Pay & Grading
1. Introduction
The University of Glasgow is committed to the principles of equal pay for work of equal value and operates a single job evaluation scheme to measure the relative value of all jobs in its pay and grading structures within an overall framework that is consistent, transparent and fair.
The Policy aims to reflect equality of opportunity with respect to pay, salary and career progression for all staff in ensuring that the level of reward is appropriate to the relative size and content of the job.
The Policy is not intended to address issues relating to outstanding performance, etc. Staff may receive accelerated incremental progression or contribution pay to recognise exceptional performance throughout the course of their employment.
2. Purpose and Scope
This policy and procedure covers all categories of jobs governed by the national framework agreement for prospective and existing staff up to and including Grade 9 of the University's pay and grading structure, excluding clinical academics. The policy supersedes any previous or outstanding arrangements and agreements relating to grading for staff categories. Pay and grading for posts above Grade 9 is determined under separate arrangements underpinned by broadly similar mechanisms to those which apply to jobs on the single salary spine.
This Policy reflects the University's commitment to reward all members of staff fairly and equitably in relation to the roles to which they are appointed or regraded / promoted. The University recognizes and reflects through this policy that roles do not always remain static and may change in relation to the range, complexity and level of duties, accountabilities and responsibilities. Such changes may require the grade of any post to be reviewed at the appropriate time.
This Policy applies to the grading of all posts in the Research and Teaching, Management, Professional and Administrative (MPA), Technical and Specialist and Operational Job Families. The procedures primarily relate to the initial grading and salary placing of jobs and posts respectively and should be read in conjunction with other policies/procedures to which reference is made below. It does not cover the application, notification or appeal processes where relevant, associated with the regrading of support posts or the promotion of academic posts.
Separate policies make provision for Support Staff Regrading and Research & Teaching Staff Promotion Procedures and can be found at:
and
- Appointment, Progression and Promotion Policy (Academic Promotions)
Market related issues will be dealt with in accordance with the University’s Market Supplement Policy which can be found at:
This Policy applies to all appointments made with an intended duration of three months or more.
Responsibility for its application, monitoring and review lies with the Director of Human Resources.
3.0 Pay & Grading – Job Evaluation & Matching Procedure
The University applies a single job evaluation system for all* categories of job in order to:-
- establish the relative size of all jobs;
- enable all jobs to be allocated or matched to a level or grade within a common pay structure;
- ensure that pay and benefits are allocated on a fair and consistent basis and that the University fulfills is legal obligation to provide equal pay for work of equal value;
- comply with the requirements of the national framework agreement with implementation at a local level for the modernisation of pay structures, and
- strike a balance of the requirement for thorough and effective analysis and evaluation with efficiency and flexibility.
The pay and grading structure has been developed and operates on a job family approach outlined in the University’s Role Profiles document, underpinned by a job evaluation process based on the Hay methodology. A benchmark exercise established the relative grading of jobs within the pay and grading structure and new jobs are matched on to the pay and grading structure accordingly.
3.1 Job Matching Process
Posts are normally assigned to the appropriate job family and level using a job matching approach. Jobs are matched to the appropriate job family and level utilising the University Role Profiles which can be found here:
The object of any job matching process is to establish a ‘best fit’ match of any job description to the job family role profiles, in order to establish the correct grade for the job. Where a job straddles two levels, ‘a best-fit’ will be applied using a 75-80% match based upon the duties and responsibilities of the role.
In the event that a decision cannot be reached applying this job matching approach, the job is fully evaluated.
3.2 Job Evaluation Process
The University evaluates jobs using the Hay method of job evaluation which is an analytical and factor based system, in circumstances in which full job evaluation is deemed appropriate. Jobs are evaluated by a Job Evaluation Panel drawn from a substantial University wide pool of experienced staff, fully trained in the Hay job evaluation methodology, job matching and equality issues in grading.
Each panel comprises:-
- Independent Convener
- 2 Management Representatives
- 2 Human Resources Managers
- 2 Trade Union Representatives
Each panel must be appropriately constituted to proceed, with all panel members having prepared in advance of the meeting otherwise the panel will be cancelled or postponed accordingly, and the reason recorded.
3.3 Panel Protocol
Job matching and evaluation panels are normally convened as required by the arrangements outlined in Clause 4. The discussion and decisions of any panel meeting are formally recorded producing an audit trail and rationale for each outcome. Panels operate on the basis of consensus decision making and all panel members are expected to contribute to the matching or evaluation process on equal terms.
Panel members will not take part in any part of the process in terms of their own role, any roles for which they may have direct line management responsibility or indeed any role to which they may report. Panel members are expected to declare any other potential conflicts of interest as appropriate.
It is the responsibility of the Convenor to ensure this process occurs fairly and consistently with each panel member having an equal right to speak. The Convenor should make every effort to ensure this is achieved. The Convenor is normally a non-voting member of the panel as is the Clerk. In the highly unusual circumstance in which consensus cannot be reached and despite repeated efforts, complete stalemate persists among voting members, the Convenor will have a casting vote.
