PARLIAMENTARY STAFF ORGANISATION - EQUAL PAY AUDIT REPORT 2012
BACKGROUND
1.In order to test that the SPCB’s pay policies and practices are free from unlawful bias and are compliant with the equal pay provisions under the Equality Act 2010, the Leadership Group (LG) agreed at its meeting on 23 April 2012 to undertake an equal pay audit. Whilst this is not a legal requirement under the UK equality duties regulations, the SPCB must have due regard to the need to eliminate unlawful discrimination in all its working practices and demonstrate how this is met. The equal pay audit will help the SPCB to demonstrate compliance with this duty as it is considered to be an effective way to ensure that a pay system delivers equal pay and that there are no unjustifiable pay inequalities.
2.The LG also agreed to meet the provisions under the Scottish equality duties regulations which go beyond the scope of the UK duties. An equal pay review is specified as one of the Scottish duties and all employers in Scotland are expected to publish information on pay on the grounds of gender, disability and ethnicity every two years. The LG therefore agreed that an equal pay audit should be carried out every two years and extended to cover the characteristics of disability and ethnicity in addition to gender.
THE AUDIT
Aims
3.The overall aim of the audit is to test if the SPCB’s existing pay policies are in line with current equal pay legislation. In particular, the audit sought to:
- review the pay of men and women doing equal work and, where possible, review the other protected characteristics of disability and ethnicity, as defined by the Equality Act 2010;
- test the SPCB’s pay and grading structure including any links between the performance management system and rewards such as pay progression;
- explain any identified equal pay or reward discrepancies;
- propose solutions for addressing any discrepancies which were not objectively justified through an equal pay audit action plan.
Approach
4.Support for the audit was provided through a working group which comprised of Derek Stein, Pensions and Reward Policy Adviser, Aneela McKenna, Equalities Manager and four members of the Scottish Parliament’s Equality Advisory Group. The working group followed a five step process recommended by the Equality and Human Rights Commission which includes:
- analysis of the equal pay audit information;
- identification of any pay gaps that cannot be justified;
- eliminating those pay gaps that cannot be explained on non-discriminatory grounds;
- drafting an equal pay audit report;
- drafting an equal pay audit action plan.
5.The audit comprised a series of tests designed to detect areas of equal pay risk within the SPCB’s existing pay system for men and women doing work rated as being of equivalent or equal value. Where possible, the tests covered the other protected characteristics of disability and ethnicity. Additionally, it tested the current pay and grading structure and any links with the performance management system.
6.The audit was based on a total population of 437staff, which was a snapshot of the payroll headcount figure as at 31 May 2012, although the actual sample size used for each test varied depending on the subject. For example, staff employed on TUPE terms were excluded from any tests that involved an analysis by grade as they have not been subsumed into the SPCB’s grading structure. Similarly, the Chief Executive and Assistant Clerk/Chief Executives were excluded from some of the tests because of the small sample size. Staff who were on secondment to another organisation and staff seconded to the SPCB were excluded from all of the tests carried out.
Gender
7.A series of 18 individual tests were carried out on the characteristic of gender. A complete listing of the tests performed together with details in each instance of the data sample size used and the main findings is provided in Appendix A.
Disability
8.The equality monitoring exercise invited staff to declare if they had a disability. Based on the equal pay audit population of 437staff the number of staff that responded was 328. Of those who responded 39 staff declared that they had a disability, 109 chose not to respond and 4 preferred not to answer the question on disability. Based on the 328 staff who responded approximately 11.9% of staff declared they had a disability. Compared to the total population of 437 this represents approximately 8.9% of staff.
9.Whilst all 18 tests were carried out on the characteristic of gender the number of staff who declared they had a disability was too low to carry out all 18 tests. The analysis was therefore restricted to tests 4, 5, 8, 10, 15 and 18 only. A complete listing of the tests performed together with details in each instance of the data sample size used and the main findings is provided in Appendix B.
Ethnicity
10.The equality monitoring exercise also invited staff to declare their ethnicity. Based on the equal pay audit population of 437 staff the number of staff that responded was 328. Of those who responded 6 staff declared that they were from a black and minority ethnic background, 109 chose not to respond and 14 preferred not to answer the question on ethnicity. Based on the 328 staff who responded approximately 1.8% of staff declared they were from a black and minority ethnic background. Compared to the total population of 437 this represents approximately 1.4%.This was too few to enable any meaningful statistical analysis.
