1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 These procedures are to be followed when establishing or reviewing the classification levels of all general staff positions (including Senior Administrative Officer levels) arising from:
(a) the creation of a new position where the classification level has not been previously determined (e.g. there is no current position with similar role/responsibilities); or
(b) a request to review an existing position; or
(c) prior to recruitment action of SAO level positions to ensure that the classification level is appropriate.
1.2 Decisions to approve a higher classification of a position should be based on increased work value, and assessments made against the Position Classification Standards.
1.3 The decision to approve the classification level of general staff positions is normally made by:
(a) the College Dean or College General Manager for general staff up to and including ANUO Level 7 within the ANU Colleges;
(b) the Head of a Budget Unit for general staff up to and including ANUO Level 7 within administrative divisions and areas outside of the College structures; or
(c) the Director - Human Resources for general staff above ANUO Level 7 with advice from the SAO Remuneration Committee for SAO level positions.
Other senior officers, such as the Vice-Chancellor, also hold the delegation to approve classification levels as appropriate.
1.4 When a position becomes vacant, the area should review the requirements of the work area in terms of the need for the position, the duties required and, if changes are made, the impact on the classification level.
1.5 Where substantial changes are made to the duties and responsibilities of a position because of a restructure within an organisational unit resulting in the application of the University’s change management procedures, the position may be regarded as a new position.
1.6 Classification reviews should be conducted and documented to ensure that the process is transparent and equitable, and carried out in a timely manner.
How is the classification level ascertained?
1.7 The classification level of a position is based on work value. The work value of a position is determined by the University’s Position Classification Standards with reference to:
· the scope of activities covered by the position;
· knowledge and qualifications required to do the job;
· judgement, independence and problem solving requirements; and
· level of accountability and responsibility.
1.8 Reference must be made to the relevant descriptors for the proposed level when preparing a supporting statement and assessing the position’s work value.
When is a review of the classification level appropriate?
1.9 The classification level of a position should be reviewed when a significant increase in work value has occurred, and the new duties and/or increased responsibility is required on an on-going basis.
Do all changes lead to a review?
1.10 Not all changes in work equate by themselves to changes in work value.
In particular:
· increased workload should not be confused with increased work value, as it may be that the additional duties have the same work value as existing duties - increased workload should be addressed by the supervisor as a workforce planning and resource issue;
· higher level activity instigated by the occupant does not necessarily constitute grounds for an increased classification level, and is subject to the requirements of the work area. The nature, level of duties and job requirements should be reviewed between a staff member and their supervisor in the course of annual HR planning and the development of workplans and performance objectives:
· work value changes are more than an extension of skills already held by the occupant; and
· developments in technology and acquisition of new skills, knowledge or qualifications are not by themselves grounds for an increased classification level, although these may be taken into consideration where required to perform the full range of functions of the modified position.
Can reclassification be a mechanism for reward or to retain staff?
1.11 It is not appropriate to reward above-average performance through an increase in classification level where the higher level is not consistent with the job requirements.
1.12 Difficulties in recruitment and retention of staff as a result of market factors should be addressed through the use of market loadings rather than an increase to a classification level which is not consistent with work value.
2. PROCEDURES
Developing a classification review proposal
2.1 A proposal to reclassify a position may be made by:
(a) the supervisor of the position or other appropriate person with management responsibility for the position; or
(b) the occupant, following preliminary discussion with their supervisor to ensure a mutual understanding about the requirements of the position.
2.2 The proposal will be given to the area’s business office or Head of Budget Unit and include:
(a) a new position description which reflects the current and on-going duties, verified by the supervisor as an accurate reflection of the duties required;
(b) documentation defining the changes to the skill set required for the position, which may form part of the position description;
(c) a classification application form, which includes the proposed classification level and the signature of the person putting forward the proposal;
(d) a supporting statement addressing the changes to the duties and responsibilities that has resulted in an increased work value, and other documentation required by the College Staffing Committee or administrative division/area committee; and
(e) the previous role statement/position description for comparative purposes.
Determination of reclassification proposals ANUO Levels 3 - 7 (inclusive)
2.3 The decision whether or not to approve reclassifications up to and including ANU Officer Level 7 is the responsibility of:
(a) the College Dean or College General Manager for general staff within the ANU Colleges, or
(b) the Head of the Budget Unit for general staff within administrative divisions and areas outside of the College structures.
2.4 Referral of proposals to a College Staffing Committee/Advisory Committee prior to deciding the outcome will be in accordance with the area’s procedures. It should be noted that the amount of change in responsibilities and duties that constitutes sufficient increase in work value for reclassification will differ depending on the classification level.
2.5 Where the decision is to approve reclassification, the date of effect is usually the date of approval, or where there has been a significant delay in reviewing the proposal, the date of submission.
2.6 The initial increment step is normally the base of the new classification. In exceptional cases (i.e. where the staff member has gained experience at the higher level through extended periods of Higher Duties), a step above the base may be more appropriate. A staff member who is the occupant of a reclassified position and in receipt of a Long Service Allowance (LSA) will be transferred to a salary step in the new classification that absorbs the allowance.
