The following response has been received from the Human Resources Management Team.
Common Questions
1) Key information is missing
There has been some concern raised over key information not being available.
We have been keen to make the consultation over the revised structure meaningful and, therefore, it was not appropriate to have job descriptions, grades, impact tables produced until the structure has been firmed up.
The consultation was to establish whether the structure is generally appropriate to meet the future challenges of the County Council and further consultation will need take place over draft job descriptions etc.
The new structure has been costed using very broad estimated grades and therefore the grades were not based upon developed job descriptions. Any impact table would have been misleading and liable to significant change following consultation.
2) Need some support to HR during the change process and development into the new structures
There will be support given to HR colleagues to develop into new roles and, when appointed, the Service Managers will assist Service Heads in planning how this support might be given.
3) Strategic work needs to be reflected as far down the HR structure as possible
In planning the new structure HRLG was keen to ensure that strategic work needs to feature in as many jobs as possible. If we are to be seen to be supporting the strategic direction of the County Council we must strengthen the strategic/developmental elements of the HR work. The job descriptions for new posts will feature strategic/policy work as far down the structure as possible and this is reflected in the balance of operational and strategic duties and responsibilities of the Service Heads, and other posts in the new HR structure.
4) Relevant and clear project plan for full integration from 1 April 2008 is needed
We recognise the need for detailed and realistic project plans to underpin the HR restructuring. HRLG have been working to a project plan and an updated plan has been produced. It will be circulated soon and further consultation events are being planned for 15 February.
5) Impact table needed
This has been answered in question 1.
6) SLA/Service Offer needed
Ideally, a Service Level Agreement should have been produced before structures considered. whilst a Service level agreement would have helped in the process, this was not possible within the time frames and with the budgetary pressures
However, due to the pressure to make budgetary savings the design of the structure has had to take precedence. A ‘Service Offer’ paper has been produced and will be the subject of discussion by Strategic Directors, shortly. It is clear that we shall not be able to continue to provide the same level of support as managers currently enjoy. The Service Offer paper addresses these issues.
7) Structure is top heavy
The strategic development of HR policies at NCC is vital so that we can meet our obligations/aspirations and ensure service improvements. We must improve the ways in which we develop/upskill, recruit and reward employees as well as plan our workforce so that we can have a robust plan to achieve our aims/objectives and cultural change. With this in mind, there is a need to have adequate capacity to achieve these aspirations. The structure has been designed to give this capacity by allowing a balance of strategic and operational activities through the different levels, although it is recognised that there may need to be a review in the next 12 – 24 months.
8) How will strategic/operational priorities be balanced?
The balance of strategic v operational priorities will be undertaken through the newly established HR Management Team (HRMT) made up of Service Heads and Service Director (HR).
9) Matrix management of specialist teams will be very difficult.
Matrix management is not easy however, if we are to become more project/ programme based based, as an organisation, we need to enable work to be commissioned through specialist teams that may be working on a number of projects at the same time. The trick will be to balance capacity against priorities and to ensure HRMT balance these priorities.
10) Little mention of administrative support
Administrative support will be provided from within the proposed HR structure as there is no further resource that is to be disaggregated from departmental resources. It is likely to be provided by HR Assistants with some support from Business Support in the Resources Department. Following budgetary pressures and the need to become HR focused rather than just simply administrative in nature. This will give greater flexibility within the structure.
11) What is the methodology used to determine numbers of posts at each level?
The numbers of posts at each level has been determined by using the expert knowledge of each Head of HR and has been a judgment based upon this knowledge of the level and amount of work undertaken. The levels and numbers of posts have been adjusted following the consultation process and the volumes of work have been taken into account in the design of the new service. (We have been listening. Honest!)
12) Where will policy work sit?
This has already been answered at question 3.
13) No evidence that benchmarking info used to develop the new structure
The benchmarking work undertaken at the baselining stage of our development of the new structure has been used to underpin our discussions and has featured as a basis for our balance of numbers of posts.
14) Effective date of 1 April 2008 to implement the new structure is unrealistic
It is recognised that the full integration of HR by April 2008 is challenging and may slip. However, this timescale is largely dependent upon our ability to be satisfied that the crucial HR support is adequate and that the full integration will not put the organisation at serious risk of failure. A risk analysis will be undertaken closer to the implementation date.
15) Under resourced. Empowering managers will result in more ETs and greater costs to the County Council
We all recognise that there will be fewer posts in HR, although, integration will allow for efficiencies through standardisation of processes to allow us all to work in a more effective way. This will partly mitigate against the loss of staffing resources. We will also be looking at ways in which we can dispense with cumbersome administrative tasks which will involve the greater use of information technology. It is also important that training for managers is provided to a high standard to maximise their potential to deal with HR issues effectively.
It is recognised that there will be capacity issues with such a reduction in posts. However to mitigate this we will need to look a new ways of working and providing support to managers. Whilst there is a risk of more ET claims it is hoped that the new structure will mitigate against some of the capacity issues by enabling HR to be more flexible in the way we offer services.
Learning and Development
1) Lack of capacity to deliver imperatives
This has been partly answered earlier, however, it is perhaps opportune to state that there will be a chance for us to work more effectively with other partners to deliver learning and development. These may be other public or private sector organisations. The Learning and Development Team will also need to play a key role in supporting managers to become much more self sufficient in dealing with day to day HR issues.
2) External support will be very expensive
Cost effective external support and more effective use of partnerships needs to be further explored.
3) Balance of posts at the proposed levels is wrong. Need to consider higher level posts
The balance of posts in the Learning and Development Team has been reviewed and changed to reflect comments made. It is proposed that there may need to be two higher level posts below Service Manager with two posts to support them rather than the original suggestion of 4 posts all at a lower level.