11.This figure is lower than the number of black and minority ethnic background people living in Scotland which is 2%. This figure is expected to be higher (approximately 5%) based on the results of the Scottish Census 2011 which are due to be published in 2013.We recognise that black and minority ethnic staff are underrepresented in the workforce. While opportunities for external recruitment are limited, we recommend that steps are taken to increase the number of applications from black and minority ethnic groups as detailed in the action plan at Appendix C.
Results of the Audit Tests
12.Overall the audit found no evidence of equal pay risk in any of the areas tested and no significant concerns were highlighted over the SPCB’s pay and reward policies. The tests on the SPCB’s pay and grading structure found that there was a robust framework in place which is based on the principles of equal treatment and fairness. The SPCB’s recruitment and internal promotion procedures demonstrated strong principles of equal treatment, fair and open competition and selection based on merit.
13.Whilst no area was found to be at risk of non-compliance with the Equality Act 2010 the action plan at Appendix C identifies 2 areas which may benefit from further monitoring or improvement to ensure that the next audit is more reflective of the needs of the organisation.
Next Steps
14.To consider the recommended action points in the attached action plan at Appendix C and carry out an equal pay audit on a biennial basis.
Appendix A
PARLIAMENTARY STAFF ORGANISATION - EQUAL PAY AUDIT BY GENDER
Test 1: Recruitment Procedures
This test checked whether or not a valid audit trail existed for pay decisions by selecting the last five male and female employees who received offers to join the parliamentary staff organisation. This test was designed to ensure that their offers were documented and that the relevant policies and procedures were followed.
Audit Sample Size:10 employee records.
Audit Findings
The SPCB’s recruitment procedures are based on the principles of fair and open competition and selection based on merit. A competency based selection process is used. Before a job is advertised the key skills or knowledge needed to be able to carry out the job are identified. The criteria are published with the job advert and are used for selection purposes throughout the entire selection process. In terms of the last five male and female employees who received offers to join the parliamentary staff organisation, proper documentation existed and policies and procedures had been followed in all cases.
Test 2: Internal Promotion Procedures
This test checked whether or not a valid audit trail existed for pay decisions by selecting the last five internal promotion competitions. This test was designed to ensure that their offers were documented and that the relevant policies and procedures were followed.
Audit Sample Size:5 employee records.
Audit Findings
The SPCB’s internal promotion procedures are based on the same principles and procedures as for external recruitment as detailed in Test 1 above. In terms of the last five internal promotion competitions proper documentation existed and policies and procedures had been followed in all cases. In line with the SPCB’s starting pay on promotion rules promotees moved to the minimum of the higher grade pay scale on promotion or the equivalent salary point that had been attained as a result of aprevious period of temporary promotion.
Test 3: Job Description and the Link to the Job Evaluation System
This test checked whether or not a valid audit trail existed for job evaluation assessments by ensuring that appropriate documentation such as job description and job evaluation scores were in place.
Audit Sample Size: 5.
Audit Findings
The SPCB’s job evaluation system involves assessing all jobs against a bespoke range of job evaluation factors thus ensuring that all SPCB jobs can be evaluated fairly and consistently. Job evaluations are conducted on the basis of the Head of Group/Office submitting a job description and a completed job evaluation assessment form. The information is evaluated independently by 2 job evaluators and the initial job evaluation scores are sent to the Head of Group/Office for consideration. The grading of the job is only disclosed after the Head of Group/Office has agreed the job evaluation scores. There is an appeal mechanism in place whereby the Head of Groupmay ask for the job to be re-evaluated by someone who was not involved in the original evaluation. In this test proper documentation existed and policy and procedures had been followed in relation to the five jobs evaluated.
Test 4: Number of Male v Number of Female Employees
This test provides a general overview of the gender split between men and women in the organisation and is used as the benchmark for subsequent analysis.
Audit Sample Size: all 437 employees.
Audit Findings
This test showed a 49%:51% male: female split within the organisation. By way of a comparator the male: female split within the UK Civil Service, House of Commons and the National Assembly for Wales was 47%:53%, 54%:46% and 49%:51%. Based on this result there does not appear to be a risk associated with the staff profile of the whole organisation.
Test 5: Grade Population – by Gender
This test examines the gender split by grade, by analysing the distribution of men and women in the parliamentary staff organisation grade hierarchy.
