A job evaluation methodology and the experience from CyprusStorekeeper B – Predominantly male – scale 4, 686,72 euros + 4 points ... • Contacted personal interviews with the

A JOB EVALUATIONMETHODOLOGY AND THE

EXPERIENCE FROM CYPRUSDR. LOUCAS ANTONIOU,

CYPRUS LABOUR INSTITUTEINEK-PEO

23 JUNE 2016

JOURNALISTS HOUSE NICOSIA

INTRODUCTION

• A pioneer initiative at EU level of our Portuguese partner CGTP-IN incollaboration with ILO and 6 other Portuguese organizations

• The project “ Revaluating Work to Promote Equality” carried out between2005 and 2008, EU programme EQUAL

• The job evaluation tool is designed to support organizations to conduct jobevaluation processes free of gender bias.

• Training of the Cypriot and Greek working group in Lisbon, October 2015

WHAT IS THE JOB EVALUATION TOOL?

• A methodological tool that aims to compare jobs

• It’s an attempt to compare jobs free from gender biases

• A job evaluation method is…

• a process that compares jobs, which takes account of their importance andcomplexity, and aims to determine the relative position of one job in relation toanother in a sector or organization, regardless of whether the job holder is a manor a woman

• The ultimate aim is to achieve pay equity and consequently improve the earnings ofthe lowest-paid workers, who are mainly women.

WHAT IS THE JOB EVALUATION TOOL?• It scrutinizes, evaluates and compares all of the demands of a job by using common,

precise and detailed criteria.

• It breaks down the components that make up jobs into certain factors and allows thecomparison between them. The factors used are (1) SKILLS, (2) RESPONSIBILITIES, (3)EFFORT and (4) WORKING CONDITIONS

• Each of the four factors is divided into sub-factors in order to generate furtherdetailed information about a certain job.

• The sub-factors are sub-divided into levels or grades in order to differentiatebetween job on the basis of certain variables: frequency, intensity, duration, weight,etc..

A JOB EVALUATION METHOD SHOULD…

• Compare predominantly female occupations with predominantly male occupations

• Compare work of equal value

• Focus on the content of work rather on the skills of the job holder

• Give visibility to job demands that are usually overlooked and do not appear in therespective job description

• Produce a measurable scale for attributing fair value to a job

• THESE METHODS MUST BE BUILT IN A WAY THAT ENSURES THAT THEY ARESYSTEMATIC, PRECISE AND AGREED UPON BY ALL THE STAKEHOLDERS

STAGES IN BUILDING THE JOB EVALUATION METHOD..

STAGE 1CONSTITUTION OF THE

WORKING GROUP

STAGE 2SELECTING THE JOBS

TO BE COMPARED

STAGE 3DEVELOPING THE JOB

EVALUATION TOOL

STAGE 4INFORMATION

GATHERING ON THEJOBS TO BE EVALUATED

STAGE 5DETERMINING THEVALUE OF THE JOBS

STAGE 6ASSIGNING POINTS

AND IDENTIFYING JOBSOF EQUAL VALUE

STAGE 1: CONSTITUTION OF THE WORKING GROUP..

• The working group is responsible for the entire process

• Tripartite partnership: It involves the participation of employers, tradeunions, and governmental departments.

• It provides different perspectives on jobs

• It legitimates the process

• It enables sharing of tasks and responsibilities

• Training of the working group: (1) pay equity and (2) methodological aspectsof assessing the value of work

• Decision making is based on consensus

STAGE 1: CONSTITUTION OF THE WORKING GROUP..

• THE CYPRIOT CASE

• CONSTITUTION OF THE CYPRIOT CONSORTIUM: Informative session with allstakeholders: trade unions, employers organizations, independent authorities.

• Definition of the working group

1. INEK-PEO

2. From trade unions: SYXKA-PEO, OYXEKA - SEK and Women’s Office of PEO

3. From employers: HRM Managers from Hilton Hotel and Louis Group

4. From Independent authorities: Gender Equality Committee in Employment andVocational Training

• No particular training took place

STAGE 2: SELECTING THE JOBS TO BE COMPARED…

• Predominantly female jobs to be compared with predominantly male jobs

• Information from official statistics, information gathering among trade unions,human resource and recruiters, managers in sector

• Criteria for determining gender predominance:

• The percentage of women and men doing the job,

• The historical incumbency of the job, and

• Job stereotyping

STAGE 2: SELECTING THE JOBS TO BE COMPARED…


• Insufficient statistics

• Make use of the collective agreement, trade unionists and HR managers

• Selection of four jobs in hotels– two pairs:

1. Room-maid – Predominantly female – Scale 3, 669,91 euros + 5 points

2. Storekeeper B – Predominantly male – scale 4, 686,72 euros + 4 points

1. Housekeeper B – Predominantly female – scale 5, 727,71 + 6 points

2. Headwaiter/tress B – Predominantly male – scale 10, 935,87+ 9 points

STAGE 3: DEVELOPING THE JOB EVALUATION TOOL…

• Appraising the characteristics of different jobs by using a set of common criteria inorder to establish their relative value

• Through the use of such a tool, it is possible for all the demands in jobs to be evaluatedby using common, clear and detailed criteria.

