Pay Modernisation and Workforce Planning Board

Assynt House
BeechwoodPark
Inverness IV2 3BW
Tel: 01463 717123
Fax: 01463 235189
Textphone users can contact us via
Typetalk: Tel 0800 959598
/

MINUTE of MEETING of the

PAY MODERNISATION AND WORKFORCE PLANNING BOARD

Board Room, Assynt House, Inverness /

Friday 20 April, 2007 – 10.00 am

Present: / Dr Roger Gibbins, Chief Executive (Joint Chair)
Ray Stewart, Employee Director (Joint Chair)
Pamela Cremin, Workforce Planning Manager
Diane Fraser, RCN
Anne Gent, Director of Human Resources
Brian Houston, Payroll Manager
Gordon MacDonald, KSF Project Manager
Mary Morton, Head of Community Pharmaceutical Services
Adam Palmer, Unison
Caroline Parr, Partnership Support Officer
Douglas Philand, Team Leader, Argyll and Bute CHP
Dr Ken Proctor, Associate Medical Director (Primary Care)
Douglas Seago, Head of Facilities
Donald Shiach, Pay Modernisation Manager
Christina Stewart, RoyalCollege of Midwives
In Attendance: / Brian Mitchell, Board Committee Administrator
1 / WELCOME & APOLOGIES
Apologies were received from Tony Cowan-Martin, Sheena Craig, Malcolm Iredale, Catherine Mackay, Heidi May, Gill McVicar, Heather Sheerin, Hamish Stewart, Andrew Ward, and Claire Wood.
2 / MINUTE OF MEETING HELD ON 16 FEBRUARY2007
The Pay Modernisation Board approved the Minutesubject to the following amendments:

• Addition of David McRonald and Adam Palmer to the List of those Present.
• Page 6, Item 5.1, Paragraph 2, Line 4 – after the second sentence add “Ms Fraser also expressed concern regarding the training issue for those staff assimilated beyond the second Gateway in respect of which Mr R Stewart confirmed that such training requirements would be picked up under the PDP & R process.”

3 / MATTERS ARISING
There were no matters raised under this Item.
4 / WORKFORCE PLANNING
4.1 / NHS Highland Workforce Plan 2007/08
Mrs Cremin spoke to the circulated report on the development of the NHS Highland Workforce Plan which included an Action Plan and individual Unit Plans underpinning CHP and SSU Local Delivering for Health Plans, these being developed in line with the NHS Highland Rightfit Workforce Model and providing a document that was overall easier to access and easier to understand for staff. The Workforce Model had been utilised to identify those posts that were difficult to recruit to and whilst recruitment and retention rates were stable there was a desire to improve the number and effectiveness of exit interviews. There was a need to consider the demographic profile of both the public and NHS Highland staff with a view to establishing the potential impact these would have on the organisation, as well as matters such as the change in Consultant working hours, on achieving sustainable services throughout the area. Mrs Cremin advised that there was movement in linking both service and financial planning elements of the organisation and part of this process had indicated an anticipated increase in Nursing, Medical and AHP staff numbers, some of which had yet to be funded, this aspect being difficult to assess due to data issues. Mr McRonald stated that the main area being considered was in respect of the funded establishment, that affordability was an issue in terms of what was funded and what was not, and indicated that one difficulty being encountered was the absence of notification of the financial allocation for 2008/09.
An Action Plan for 2007/08, the main points of which were outlined had been developed which took account of the ten recommendations identified by the development of the Workforce Plan 2007, and this included a set of robust timescales as well as identified Leads who were to support the Action Plan. Mrs Gent advised that there was to be held a workshop to consider Workforce Planning from a national perspective the following week and stated that whilst there was a need to be clear as to the proposed outcomes, one positive aspect of the work to date was the creation of CHP/SSU Local Plans as these illustrated the gaining of ownership of this subject at that level. Dr Gibbins stated that that the Plan showed the good links in this area that existed and advised that whilst leadership in this area rested with the Human Resources service there was a need for more operational accountability and as such General and Locality Managers would require to be involved in driving matters forward. Finally Members were advised that the Plan would be submitted to the meeting of the NHS Board to be held on 1 May 2007 for appropriate sign-off.
On the point raised by Mr Seago, in relation to recruitment and the issues of housing and accommodation, Mrs Cremin confirmed that consideration was to relate to both staff accommodation and permanent affordable housing, and include the Raigmore 2020 Project. Mrs Cremin further advised that the North CHP was working with The Highland Council on this subject. Mr R Stewart stated that there were a number of issues existing in relation to recruitment and these applied to all groups. He added that RRP (?) considered matters at a national level and this needed to be wider in its remit, this point being echoed by Mr Seago. Mrs Parr raised the issue of Partnership Working, whether there could be a development session for Trades Unions etc. Mrs Gent advised that there would be time constraints involved in organising such an event and that the Plan and actions emanating from this would be considered at the next meeting to be held on 15 June 2007. Mrs Cremin referred to Recommendation 9, relating to education providers, and advised that there were particular areas around Dental training, especially with regard to absorbing relevant trainees etc and as such the relationship with NES would be crucial. Concern was expressed that NES should be providing training etc that was relevant to the position of NHS Boards, not vice versa and Dr Gibbins emphasised that Workforce Planning was crucial to allow that to happen. Mrs Gent confirmed that a Learning and Development Strategy was being developed and that this would require a strategic approach.
Moving forward the issue of Staffside involvement was raised and Dr Gibbins raised the issues of communication of the document, how this would be practically utilised, and the role of this Committee and that of the Staff Governance Committee. Dr Gibbins stated that he considered the PMB to be the primary the monitoring body. Mrs Cremin confirmed that a number of specific actions from the Plan were to come back to this Board later in the calendar year and that with regard to progress prior to the Plan being submitted to the NHS Board she was to meet with the Director of Planning and Performance and the Head of Service Redesign to discuss matters relating to monitoring and performance. With regard to the issue of funded and required establishment Dr Gibbins stated that whilst the NHS Board could not seek to increase this, aspects relating to redesign etc would have major implications and this required to be captured accordingly. Mrs Cremin advised that the Scottish Executive wished to see these aspects included in the Plan and Dr Gibbins requested that this point be brought back for consideration at the next meeting.
Mr R Stewart referred to the forthcoming Development Session and requested as to whether there was to be Staffside representation. Dr Gibbins stated that the inclusion of local representatives would be appropriate and Mrs Gent suggested that the Pay Modernisation and Workforce Planning Board be invited to participate.
The Pay Modernisation Board:

• Otherwise Agreed the NHS Highland Workforce Plan 2007/08.
• Noted that comments were to be relayed to Mrs Cremin by Wednesday 25 April 2007.
• Noted that the Plan was to be submitted to the NHS Board at their meeting to be held on 1 May 2007.
• Noted that a number of specific actions emanating from the Plan were to be brought back to the next meeting, including aspects relating to redesign and the impact on establishment.
• Noted that a Learning and Development Strategy was being developed.
• Agreed that the Pay Modernisation and Workforce Planning Board be invited to participate in the forthcoming Development Session.

5 / PAY MODERNISATION - IMPLEMENTATION
5.1 / Agenda for Change
5.1.1 / Update on Assimilation
Mr Shiach spoke to the circulated report which gave an overall summary of progress in implementing Agenda for Change in NHS Highland in that the figures for assimilation and arrears paid as at the end of March 2007 were 7264 and 3274 respectively for the old Highland area and 1030 and 345 for the Argyll and Bute CHP area. Mr Houston advised that 1018 staff members had been paid arrears in April and Dr Gibbins expressed his thanks to the Team involved for their hard work in this area. The report also gave projected figures moving forward. With regard to JEMG a number of batches of small numbers of staff remained to be consistency checked and there were fewer than 100 staff whose assimilation would be delayed due to JEMG monitoring. Mr Shiach advised that with particular reference to Argyll and Bute staff the rate of progress noted was to improve although the relevant Agenda for Change staff had been advised that assimilation should not progress prior to JEMG approval despite STAC advising that this could be undertaken by NHS Boards. Dr Gibbins emphasised the need to keep pressure on the Team undertake assimilations for Argyll and Bute CHP staff and Mr Philand confirmed that he would seek to pursue that point accordingly, thanking the Board for its support in this area.
The Pay Modernisation Board:

• Noted the position in implementing Agenda for Change.