In those instances in which there is inadequate information to reach a decision and it is determined appropriate by the panel, the Convenor may request the postholder, the postholder’s manager or another suitably informed manager to attend the panel meeting for a short time. This will enable further information to be sought by the panel in relation to any post under consideration which is not readily available from the documentation presented. Such individuals invited to attend in this capacity will be expected to respond where possible to direct questions raised by the panel and will not be permitted to offer a view.
All discussions within panels and records of these discussions will be strictly confidential to the Human Resources Service and the panels. Jobs will not normally be re-considered within a 12 month period, unless under the Support Staff Regrading Appeals process. However, in exceptional circumstances this may be approved by the relevant Head of College or the Chief Operating Officer.
3.4 Data Protection / Records Management
There must be an appropriate audit trail of any decision reached in the event that feedback or information is sought in accordance with data protection legislative requests.
All relevant documentation associated with the policy will be retained by the Human Resources Service, in accordance with all relevant data protection legislation. All related information associated with the pay and grading of a particular post will be retained within the personal file of the postholder with the HR Service.
4.0 Grading Arrangements
4.1 New/ Replacement Post
The grading of any new/replacement post will be in accordance with the Recruitment & Selection Policy which can be found at:
This requires the preparation of a new job description which clearly reflects the duties, skills and experience required for the post or provides the opportunity to re-assess the content of any existing job description.
The job description will be assessed and graded by the relevant territorial HRM and two other HRM’s using the University’s Job Family Role Profiles. This grading process may require moderation through the input of another HRM and/or may require further information from the recruiting School/RI/Service relating to the job content prior to determining the appropriate grade of a post. Rarely, in the event that consensus cannot be reached applying a job matching approach, the job will be fully evaluated prior to advertising in accordance with the job evaluation arrangements detailed in Clause 3.2. A justification by way of an audit trail for any particular job grade/level and family assigned will be electronically recorded by each HRM involved in the process
Recruits to any new or replacement post will normally be placed on the minimum point of the relevant pay scale (the normal starting point at appointment), unless they already have qualifications, skills or experience commensurate with a higher point on the scale and comparable with those other postholders at higher points on the scale. In this event, a record will be retained within the personal file of the relevant postholder outlining the justification for appointment at a higher point on the scale and reviewed accordingly by the HR Service in accordance with this procedure.
4.2 Support Staff Regrading
Support Staff Applications Posts for regrading will be considered by an appropriate Job Matching Group and the process will follow the University's Job Matching methodology outlined above. Posts will be graded by means of matching the job description first to the most appropriate Job Family and then to the most appropriate Level Profile.
Any regrading request must be based on significant and permanent qualitative change(s) to the level of duties and responsibilities of an individual post or group of posts and must relate to the majority of key elements within the appropriate generic Job Family Level Profiles (i.e. be at least a 80% best fit to the higher grade).
Focus will be on the duties and responsibilities in the job description and the requirements of the role, e.g. qualifications, skills, experience, etc.
The Job Matching Group will assess each key element of the job description against the corresponding key element in the Job Family Profiles to determine a "best fit" overall.
An assumption will always be made that the full remit of the job is being carried out to an acceptable level of performance.
Where the Job Matching Group assess the post to match to a higher level, the post will be regraded to the appropriate level and the postholder(s) will normally be placed on the minimum point of the relevant pay scale (the normal starting point at appointment), unless the postholder meets the criteria, in terms of experience or contribution pay position commensurate with a higher point on the scale and comparable with those other postholders at higher points on the scale.
4.3 Research & Teaching Staff Promotion
Applications for promotion from Academic Staff will be considered by the relevant College Promotion Committee using the University's Research & Teaching Promotion Procedure. Applications will be considered against the relevant core criteria outlined in that procedure and by means of matching the job description to the most appropriate Level Profile.
Applicants will require to satisfy the core criteria detailed in the relevant Level Profile to justify promotion to a higher level. The Committee will focus on the duties and responsibilities outlined in the application, job description and the requirements of the role, e.g. qualifications, skills, experience, etc. The Committee will consider each element of the application and job description against the corresponding key element in the Level Profile for which the application is made to justify promotion or otherwise.
Where the College Promotion Committee assesses the application to merit promotion to a higher level, the postholder will normally be placed on the minimum point of the relevant pay scale (the normal starting point at appointment), unless the postholder meets the criteria, in terms of experience or contribution pay position commensurate with a higher point on the scale and comparable with those other postholders at higher points on the scale.
5.0 Monitoring & Review
The application of the pay and grading policy will be monitored and relevant data compiled and reviewed annually by the HR Service for equal opportunities monitoring purposes.
Information compiled for monitoring purposes will be shared annually with the recognised trade unions and consultation will take place to enable the effectiveness of this policy to be reviewed.