• The method is recognized as being the most appropriate for job evaluation in a genderequality context.

• The method could be build either by:1. The adaptation of an existing evaluation method

2. Constructing a new from the scratch

3. Acquiring a method developed by a consulting firm.

• Point rating schemes in four factors: SKILLS, EFFORT, RESPONSIBILITIES AND WORKINGCONDITIONS

• Methodological rigour: sub-factors are tailored to the activity sector, no ambiguity orduplication. Sub-factors shall be suitably adapted to the activity sector

STAGE 3: DEVELOPING THE JOB EVALUATION TOOL…


• Adapted the Portuguese Tool, which was first designed for the Restaurant andBeverage Sector in Portugal

• Translated in Greek

• Minor changes occurred in defining the sub-factors

• Minor changes in relation to the sub-factor levels

• Adopted initially the point rating schemes

STAGE 4: INFORMATION GATHERING ON THE JOBS TOBE EVALUATED…• Various data collection tools can be used – structured or opened ended questionnaires• The Portuguese group constructed a structured questionnaire which was administered in the

workplaces.• The Structured questionnaire provide…

• the respondents with a range of possible responses, which limits the interpretation of the researcherwho analyze the questionnaire preventing any gender bias

• It facilitates data processing because answers to closed questions are simpler to code and analyzed• It easier to transfer to other sectors

• Two main parts of the questionnaire: a. identifying the tasks performed in a particular job andascertaining whether the tasks comply with the existing job description and b. identifying the jobdemands

• Observations – Preceding the finalization of the questionnaire. It is useful in obtaining additionalinformation as some people find it difficult to put job demands into words. Also people tend toundervalue or overlook tasks they perform

• Piloting the questionnaire• Result analysis

STAGE 4: INFORMATION GATHERING ON THE JOBS TOBE EVALUATED…


• Even we did not schedule a pre-test of the questionnaire, after thecompletion of the first 15 questionnaires we proceeded to minor changes

• Contacted personal interviews with the participants at the workplaces

• 23 hotels, most 4 and 5 star hotels, in Nicosia, Limassol, Paphos andFamagusta

• 80 participants – 20 room-maids, 20 storekeepers B, 21 housekeepers B and19 Headwaiters B

• No observations have been performed

• Analysis of results

STAGE 5: DETERMINING THE VALUE OF JOBS…

• This is a vital stage of the process and includes the weighing importance of factorsand sub-factors and their respective assigned points.

• No matter the effort made to avoid gender biases in the preceding stages, prejudicecan creep in.

• The assignment of point scores must take into consideration the importance of eachfactor and sub-factor.

• This is more than a technical task and it entails in-depth reflection from all parties.• It entails practical consequences for enterprises, workers and the sector. Therefore,

it is very important that each member of the working group has a clearunderstanding the concepts under analysis. The meaning and purpose of each factorand sub-factor must be objective, understood and agreed by all.

• The weighting grid is the tool that synthesizes the process and a key element of thewhole evaluation system.

STAGE 5: DETERMINING THE VALUE OF JOBS…

ORDER OFIMPORTANCE

FACTORS POINTS

1ST SKILLS 375

2ND RESPONSIBILITY 275

WORKING CONDITIONS 275

3RD EFFORT 125

THE CYPRIOT CASE

Adopted the weighting of factors from the Portuguese project

STAGE 6: ASSIGNING POINT SCORES AND IDENTIFYINGJOBS OF EQUAL VALUE…

• Once the levels in each sub-factor have been assigned points, the resultsobtained in the fieldwork must be transported onto the scale grid

• The level for each job within a particular sub-factor is determined by theanswer that obtained the majority (50+1).

• Where is not possible to apply the criterion of majority then criterion ofaverage is applied.

• Before groupings jobs into point intervals, the range of classes must beestablished. It will be hard to explain differences between jobs if the intervalsare too small and too large intervals can make the meaning of equal valuemeaningless.