2.7 The occupant and the supervisor will be informed, in writing, of the decision. If the proposal is not approved, a further proposal will not be considered for the same position within a minimum period of 12 months except where the Committee that reviewed the proposal recommends a further review within a shorter period (e.g. where the documentation supports the higher level but the occupant has not had sufficient time to demonstrate that he/she is undertaking the new duties at the proposed level). Any further submission must provide evidence by the supervisor and occupant that there have been additional significant changes to increase the position’s work value since the last review. If it has been determined that the existing classification level is appropriate, the Chair of the committee or Head of the Budget Unit must offer to discuss in person the written decision. The Head of the Budget Unit may draw attention to alternative career development strategies.
2.8 If the reclassification has been approved, the area’s business office will arrange payroll action. All documentation will be placed on the staff member’s personnel file, held in University Records.
Determination of classifications to ANUO Levels 8 - 10 (inclusive)
2.9 ANUO Level 8 is considered the entry level to senior management or senior specialist positions. Proposals within ANUO 8 – 10 levels will be assessed by the College Staffing Committee or administrative division/area advisory committee. Please see Administrative Classification Committee for Information. The committee will usually discuss the changes to the position’s work value with the occupant and/or the supervisor, and take into consideration the classification levels of similar roles outside of the work area. The committee will be convened in accordance with the area’s procedures, and will include member/s external to the area, a nominee of the Director - Human Resources, and a member with a good understanding of the specialised nature of the role (which may be the external member). To avoid any potential conflict of interest, the committee should not include the direct supervisor or a staff member at the same classification level that holds similar responsibilities.
2.10 The Committee’s recommendation will be considered by the College Dean or, in administrative divisions/areas, the Head of the Budget Unit. Where the recommendation does not require delaying the decision due to future action (e.g. further review in 6 months), the documentation will be forwarded to the Director - Human Resources to decide whether to approve or not approve reclassification.
2.11 The Director – Human Resources will advise the occupant of the position and the College Dean or the Head of the Budget Unit, in writing, of the decision. If the proposal is not approved, a further submission will not be considered for the same position within a minimum period of 12 months except where the committee that reviewed the proposal recommends a further review within a shorter period (e.g. where the documentation supports the higher level but the occupant has not had sufficient time to demonstrate he/she is undertaking the new duties at the proposed level). Any further submission must provide evidence by the supervisor and occupant that there have been additional significant changes to increase the position’s work value since the last review.
2.12 If the decision is to approve the reclassification proposal, the HR Division will arrange payroll action. All documentation will be placed on the staff member’s personnel file, held in University Records.
Determination of classification levels and remuneration packages of Senior Administrative Officer positions
2.13 Proposals to create, reclassify or increase the remuneration package of a position at Senior Administrative Officer (SAO) Levels 1 - 4 will be examined by the College Dean/Head of the Budget Unit, and a recommendation forwarded to the Director - Human Resources for referral to the SAO Remuneration Committee (see Section 3). An increase to a salary package includes the use of a motor vehicle or payment of a loading.
2.14 The Director - Human Resources, based on the SAO Remuneration Committee’s advice, will decide whether to approve or not approve the proposed classification level or increased salary package.
2.15 The Director - Human Resources will advise the occupant of the position and the College Dean or the Head of the Budget Unit, in writing, of the decision.
2.16 If the decision was to approve the proposed classification level or increased salary package, the HR Division will arrange payroll action. The documentation will be placed on the staff member’s personnel file, held in University Records.
3. SENIOR ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICERS REMUNERATION COMMITTEE
3.1 The Senior Administrative Officers (SAO) Remuneration Committee will assess the classification level of SAO level positions and proposed increases to the remuneration packages of SAO level staff.
3.2 All proposals to change the remuneration packages of SAO level staff will be forwarded by the College Dean or Head of the Budget Unit to the Director - Human Resources for consideration by the SAO Remuneration Committee.
3.3 Any proposals to pay allowances to general staff which results in the total remuneration being within the salary range of the SAO level salary schedule must be referred to the Director – Human Resources for consideration by the SAO Remuneration Committee.
3.4 As appropriate, the SAO Remuneration Committee may refer particular cases to the Vice-Chancellor for approval.
4. APPEAL PROCEDURES
4.1 The occupant of the position proposed for reclassification has the right of appeal on the grounds that procedural fairness was not applied and/or relevant evidence provided with the application was not considered, and such grounds may have been sufficient to alter the outcome of the assessment. The appeal must be made in writing within 5 working days from the date of notification and forwarded to the Director - Human Resources, or if he/she was the decision maker, the office of the Vice-Chancellor.
4.2 The appellant must provide, in writing, reasons for the appeal and any relevant documentation to support the grounds for appeal.
4.3 The Director - Human Resources, the Vice-Chancellor or the Vice-Chancellor’s delegate may reject appeals that he or she believes are frivolous or vexatious. The process by which the proposal for reclassification was considered will be assessed, not the merit of the case.
4.4 The Director - Human Resources, the Vice-Chancellor or the Vice-Chancellor’s delegate may seek clarification from the Head of the Budget Unit, College Dean, Chair of the relevant committee or advice from other relevant staff. Such clarification will be restricted to information directly related to the grounds of the appeal.
4.5 The Director - Human Resources, the Vice-Chancellor or the Vice-Chancellor’s delegate must decide whether procedural fairness was applied and relevant information was considered, being sufficient to alter the outcome. The decision of the Director - Human Resources, the Vice-Chancellor or the Vice-Chancellor’s delegate will result in:
(a) confirmation of the decision to deny reclassification; or
(b) the reclassification proposal being re-considered by an alternative committee such as the SAO Remuneration Committee.
4.6 The appellant will be notified in writing of the outcome of her/his appeal.
|