4) Managers will need to develop their staff more and we shall have to use ‘e’ learning solutions
Agreed
5) Urgently need to resolve how internal training will be paid for
This is yet to be resolved and the Service Director (HR) is working with accountants to resolve this.
6) Team will need to support managers to take more responsibility therefore not be able to deliver day to day training
Agreed to some extent, however, it really depends upon how we decide the ‘day to day’ learning and development is to be delivered in the future.
7) Integrate L&D budgets across the Authority
This is also being addressed as per question 5.
Health & Safety
1) Attendance management resource should remain in departments
Following discussion with HRMT it has been agreed to action the suggestion that the ‘casework’ associated with managing sickness absence should remain in departmental teams. The Absence Management Team will remain in Health & Safety although will mainly focus upon producing management information such as trigger reports, and advice/support to managers when needed. The team will also co-ordinate redeployment across the County Council and there will be a reduction in posts here from 6 to 3 with resources being probably channelled to departmental HR team
2) Counselling should not be integrated with mediation. Two very different services
We have also agreed, following consultation, to keep two separate posts, one concerned with Counselling and the other, Mediation service. It is felt that the services are vital and are likely to be relied upon even more in the future. The overall cost of the services cannot change, therefore, the HR Assistant post in the counselling/mediation section of the Health & Safety team will be deleted to allow the counselling and mediation post to remain independent.
The Administration resources within the Occupational Health Unit and the Health & Safety Team will need to be re directed to support the Occupational Health Unit.
3) Seems that the H&S function integration has already taken place
The new Health & Safety structure has not been implemented although the team is working in a more joined up way already, allowing a greater sharing of resources across the Authority.
Quality Assurance Team
1) Not clear as to what the team will do
The full duties and responsibilities of this team will be covered in the job descriptions being developed. It is our intention to share all the job descriptions with HR colleagues and Trade Unions and to formally consult at the 13 February meeting of the departmental JCNP.
2) How will it fit with ESC? More detail needed. Need to have a post at level 4
We do not believe there is a need for a Service Manager post. The ESC will work closely with the QA team so that the required management information is available to ensure effective management of the relationship with service users and schools. There will not be a merger of this team with the ESC.
3) Resource in the teams is too small
We accept this and following the consultation exercise it is our intention to increase the level of resources in this team.
Job Evaluation Team
1) Not clear as to what the team will do and the structure remains unchanged
This is not so. One post has been made temporary to support the implementation of the Job Evaluation exercise and is being funded from the pay structure project budget. The structure will be reviewed later this year.
2) Team should not sit in ESC – not transactional – will reduce the potential role of the team
The intention is to continue to keep this team reporting to the Service Head at the ESC although it is recognised that the JE team has a broader role to play in reorganisations and offering advice. This reporting relationship will not affect the developing role of this team.
Children and Young People and Sold Services - Schools
1) Lack of info. Therefore no meaningful consultation
This has already been answered at question 1 under the “common questions” section.
2) There should be no ‘split’ between Service Heads, need to redraw the organisation chart; 4 not 5 Service Head post needed
We have listened to the concerns of employees and senior managers and the view remains that there is likely to be a capacity problem with offering high quality operational HR support to a department of this size alongside our strategic role. Therefore, it is our intention to continue to offer two Service Heads to support the work of this department, however, to ensure that very clear areas of ‘responsibility’ are identified and to do this in close consultation with relevant managers and senior management team. There will be close working between the two Service Heads to ensure an integrated service for one department, not a two way split. It is proposed that the approach is reviewed in six months time and a discussion over these proposals is being planned with Strategic/Service Directors.
3) Distribution of posts at Functional level 3 in CYP is not consistent with other departments
This is being addressed through career graded posts at levels 2 and 3 within an agreed budget at this level.
Process Questions
1) Allow staff more time to apply for VR once the final structure has been agreed
We will allow new requests for Voluntary Redundancy (VR) if required, once the structure is finalised.
2) When will VRs be authorised?
VRs will be considered by the HR Management Team in the next few weeks and the Director of Resources will be consulted. It is our intention to agree the VRs before enabling processes are completed.
3) Will operational v strategic elements of JD: be given equal weighting?
This question will be answered once the job descriptions have been drafted. Further work on the enabling principles still needs to be undertaken and the weighting of strategic v operational work will be dependent upon the posts being filled. This will follow the enabling process.
4) Sole reliance on JD: will not fully reflect the work being done
Agreed, however, the principle of the agreed enabling procedure must be followed.
5) Need to fully understand how the enabling process will work
This will be covered at the next consultation event.
6) How will job pools be established?
This is yet to be agreed.
7) Need a clear and robust (realistic) timetable for integration
Already covered in question 4 of the common questions section.
8) When will grades be known?
Once the job descriptions have been agreed and evaluated probably in February 2007.
9) Are there to be any further consultation events?
Yes, your managers will advise you accordingly, although 15 February is most likely.
10) When will we have an HR business plan?
This is being worked on and a plan is to be considered in February.
11) Vacant posts should be advertised on temporary basis
This is happening however it is dependent upon the post and circumstances.
Summary
The feedback we have had has been extensive and very helpful. As can be seen from our responses, we have listened carefully to these comments and have modified the revised structure accordingly. Clearly, we have not been able to action all comments, however, we believe that we now have the best structure for the interim period leading up to full integration in 2008.
The budget has played a significant role in the allocation of resources and HRMT are keen to continue to be transparent and to communicate as regularly with you as possible. Therefore, further consultation events have been planned for February 2007.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment