Download
presentation to the directorate on ld2ic update n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Presentation to the Directorate on LD2IC update 2016-2020 Career Structure PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Presentation to the Directorate on LD2IC update 2016-2020 Career Structure

Presentation to the Directorate on LD2IC update 2016-2020 Career Structure

133 Vues Download Presentation
Télécharger la présentation

Presentation to the Directorate on LD2IC update 2016-2020 Career Structure

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Presentation to the Directorate on LD2IC update 2016-2020 Career Structure Responsibility Allowances

  2. LD2IC update ED of 22nd March • Objective of 5-year plan to not surpass IC ceiling (approx. 50 slots per annum) • Agreement on 2016-2017 numbers (mapping from 3-year plan) • Agreement on overall parameters for 2017-2020 (differential by sector 35/45/55)

  3. Initial 5-year proposal (to evaluate)

  4. Update process • Feedback from AT&T sector • Can work with numbers provided in Scenario 3 • Feedback from FHR sector • Plans -just fit- with numbers provided • Feedback from IR sector • Not increase IC ratio; • Feedback from RCS sector • In depth study on demographics, retention of expertise in engineers & technicians – required rebalancing across sector. • Slots transferred within sector, but plans fit with numbers provided.

  5. Revised Proposal

  6. Impact of Proposal

  7. Agree on 5-year numbers for planning parameters Endorse at ED Build plans by category/type to analyse impact on population Next steps

  8. The New Career Structure Hendrik Courtens, James Purvis, Marie-Laure Rivier

  9. A little bit of history… MOAS MAPS MARS ?

  10. Why a new career structure? 7 years of MARS analysed (2013), Staff feedback (via staff survey in 2011 and subsequently) Department head input (via interviews & SWOT in 2013) • Costof the yearly MARS advancement and outside MARS advancement is significant & increasing, triggering the question whether tax payer’s money is spent in the right way (10mCHF)` • 15 FTEs estimated (audit) • Opportunity to change MARS every 5 years only (as part of 5YR) • Some feel MARS is not aiding development. • Supervisors find the formal system too time-consuming, and supervisees want more regular informal contact. • Managers are implementing MARS with varying success. • Many feel MARS does not help with poor performance. • The distribution of steps is seen as unfair by many. + overall difficult context (audit reports, exchange rate, questioning from Member States) “...There’s a high (increasing) cost, while there’s a perception people get less and less. The cost is too high for what we get back...” “...We need to show to the MS that we are doing something to address the cost...”

  11. A little bit of history… MOAS MAPS MARS MERIT

  12. HOW it has been a long journey… Management (over 30 breakfast meetings) 2013 Regular meetings with SA Formal process ED, CCP, TREF, FC, Council 2014 2015 2016 Informal Formal

  13. Many solutions evaluated Financial affordability? Long term impact? 5 objective ratings x 3 function ratings Optimal distribution? Grades? Tracks? How many? Criteria?

  14. Example negotiation / evolution 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 8 10 19893 20060 16857 23871 24724 Starting proposal (spreads 35%-45%, midpoints 20%, good 1.25%) First iteration (spreads 40%) Second iteration (midpoints 19% & good 1.35%) Slide courtesy of SA Final iteration (transitory measures)

  15. Arbitration – November 2015 • Request to abolish ‘tracks’ • Agreed • Request of transition measures to go to 4 years • Agreed • Duration of initial merit budget • Integrated in AC26 • Introduction of Talent Management tools • Agreed as of 2017 • Request for actuarial studies on CHIS impact • Done • Fellows maternity leave coverage at end of contract • Agreed for exceptional circumstances

  16. WHAT : New Career structure

  17. Mapping of current staff New SalaryGrid CP AA CP A CP B CP C CP D CP Ea-Eb CP Ec-Ee CP Fa-Fb CP Fc-Ga CP Gb-Gf 83.33% Harmonised spread, overlap & midpoint progression Spread 40% 116.67%

