Frequently Asked Questions Newsletter
Number 1 - Basic Information
What is Agenda for Change
It is the name given to the proposed new national
NHS pay and terms and conditions system. It will seek to introduce
new pay bands and harmonised terms and conditions for NHS workers.
The system is being negotiated by the Health Departments and the
National Joint Staff Side Unions. The Government originally outlined
their proposals for the new system in 1999.
top
Why we need a new pay system for the NHS
change
UNISON has argued since the mid-90s that there
is a need to overhaul NHS pay.
Under the present system some staff have their
pay fixed by Pay Review Bodies, some by Whitley Councils, some
through local negotiations and some without any negotiations at
all. The present grade definitions reflect the way in which the
NHS was organised and staff worked over 10 years ago. NHS staff
continue to suffer from low pay. All this means that people doing
the same or equal jobs can be, and are, paid differently and can
have different conditions of service. It means that different
groups of staff get different annual pay increases. These differences
- in pay, in pay increases, in conditions of service - undermine
the spirit of teamwork on which the NHS relies. They cannot be
justified in a society that believes in equal pay for work of
equal value. They stand as a barrier to delivering the best possible
health care to the people of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern
Ireland.
top
Why is it taking so long
To change the pay and conditions of over a million
workers with a range of pay and conditions is an enormous challenge.
At times there have also been questions about the Government's
commitment to the process and whether they would be prepared to
fund the new proposals adequately. More recently technical issues
have held up the process, notably the job evaluation scheme that
underpins the proposals and the job profiles that will help assimilate
staff across to the new pay bands. There are also clear differences
between union policies and the management side proposals that
need addressing.
top
What have the negotiations covered so far
Pay Spines
The Management are proposing a system to cover
non-medical staff which consists of two identical pay spines.
One would be for those currently covered by the Nurses and PAMs
Pay Review Body and would also include "professions with a minimum
entry requirement of three years' educational study (or equivalent)
to diploma level or higher, in a health specific area (other than
medicine or dentistry) and which are state registered and have
a substantial majority of members employed in healthcare." The
second pay spine would cover other staff, such as administrative
and clerical workers, ancillary staff and senior managers.
This would still give the possibility of different
groups being treated differently and unfairly. UNISON believes
there should be only one pay spine. No agreement has been reached
yet. However, the Management Side has agreed "it is essential
that there be a means to ensure that future pay increases on the
three spines do not result in different rates of pay for jobs
of equal value which could not be justified under the relevant
legislation." The principle of the same basic pay increase for
jobs of equal value has been conceded.
Pay Bands
The pay spine(s) would be divided into fixed
NHS wide pay bands or grades, but instead of there being national
grade definitions for different groups of staff as now the job
evaluation system would show which band a job was paid in. The
Management Side has proposed setting 9 to 10 pay bands the details
of which are being looked at.
Job Evaluation
A Job Evaluation scheme has been developed to
cover the whole range of NHS jobs. It has been tested on over
200 different jobs measuring the jobs using the same 16 factors.
Each factor is divided into a number of different "levels" which
describe how much or how little a particular factor is involved
in a job. The total score of all the levels under each factor
tells us where each job stands in relation to every other job
in the NHS.
The evaluation process was followed by the "benchmarking"
of over 400 real jobs. This evaluated "typical" examples of common
jobs in order to see where they come out in relation to the other
jobs included in the benchmarking exercise. This has given the
information required to design the new pay bands and show how
the benchmarked jobs will assimilate to the new pay bands. In
most cases two or three examples of the benchmark job were looked
at in order to make sure that we do get a "typical" version of
the job.
Details on the job evaluation scheme can be found
in health circular HC/14/02. This can be obtained from your Branch
Secretary or the Agenda for Change section of the UNISON website.
Career and Pay Progression
The Management's initial proposals wanted to
replace annual increments with a system based on responsibility,
competence and satisfactory performance. We rejected that because
it was unworkable and would have meant the introduction of performance
related pay. Instead, discussions are going on to look at how
to define the kinds of skills and knowledge needed to do a particular
job and to progress up the career ladder. This links with continuous
professional development, personal development plans and the work
that has already been done to establish National Vocational Qualifications.
This "knowledge and skills framework" has been described in more
detail in HC/14/02.
Market Forces and Equal Value
UNISON has opposed to the idea of market forces
payments because they suggest the backdoor introduction of local
pay. But market forces payments already exist in the NHS. London
Weighting is one example. Also most Whitley agreements allow for
local pay supplements to deal with recruitment and retention problems,
but the most widespread example of market forces payment is grade
drift - paying a job a grade higher than the definition in the
national agreement because it cannot be filled at the correct
grade. Job evaluation should stop this, but there will still be
cases where jobs are hard to fill at the correct grade and the
law on equal pay allows for a supplement to be paid when this
is the case. The new system cannot ignore this, but will need
to control any market supplements very tightly.
Terms and Condition
Until basic pay has been decided it is difficult
to negotiate on conditions. However, we are arguing for a reduced
working week without loss of pay and no detriment for any staff
as a result of harmonisation.
Apart from harmonising conditions, the main issue
to be dealt with is the Management Side's proposal for a simplified
approach to paying for unsocial hours. They suggest replacing
the present system of special duty payments based on the hours
and times staff actually work with a set of different allowances
according to whether staff work fully rotational shifts or more
limited shift patterns. We believe that a system which does not
take account of when exactly people work is impractical and would
be completely out of line with the need to allow staff to balance
their work and home commitments.
Early Implementers
To make sure that any new system works before
it is rolled out across the NHS a number of employers have put
themselves forward as so-called "early implementers", in effect
"pilot sites". The final list is expected to be agreed by Government
Ministers in early October. There will be no early implementation
until and unless a new system has been agreed.
top
How will members get their say?
UNISON is committed to holding a conference for
branches to discuss any proposals. This will be followed by a
ballot of all members. We will organise a range of briefings at
all level. Other unions will also consult with their members.
top
|
NHS
Agenda For Change 