5.1.2 / Review Process
Mr Shiach spoke to a tabled report in relation to the review process relative to Agenda for Change which outlined discussion that had been held by the Human Resources Sub Group of the Area Partnership Forum, the report to which had also been appended. It was reported that much of the discussion had focused on the difficulty in determining a start and end date for completion of the Review process and with some staff having been assimilated for over a year issues relating to morale etc had arisen. It had been agreed that the majority of staff should be assimilated prior to the process commencing, that it was important that an end date be identified, and that the resource implications be highlighted to the Pay Modernisation Board. Mr Shiach indicated that the total number of review requests could not be identified at that stage and outlined the resource implications required for the necessary Review Panels which, it was stated, could consider five reviews per day. With regard to the make up of the Review Panels it had been considered appropriate that these involve the Project Manager, Assistant Project Manager or either of the Job evaluation Leads given their involvement in consistency checking. Mr Shiach advised that a date of 31 December 2007 had been agreed as a target date for completion of the Review process, with a fall back of position of March 2008, and based on the backfill costs for the matching phase, adjusted to 2007/08 rates, an estimated resource of £39600 would be required to allow completion.
Discussion then moved to the actual Review process itself as outlined in the Appendix to the report and Mr Shiach advised that it had been agreed to prioritise those staff who would be on protection arrangements following assimilation and as such it would be important to identify those involved in this group and who would be eligible. It was advised that the exploratory stage of the review was consistent with ACAS guidance in this area and involve a two stage process although this could be onerous in time requirements for managers and as such staff would be given the option to opt out of this element if agreed although this would be initiated if so requested. Dr Gibbins sought clarification as to whether all reviews would be considered on an individual basis and was advised that whilst this was the case it was hoped that groupings could be considered for similar or linked posts if agreed. The criteria for review, which staff should be made aware as part of the process would be that their post was not matched correctly to an appropriate National Profile and in this regard supporting evidence would be required, the onus for this being on the individual concerned as to their reasons for seeking a review. In this regard Mr Palmer stated that whilst the number of review requests was likely to be high, especially in the Admin and Clerical sector, staff members would be given appropriate advice and advised accordingly where it was considered that a case for review did not exist.
Mr Seago raised the issue of implications for staff and the organisation as a result of the assimilation process and in particular where staff members were dissatisfied with the outcome. He requested that those people be prioritised for review as they were likely to withdraw from working overtime hours and undertaking extra duties as a result. Mr Palmer stated that Agenda for Change had given some staff the catalyst to raise long standing issues not particularly relevant to this process. This point was echoed by Mr R Stewart, and Mr Houston advised that in relation to part-time staff additional hours payments were no longer to be offset as part of the process, this being a benefit, and that fulltime members of staff would continue to be paid overtime rates. Dr Gibbins requested that those areas where services could be impacted upon also be made a priority. It would be important to distinguish between those issues that were as a direct result of the Agenda for Change process and Mr Shiach confirmed that this was being undertaken. The point was made that Agenda for Change, in principle, had been an attempt to harmonise certain matters and seek to provide ‘equal pay for work of equal value’, and had never been a scheme for the improvement of pay levels within the NHS. Dr Gibbins confirmed this, however, made the point that the number of Review requests could, to some, give the impression of a failed process although it was important to recognise that some staff had benefited and as such it would be important to establish the numbers of those who had indeed benefited, those who remained roughly at the same level, and those who would require protection arrangements.
After discussion The Pay Modernisation Board:

• Endorsed the Agenda for Change Review process as recommended by the Human resources Sub Group.
• Agreed the NHS Board seek to achieve a proposed end date for completion of the Review process by 31 December 2007, with a fall back position of March 2008.
• Noted the additional resource requirement as identified in the report.
• Agreed that consideration of the additional resource requirements be remitted to the next Corporate Services Meeting.
• Agreed that any future report to the NHS Board on this matter not include an illustrative figure relative to the anticipated number of Review requests as this was not indicative of the eventual number of those that were likely to be successful.

5.1.3 / Financial Impact
Mr McRonaldadvised that the remodelingof Staff Group costs was ongoing and indicated that this was substantially complete for Nursing and Ancillary staff although matters relating to the Admin and Clerical Group remained unclear at this stage as was the case for Pharmacy and Maintenance Staff Groups. An accrual of £9.1m for old Highland, and £4.2m for Argyll and Bute CHP had been identified, this being worked from an existing baseline and recognising known issues and providing for a successful Review process for 1 in 3 cases. Overall there was a potential for a carry forward of Non-Recurrent Resource and Mr McRonald stated that it was anticipated that the identified additional resources would be reasonably accurate as to the final required level although an additional 10% contingency had been included for unknown emerging pressures. Dr Gibbins stated that the detailed work that had been undertaken in this area gave assurance to the NHS Board that the organisation had accurately identified the required additional resource requirement and added that whilst the adequacy of that provision was very closely mapped rather than over cautious it was anticipated that this would be sufficient at this stage. On the point raised by Mr R Stewart in relation to accrual for Unsocial Hours payments Mr McRonald advised that whilst further work was required in this area additional resource may be available.
The Pay Modernisation Board:

• Noted the position.

5.2 / KSF Implementation Work Plan
Mr MacDonald spoke to the circulated report which detailed a work programme for the submission of KSF Outlines and including elements relating to monitoring and performance. It was reported that resources were to be re-focused to support work on Outline development refresher sessions, consistency checking and support for Personal Development Planning and Review (PDP&R). Mr MacDonald indicated that by March 2007 some 1653 staff had attended 229 PDP&R sessions, 995 Outlines had been submitted and assigned to 2638 staff, and reports were to be issued to managers regarding the number of outstanding Outlines in their area of responsibility on a monthly basis. Mr MacDonald advised that he had met with SSU/CHP General Managers to discuss how to progress matters and emphasised the need for Outlines to be submitted and following this progress in operational areas were to be monitored, with particular focus on the areas were this was submission was slow. There was a need for all staff to be aware of the requirements in relation to KSF, not only in terms of Outline submission but also PDP&R and the use of eKSF facilities and communication would be a crucial element in this regard with support offered where appropriate. With regard to understanding of the process at Senior level it was advised that an appropriate support structure was in place to assist, this point being referenced in the KSF Implementation Plan. Mr Palmer stated that the timescales for implementation were extremely challenging and expressed concern that eKSF was not fully operational. He also raised the issues of funding for the Project and stated that following on from the discussion in relation to the previous discussion relative to Agenda for Change this was likely to have an impact. Mr Philand raised the position of Outline submission in Argyll and Bute CHP and in response Mr MacDonald confirmed that he was to be in the area on 30 April 2007.