The University introduced a new grade structure in August 2007. Staff were moved to a grade on the new structure through implementation of agreed job evaluation processes. An appeals/re-evaluations policy was put in place specifically to deal with appeals arising from that process.
However, the University recognises that roles will continue to develop and grow in line with operational requirements and/or that restructuring of roles may be necessary from time to time. The re-evaluation and appeals mechanisms set out below aim to provide a consistent, transparent and equitable procedure for assessing substantive and material changes to existing roles using the agreed job evaluation methodologies.
The University of Bristol Job Evaluation Scheme (UBJES) Booklet provides information on the job evaluation processes and will provide practical guidance to individuals and managers.
This procedure does not apply to roles on the academic pathways, where alternative promotion and progression arrangements have been established.
Where an individual and/or manager believes that there have been substantive and material changes to a role, discussions may be initiated around whether a re-evaluation request may be submitted. A job description submitted for re-evaluation must be agreed by both the individual and the manager.
Staff who have been appointed to a new post have the option to request a re-evaluation after being in the role for six months, or at a later time. The opportunity to submit a re-evaluation applies to individual roles and also in cases where one or more individuals are in a role that has been evaluated or matched by use of a group (generic) job description, but their own role has changed such that it is appropriate that they be disassociated from the generic role and re-evaluated in their own right. Roles may be re-evaluated as a generic only where the changes to the role apply to every role-holder.
Where agreement has been reached on the submission of a re-evaluation, a request for re-evaluation of role form/job description template should be completed (including the work examples). For re-evaluations in the Professional and Administrative family, it is essential that the request for re-evaluation of a role form/job description template is completed in conjunction with the Professional and Administrative Grade Descriptors. The Grade Descriptors have been developed to assist managers in identifying the level/grade of the role providing typical activities under the main job description template headings for grades D to M. Further information on how to use the Grade Descriptors in conjunction with the request for re-evaluation of a role form/job description template can be found within the Job Description Guidance.
On receipt of a correctly and fully completed re-evaluation form and a new and agreed job description, Personnel Services will convene a Panel as soon as is practically possible.
The Re-evaluation Panel will consist of two trade union representatives (one from the relevant trade union) two management representatives and a Chair/Technical Advisor. All members of Panels will be UBJES trained.
The re-evaluation panel will consider the job description and will evaluate/match the role as appropriate. The re-evaluation panel will evaluate the new job description in its own right. The re-evaluation result may therefore be higher, the same, or lower than any earlier job evaluation result.
The results of the re-evaluation, together with the new grade and salary, will be provided to members of staff by letter from Personnel Services, sent via an appropriate manager. This will provide the role-holder and manager with an opportunity to discuss and understand the results.
In some instances an employee will not be happy with the outcome of the re-evaluation, and in such cases following full discussion with the appropriate manager, an employee may wish to submit an appeal. An appeal must be submitted within 4 weeks of the date of the re-evaluation outcome letter.
For an appeal to be heard, the following conditions must be met:
The Panel’s decision on whether the conditions for an appeal have been met will be final.
Some appeals may arise where staff members have been re-evaluated by use of a group (generic) job description. An appeal against the grade of a generic role will only be considered where at least 80 per cent of existing role-holders have signed the appeal submission.
Having agreed that the appeal has been properly brought, the Appeals Panel will consider the grounds put forward in the written appeal in light of the new Job Description Template, the Job Evaluation Rationale/s and the methodology used. Where the re-evaluation was “matched” and the panel believes this methodology to have been inappropriate, the Panel will evaluate.
In circumstances where the Panel considers there is the need for clarification of elements of the role or the grounds for appeal to aid their decision making, they may get whatever information they need from wherever it is available. Panels have the right to call in material related to jobs of broadly the same character and can make relevant comparisons before deciding upon an appeal.
The Appeals Panel may:
The results of the Appeal Panel, together with the new grade and salary (where appropriate), will be provided to members of staff by letter from Personnel Services, sent via an appropriate manager
Any change in salary arising from a re-evaluation or from a subsequent appeal will be backdated to the date of receipt of the re-evaluation. Exceptionally, a department may make a case (giving full reasons) at the point of submission of the re-evaluation seeking limited backdating. The Head of Personnel Operation’s decision on the effective date will be final.
Council has prescribed this procedure in relation to appeals against decisions arising from the job evaluation/matching process and there will, therefore, be no other route or right of appeal against individual job evaluation/matching outcomes.
*Please note that this category of appeal should only be used where you believe your own role is directly comparable with (i.e. very similar to) another role, and therefore should evidently be scored at the same level as that role. In other cases you should submit a Category 2 appeal, where you may, as appropriate, include reference to comparator roles (whether scored at the level you think your role should be, or higher, or lower). Where category 3 is applicable, there is no requirement to have submitted a re-evaluation request prior to the appeal.
**Should the Appeals Panel reach the conclusion that the job of the appellant, or where relevant of a comparator, has been scored too high such that the score is clearly outside the bounds of what might be reasonable, the appellants score will remain unchanged by the panel, but the appropriate Personnel Manager will be informed. It will be her, or his, responsibility to discuss the case with the appellant/comparator role-holder and their line manager (and a representative of a trade union or other competent person, if the appellant/comparator role-holder so wishes) and make sure that the job description template accurately reflects the role in question. Once revised as appropriate, the Job Description Template will be sent on to a re-evaluation panel, where it will be treated as any other request for re-evaluation. There is a right to appeal from all re-evaluation panels.