Audit Sample Size: 429 employees (Clerk/Chief Executive, staff transferred in on TUPE terms and secondments excluded).
Audit Findings
The table below shows that the gender split for Grade 2 up to Grade 5 is in the main consistent with the general population split for the whole organisation. The sample sizes for Grade 7 and AC/CE are very small which makes it difficult to enable any meaningful statistical analysis. However, when taken with the Grade 6 data it shows that there is a 65%:35% male: female split at senior management level (Grade 6 level and above). Taking into account the principles of the SPCB’s external and internal selection procedures (Tests 1 and 2) and the results of Test 10 (promotions) and Test 12 (applications for posts at Grade 6 level and above) there is little evidence to suggest any gender bias exists.
Grade / Male / Female / % Split2 / 61 / 81 / 43:57
3 / 31 / 45 / 41:59
4 / 49 / 39 / 56:44
5 / 39 / 41 / 49:51
6 / 21 / 13 / 62:38
7 / 5 / 2 / 71:29
AC/CE / 2 / 0 / 100:0
Test 6: Office and Grade Population by Gender
A review was undertaken of the gender split within the various offices of the organisation e.g. BIT, Security, Procurement, etc. by grade and gender.
Audit Sample Size: 420 employees (Clerk/Chief Executive, Assistant Clerk/Chief Executive’s, Grade 7’s, staff transferred in on TUPE terms and secondments excluded).
Audit Findings
The table below shows that there is a mixture of genders in all offices. Due to the segmented nature of the structure of the parliamentary staff organisation, the sample sizes in many offices is very small, making it difficult to draw conclusions on the risk level of each office. Some of the data suggests that some offices have a higher proportion of either one gender or the other but this is inevitable when the workforce is fragmented into such small units. Taking into account the principles of the SPCB’s external and internal selection procedures (Tests 1 and 2) and the results of Test 10 (promotions) and Test 12 (applications for posts at Grade 6 level and above) there is little evidence to suggest any gender bias exists.
Office / G2 M/Fsplit / G3 M/F
split / G4 M/F
split / G5 M/F
split / G6 M/F
split / Total M/F split / % M/F split
Allowances and Office-holders / 1 / 5 / 0 / 2 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 2 / 1 / 0 / 2 / 9 / 18:82
BIT / 4 / 0 / 10 / 5 / 4 / 3 / 3 / 1 / 1 / 1 / 22 / 10 / 69:31
Broadcasting / 0 / 2 / 0 / 1 / 3 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 1 / 3 / 4 / 43:57
Chamber / 2 / 4 / 3 / 3 / 4 / 4 / 1 / 8 / 1 / 2 / 11 / 21 / 34:66
Clerk/Chief Executive / 0 / 2 / 0 / 1 / 0 / 2 / 1 / 0 / 1 / 1 / 2 / 6 / 25:75
Committee / 1 / 4 / 0 / 1 / 6 / 6 / 9 / 4 / 7 / 2 / 23 / 17 / 57:43
Public Information and Publications / 3 / 2 / 0 / 1 / 1 / 0 / 0 / 1 / 0 / 0 / 4 / 4 / 50:50
Education and Community Partnership / 0 / 8 / 0 / 2 / 3 / 2 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 1 / 3 / 13 / 19:81
Events and Exhibitions / 0 / 1 / 3 / 3 / 0 / 2 / 0 / 0 / 1 / 0 / 4 / 6 / 40:60
FM / 5 / 7 / 3 / 3 / 8 / 1 / 2 / 0 / 1 / 1 / 19 / 12 / 61:39
Finance / 0 / 1 / 2 / 2 / 0 / 0 / 3 / 0 / 1 / 1 / 6 / 4 / 60:40
HR / 0 / 2 / 1 / 6 / 0 / 0 / 3 / 5 / 1 / 0 / 5 / 13 / 28:72
MRO / 0 / 0 / 1 / 0 / 0 / 3 / 1 / 1 / 0 / 1 / 2 / 5 / 29:71
Office of the PO (incl. UKIRO) / 2 / 0 / 0 / 1 / 2 / 1 / 1 / 0 / 1 / 0 / 6 / 2 / 75:25
Office of the Solicitor to the SP / 0 / 2 / 1 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 1 / 2 / 33:67
OR / 0 / 0 / 0 / 1 / 13 / 8 / 2 / 4 / 1 / 0 / 16 / 13 / 55:45
Procurement / 0 / 1 / 0 / 0 / 1 / 3 / 1 / 1 / 0 / 1 / 2 / 6 / 25:75
Security / 39 / 25 / 5 / 4 / 2 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 1 / 0 / 47 / 29 / 62:38
SPICe / 2 / 5 / 1 / 7 / 2 / 2 / 11 / 14 / 3 / 1 / 19 / 29 / 40:60
Visitor Services / 2 / 10 / 1 / 2 / 0 / 2 / 1 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 4 / 14 / 22:78
Test 7: Senior Management Population (Grade 6 level and above) – by Gender
This test analyses the representation of men and women at a senior management level.
