Employers are turning to the tried and tested technique of job evaluation as a way of dealing with pressure to conduct equal pay audits, according to research published by IRS Employment Review today (26 January 2004).
Though critics have claimed the technique is bureaucratic and a ìbogus scienceî, the research shows that it has taken on a new lease of life - particularly in the public sector, where employment procedures are often more structured and formalised.
Almost half of the 162 companies and public sector bodies taking part in the survey already use job evaluation to determine the relative importance of roles within their organisation - and a third more plan to introduce it in the near future.
The results of this two-part survey are published in the new issue (792) of IRS Employment Review (www.irsemploymentreview.com), published by LexisNexis IRS.
Other key findings:
The main reasons (ranked in order of importance) for evaluating jobs are as follows:
Determining pay and grading structures
Comparing rates with the external market
Helping to conduct an equal pay audit
Clarifying career paths
Developing performance management/appraisal systems
Identifying and measuring competencies.
Analytical schemes (see notes to editors) are used by the majority of employers - around 86% of those using job evaluation in our survey - largely because analytical schemes can enhance objectivity in valuing jobs and help in protecting employers against equal pay claims.
When jobs are found to be underpaid relative to others assessed as part of a job evaluation exercise, employers are most likely to move the jobs concerned to the minimum point of the band that is determined to be appropriate.
In cases where a job evaluation exercise reveals some relatively overpaid jobs, the most common response is to ìred circleî salaries, often for a limited period.
Almost three-quarters of respondents who use job evaluation also operate an appeals procedure to cover the situation where individual employees are unhappy with the value placed upon their job.
Approximately three-quarters of those who recognise unions report that they involved them when they have recently introduced or substantially changed job evaluation arrangements - most commonly in the initial evaluation of jobs or in the appeals procedure.
IRS Employment Review managing editor, Mark Crail said:
ìJob evaluation is not an easy task. It requires a considerable amount of planning, and it is essential to get employee communications right if it is going to work. But employers are finding that this is a useful technique when used in conjunction with equal pay audits. Although only a minority of employers have yet gone down this road, both the Equal Opportunities Commission and the Kingsmill Review of womenís pay have recommended that larger companies in particular should do so, and the Government now requires public sector organisations to audit for equality.î
The full survey is published in IRS Employment Review available from customer services on 020- 8662 2000, price 30 or can be found on
Equality Audits Revive Old HR Practices
.