  18. Grades are not paths Currently we have career paths, Job codes & professional codes (see HRT) Technician Technical Eng. Engineer Moving to Grades & BMJs

  19. MERIT: A lighter form

  20. Changes What does *not* change What changes

  21. Evolution Current Future Promotions Separate Process & Time Window One Process & Time Window Departmental Ceilings Centralised Equity budget for exceptional requirements (currently being defined) Departmental ceilings

  22. Advancement & Promotions calendar MARS May - June 1 July End Feb - mid-March Mid-March - April End May 1 May 1 Dec – 15 Feb End Feb Promotions proposed, analysed and approved. Information to staff members by end June Promotions effective date Notification via pay slip and fully approved form Validation and approval of proposals Enlarged Directorate Information to staff members via supervisor Form completed by GL Advancement increase in % and Performance Award under new system Collegial consultations in depts Annual interviews take place Promotions Advancement

  23. Yearly Performance Reward • Steps are replaced with • a salary increase, expressed as a percentage of the midpoint, AND • a Performance Payment, in case of strong and outstanding performance. Salary increase BOTH Annual lump-sum Payment (non- recurrent)

  24. An example of advancement Particularly Meritorious – 2 steps in CP C With a Strong rating in Grade 4: 195 CHF Overhead = 1.545

  25. (Benchmark Jobs at CERN are not new) First introduced in CERN in 1998 by M. Bénot, P. Berry, P. Ciriani, J. Cuthbert, L. Linssen, J.P. Matheys, R. Raysonand S. Weisz. But they cover jobs such as ‘master mechanic’, ‘carpenter’, ‘telephonist/telexist’…. Need to be updated & function with the new 10 grade structure.

  26. Benchmark Jobs An up-to-date and evolving cartography of the various job families present in the Organization. A reference framework for recruitment, mobility, promotion… • Grade changes inside BMJ: 1-2, 2-3, 3-4, 4-5, 6-7: • Dept + HR • No interview (only if changing BMJ) • BMJ and Grade changes 2-3, 3-4, 4-5, 5-6: • Dept + HR • Interview • Consultation at Sector level • Grade changes 7-8: • Sector + HR • Interview • Grade changes 8-9, 9-10: • CERN-wide (SSAC) + HR • Interview *NB: also possible to change BMJs without change of grade

  27. Equity Budget Context: • Separate time-windows for Advancement & Promotion • While thebudget/ceiling for advancement is defined, there’s no budget for promotions, following the cancellation of career tracks and arbitration by the DG • Advancement algorithm “caps” advancement at 2.35 % salary increase and 2.15% performance payment • A CERN-wide budget, equal to 0.1% of the salary mass has been set aside • 2017 : • Transition year – use of equity budget in exceptional circumstances, • Assess budget requirements (0,1% or more) in line with the desired Talent Management framework • 2018 : • Further usage to be defined / studied (e.g. for high-potentials) Equity budget solves age-old problem of using ‘steps’ during advancement for ‘rattrapage’

  28. Rewards outside annual exercise Work in Progress / Concertation (AC 26) * RA not automatic, but only on request of Department Head

  29. WHEN: 18th August • No promotion, no demotion • Based on current job title and professional code listed in the HR database • Staff on so-called “generic” codes will be mapped to the closest relevant BMJ Annex: Information Sheet Notification letter • All Staff members will receive a notification letter informing them about their : • Position in the salary grid • Grade • Provisional Benchmark Job Title

  30. Outliers

  31. … and WHAT about New Staff? International Indemnity (new Staff) • Current staff keep their existing International Indemnity. • For new staff, International Indemnity will be calculated on the minimum of the recruitment Grade. • Staff hired as of 2007 in Career Paths A & B may now be entitled to International Indemnity (if they fulfil the general eligibility criteria).