Audit Sample Size: 44 employees at Grade 6 level and above (excluding secondments).
Audit Findings
The table below shows a 66%:34% male: female split at senior management level. However, taking into account the principles of the SPCB’s internal and external selection procedures and the results of Test 10 (promotions) and Test 12 (applications for posts at Grade 6 level and above) there is little evidence to suggest any gender bias exists.
Grade / Male / Female / % Split6 / 21 / 13 / 62:38
7 / 5 / 2 / 71:29
AC/CE / 2 / 0 / 100:0
C/CE / 1 / 0 / 100:0
Test 8: Salary Levels of Males and Females
This test checks if men and women in similar roles at similar grade levels are being paid equally.
Audit Sample Size: 427 employees (Clerk/Chief Executive, Assistant Clerk/Chief Executives, staff transferred in on TUPE terms and secondments excluded).
Audit Findings
The SPCB’s pay progression rules enable staff to progress to the salary scale maximum within 3 years (Grade 2), 4 years (Grade 3 to 5) and 5 years (Grade 6 to AC/CE). Based on thepay progression rules, similar median salary levels within each grade would be expected. The table below shows that was the case except in the case of Grade 7’s. Here the gap is explained by the fact that men have a longer level of service than the women. The pay progression rules will however ensure that the gap will close within 5 years and therefore the risk is minimal.
Grade / Male Median Salary Rate / Female Median Salary Rate2 / £22,991 / £22,991
3 / £29,346 / £29,346
4 / £37,466 / £37,466
5 / £47,242 / £47,242
6 / £59,777 / £59,777
7 / £73,482 / £67,586
Test 9: Starting Salaries
Test to see whether there is a gender bias in the award of starting salaries above the minimum of the salary scale.
Audit Sample Size: data on 10 new starters reviewed.
Audit Findings
This test showed that all 10 new employees were offered the minimum of the salary scale on appointment so there is no evidence of any bias.
Test 10: Promotions – Total Population
This test compares the number of men and women promoted since October 2010 (excluding temporary promotions).
Audit Sample Size: All 15 employees who were promoted during the review period.
Audit Findings
The SPCB’s promotion procedures are based on the principles of fair and open competition and selection based on merit. In terms of the number of promotions the table below shows a 53%:47% male: female split which is broadly in line with the male:female split of the whole organisation. There is little indication that one gender has better promotion prospects than the other within the parliamentary staff organisation.
Grade / Male / Female / Total3 / 0 / 3 / 3
4 / 3 / 1 / 4
5 / 3 / 0 / 3
6 / 1 / 3 / 4
7 / 1 / 0 / 1
8 / 7 / 15
Test 11: Part-time Workers
This tests if the pay of part-time staff is proportionately equal to that of full-time staff. The SPCB’s work life balance policy offers staff a number of different working arrangements. For this test all staff working on a part-time, job sharing, partial retirement and term time basis have been categorised as part time workers.
Audit Sample Size: 91 part-time staff were compared with the full-time population.
Audit Findings
This test showed that 21% of the parliamentary staff organisation are part-time workers. The male: female split for part-time workers was 30%:70%. Based on the data provided, the analysis showed that when drawing comparisons using the full-time equivalent pay rate, part-time workers are paid the same as their full-time counterparts. Due to the high percentage of part-time workers it is recommended that future equal pay audits should treat part-time workers as a separate characteristic. This would enable the SPCB to check if any bias exists for this group of staff, for example, whether part-time is being accessed fairly across the grades, whether there is equal access to training courses and promotion boards and whether there is equal treatment for performance markings.
Test 12: Applications for posts at Grade 6 level and above