STAGE 6: ASSIGNING POINT SCORES AND IDENTIFYINGJOBS OF EQUAL VALUE…


• Adopted the grid of the Portuguese research, 30points intervals

Classes Points Headwaiter/ress Housekeeper Storekeeper Room-maid

A 720-749B 690-719C 660-689

D 630-659

E 600-629F 570-599G 540-569

H 510-539

J 480-509

I 450-479

K 420-449

RESULTS OF THE PILOT RESEARCH IN CYPRUSSKILLS (325 – 32,5%) STOREKEEPER ROOM-MAID HOUSEKEEPER HEADWAITER/RESS

A/A SUB-FACTORS POINTS LEVEL SC0RE LEVEL SCORE LEVEL SCORE LEVEL SCORE

1 EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND 35 3 26,25 2 17,5 4 35 3 26,25

2 VOCATIONAL TRAINING 15 1 1,5 1 1,5 2 13,5 2 13,5

3 DURATION OF WORK 20 4 20 4 20 4 20 4 20

4 DUTIES IN RELATION TO H&S 25 3 15 2 10 2 10 4 20

5 USE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES 25 3 25 1 2,5 2 13,75 2 13,75

6 REQUIRMENTS IN RELATION TO H&S 30 3 22,5 3 22,5 4 30 4 30

7 FOREIGN LANGUAGES 30 2 12 2 12 2 12 3 21

8 MANAGEMENT OF CONFLICT 30 1 3 1 3 3 21 4 30

9 NO OF INTERLOCUTORS COMMUNICATE 20 3 12 2 8 4 20 3 16

10 MANUAL DEXTERITY 20 1 2 3 20 3 20 3 20

11 PHYSICAL AGILITY 25 2 16,66 3 25 3 25 3 25

12 ABILITY TO WORK FAST 25 1 8,33 3 25 3 25 3 25

13 CREATIVITY 25 2 13,75 1 2,5 3 25 3 25

5 TOTAL POINTS 325 177,99 169,5 270,25 285,5

RESULTS OF THE PILOT RESEARCH IN CYPRUSRESPONIBILITIES (275 – 27,5%)

STOREKEEPER ROOM-MAID HOUSEKEEPER HEADWAITER/RESS


1 RESPOSIBILITY FOR H&S FOR OTHERS 40 2 26,66 2 26,66 3 40 3 40

2 RESPOSIBILITY FOR SUPERVISING OTHERS 40 1 4 1 4 2 16 2 16

3 COLLABORATION WITH OTHER EMPLOYEES 30 3 30 1 10 3 30 3 30

4 PREPARATION OF WORK AND OTHERS 30 1 10 1 10 3 30 3 30

5CHECKING OF MAINTAINANCE FOREQUIPMENT AND PRODUCTS 35 4 35 2 14 3 24,5 4 35

6 ORGANIZATION OF TASKS AND OTHERS 30 2 15 1 7,5 2 15 2 15

7 HANDLE OF DOCUMENTS AND MONEY 35 2 14 1 3,5 2 14 3 24,5

8 PURCHASING AND MANAGING STOCK 35 5 35 1 3,5 3 19,26 1 3,5

TOTAL POINTS 275 169,66 79,16 188,76 194

RESULTS OF THE PILOT RESEARCH IN CYPRUS

EFFORT (125 – 12,5%) STOREKEEPER ROOM-MAID HOUSEKEEPER HEADWAITER/RESS


1 HOURS OF STANDING OR SITTING 20 3 12 5 20 4 16 5 20

2 REPETITIVE MOVEMENTS 20 2 6,5 4 15,5 2 6,5 3 11

3 MOST USUAL BODY POSTURE 20 2 10 4 20 3 15 3 15

4 LIFTING AND CARRYING WEIGHTS 20 4 16 4 16 2 8 5 20

5 PAYING ATTENTION TO SEVERAL THINGS 15 2 15 1 7,5 2 15 2 15

6 UNEXPECTED SITUATIONS 15 3 9 1 3 3 9 4 12

7 WORK LIABLE TO INTERRUPTIONS 15 4 15 2 6 2 6 2 6

TOTAL POINTS 125 83,5 88 75,5 99

RESULTS OF THE PILOT RESEARCH IN CYPRUSWORKING CONDITIONS (275 – 27,5%) STOREKEEPER ROOM-MAID HOUSEKEEPER HEADWAITER/RESS


1 NOISE FROM MACHINERY OR PEOPLE 30 1 3 1 3 1 3 1 3

2 NATURAL OR ARTIFICIAL LIGHTING 25 1 6,25 1 6,25 1 6,25 1 6,25

3 THERMAL CONDITIONS 25 2 10 2 10 2 10 3 20

4CONTACT WITH STEAM, GASES OR TOXICPRODUCTS 35 1 3,5 1 3,5 1 3,5 1 3,5

5 WORKING WEEKENDS 30 2 16,5 3 30 3 30 3 30

6 WORKING SPLIT HOURS 30 1 10 1 10 1 10 2 20

7 WORKING BETWEEN 12:00 - 7:00 AM 35 1 3,5 1 3,5 1 3,5 1 3,5

8 PACE OF WORK 30 3 18 3 18 3 18 5 30

9 RISKS OF ACCIDENTS OR ILLNESSES 35 1 7 2 14 2 14 2 14

TOTAL POINTS 275 77,75 98,25 98,25 130,25


STOREKEEPER ROOM-MAID HOUSEKEEPER HEADWAITER/RESS

SKILLS 177,99 169,5 270,25 285,5

RESPONSIBILITIES 169,66 79,16 188,76 194

EFFORT 83,5 88 75,5 99

WORKING CONDITIONS 77,75 98,25 98,25 130,25

TOTAL 508,9 434,91 632,76 708,75


Classes Points Headwaiter/ress Housekeeper Storekeeper Room-maid

A 720-749B 690-719 708.75C 660-689

D 630-659 632.76

E 600-629F 570-599G 540-569

H 510-539

J 480-509 508.9I 450-479

K 420-449 434.91

Documents

A job evaluation methodology and the experience from CyprusStorekeeper B – Predominantly male – scale 4, 686,72 euros + 4 points ... • Contacted personal interviews with the