Tweet
Just some general advice please
I currently work in a large organisation (public sector) whereby within each payband the payscale spans about £5k.
E.g Payband 1 - £15k to £20k, Payband 2 - £20k to £25k and Payband 3 - £25k to £30k.
Progression is painfully slow following the abolition of contractual progression some years back whereby after 5-7 years you'd achieve maximum on the payscale.
Over the years I have spent 7 years in payband 1, 9 years in payband 2, and 6 years in payband 3. 22 years in total.
At no point have I achieved maximum pay in any payband. And currently despite 6 years in grade I am over £3k from maximum.
In addition, pay policy dictates that pay on promotion is the greater of Band minimum or a 10% uplift.
So, my problem.
1) I work with colleages who are paid more than me, upto £3k if they have been in grade for many years.
2) I work with colleagues who are paid more than me, upto £1.5K despite less time in grade as the policy on pay on promotion means they have leapfrogged.
3)I would be paid more if I was promoted now, rather than 6 years ago. (only a small amount but more due to 10% uplift on promotion)
4) Any of my staff would get paid more than me if they were promoted now, despite my 6 years of ingrade experience.
I have raised this with my employers as I could see how this was right
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/schedule/9/part/2/crossheading/benefits-based-on-length-of-service
Benefits based on length of service
(1) It is not an age contravention for a person (A) to put a person (B) at a disadvantage when compared with another (C), in relation to the provision of a benefit, facility or service in so far as the disadvantage is because B has a shorter period of service than C.
(2) If B's period of service exceeds 5 years, A may rely on sub-paragraph (1) only if A reasonably believes that doing so fulfils a business need.
(3)A person's period of service is whichever of the following A chooses—
(a) the period for which the person has been working for A at or above a level (assessed by reference to the demands made on the person) that A reasonably regards as appropriate for the purposes of this paragraph, or
(b) the period for which the person has been working for A at any level.
My employer states " employees with longer experience tend to have had more than one job role and have developed a broader range of skills, knowledge and experience in a wider variety of business situations. The Department values this experience and versatility/ flexibility in its employees. We expect that our more experienced employees will be able to take the lead on more difficult and/ or complex issues and we are therefore happy that individuals’ salaries reflect this additional expertise and breadth of knowledge.
As it stands they will not provide anything other than the above, which to me is an unsubstantiated opinion, not back up by documented evidence, e.g. to justify the assertion that employees who had in excess of my previous 9 years in the Band 2 warranted additional pay, and for the value that is placed on that to continue to be rewarded in the next grade.
They will not advise which crierion is being used, i.e. 3a or 3b from above.
I appreciate that this may appear to be a minor matter but this is becoming a material amount of money. I believe I should be earning £3k a year more, which obviously affects previous pay, future pay, and future pensions. Earning less than colleagues with less seniority due to pay on promotion policy surely cannot be right as it conflicts with the 3 a/b doesn't it?
Opinions would be appreciated. Am I being unreasonable, or unrealistic?
I currently work in a large organisation (public sector) whereby within each payband the payscale spans about £5k.
E.g Payband 1 - £15k to £20k, Payband 2 - £20k to £25k and Payband 3 - £25k to £30k.
Progression is painfully slow following the abolition of contractual progression some years back whereby after 5-7 years you'd achieve maximum on the payscale.
Over the years I have spent 7 years in payband 1, 9 years in payband 2, and 6 years in payband 3. 22 years in total.
At no point have I achieved maximum pay in any payband. And currently despite 6 years in grade I am over £3k from maximum.
In addition, pay policy dictates that pay on promotion is the greater of Band minimum or a 10% uplift.
So, my problem.
1) I work with colleages who are paid more than me, upto £3k if they have been in grade for many years.
2) I work with colleagues who are paid more than me, upto £1.5K despite less time in grade as the policy on pay on promotion means they have leapfrogged.
3)I would be paid more if I was promoted now, rather than 6 years ago. (only a small amount but more due to 10% uplift on promotion)
4) Any of my staff would get paid more than me if they were promoted now, despite my 6 years of ingrade experience.
I have raised this with my employers as I could see how this was right
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/schedule/9/part/2/crossheading/benefits-based-on-length-of-service
Benefits based on length of service
(1) It is not an age contravention for a person (A) to put a person (B) at a disadvantage when compared with another (C), in relation to the provision of a benefit, facility or service in so far as the disadvantage is because B has a shorter period of service than C.
(2) If B's period of service exceeds 5 years, A may rely on sub-paragraph (1) only if A reasonably believes that doing so fulfils a business need.
(3)A person's period of service is whichever of the following A chooses—
(a) the period for which the person has been working for A at or above a level (assessed by reference to the demands made on the person) that A reasonably regards as appropriate for the purposes of this paragraph, or
(b) the period for which the person has been working for A at any level.
My employer states " employees with longer experience tend to have had more than one job role and have developed a broader range of skills, knowledge and experience in a wider variety of business situations. The Department values this experience and versatility/ flexibility in its employees. We expect that our more experienced employees will be able to take the lead on more difficult and/ or complex issues and we are therefore happy that individuals’ salaries reflect this additional expertise and breadth of knowledge.
As it stands they will not provide anything other than the above, which to me is an unsubstantiated opinion, not back up by documented evidence, e.g. to justify the assertion that employees who had in excess of my previous 9 years in the Band 2 warranted additional pay, and for the value that is placed on that to continue to be rewarded in the next grade.
They will not advise which crierion is being used, i.e. 3a or 3b from above.
I appreciate that this may appear to be a minor matter but this is becoming a material amount of money. I believe I should be earning £3k a year more, which obviously affects previous pay, future pay, and future pensions. Earning less than colleagues with less seniority due to pay on promotion policy surely cannot be right as it conflicts with the 3 a/b doesn't it?
Opinions would be appreciated. Am I being unreasonable, or unrealistic?