  32. Communication SA DH • 19 January: HR Public meeting Launch of the 2015 Five-Yearly Review & Contract Policy Review, • 7 July : SA Echo Bulletin 5-yearly Review - First step completed 2014 Regular meetings with SA Management (over 30 breakfast meetings) • 1 October: joint HR/SA Public Meeting 5-yearly review proposals, joint HR/SA public meeting • 19 October : SA Echo Bulletin Outcome of the 2015 five-yearly review: decision time • 14 December: HR Bulletin article Find out more about cern's 5-yearly review 2015 • 18 January: HR Bulletin article SustainableDevelopment • 11 February : HR Public Meeting 5-yearly measures on Diversity and Career Structure • 13 June: HR Bulletin article • 28 June: HR Public MeetingCareer Structure and Benchmark Jobs • HR web page isunder construction for Benchmark Jobs • BMJ on-line toolwillbereleased in August 2016 to all Staff members • Notification letterswillbe sent to Staff memberswithcontextual information on 18 August 2016 • Prior to the official notification, the deptmappingwillbe sent by HR to the DHs. DHs in turnwillsendit to their Group Leaders and report back to HR in case of modifications/errors. • GLM Information sessions on career structure • Admin e-Guide willbeupdated as of 1st September • AC 26 to bepresented at CCP in September • e-learning module for staff is being prepared • Further training/information for MARS Coordinators 2016 Today

  33. Responsibility Awards Hendrik Courtens & James Purvis,

  34. Legal Framework Prior to 1.9.2016 • SR&R R II 2.15 • A RA may be granted to staff members in accordance with the terms and conditions specified in Annex RA2 • SR&R R II 2.15 → Annex RA 2 • A maximum of 10% of the basic monthly salary • The combined basic monthly salary and RA of the staff member concerned shall not exceed the basic monthly salary corresponding to the last step of career path G (maximum Gb.15) • Paid for a maximum of six consecutive years, except in the case of staff members appointed by the Council to whom this maximum shall not apply. • AC 26, Rev 10 • The criterion to be taken into account for a RA is expertise or the level of functions, i.e. the assumption, for a specific period of time, of responsibilities corresponding to a higher level of expertise or functions • The amount shall depend on the importance of the responsibilities assumed and shall correspond to up to 10 % of the monthly basic salary. Its initial amount shall not be less than 5% of the monthly salary (min 5%) As of 1.9.2016 • SR&R R II 2.14 • An extraordinary service award and/or responsibility award may be granted to staff members in accordance with the terms and conditions specified in Annex RA2 • SR&R R II 2.14 → Annex RA 2 • A maximum of 10% of the basic monthly salary • Paid for a maximum of six consecutive years, except in the case of staff members appointed by the Council to whom this maximum shall not apply. • Paragraph on maximum (i.e. Gb15 removed) • AC 26, Rev 10 (subject to concertation) • The criterion to be taken into account for a responsibility award is expertise or the level of functions, i.e. the assumption, for a specific period of time, of responsibilities corresponding to a higher grade level of expertise or functions • The amount shall depend on the importance of the responsibilities assumed and shall correspond to up to 10 % of the monthly basic salary. • Paragraph on initial minimum removed

  35. Practice Current 1. Directors • No RA 2. Department Heads • Fc, Ga : 7% ; Gb : 0..5% • Revised (down) in July to respect max Gb15 3. Group Leaders • Incoherent approach (14 out of 76 GLs get RA, revised (down) in July) • Target is generally Fc0. 4. Section Leaders • Incoherent approach (2 out of 254 SLs get RA, revised (down) in July) 5. Others • 5 specific responsibilities (e.g. LHC co-cordinator, PS/SPS Physics Coordinator, double assignments,...). Typically awarded for 1 year. Total monthly cost = 25011 CHF for 30 persons Proposed • Directors • Up to 10 % (no maximum salary, unlimited duration) • Department Heads • Grade 10 : 5%, Grade 9 : 7% • no maximum salary, unlimited duration • Group Leaders • Consistent approach ; Reference = min Grade 9 • Only GLs below min of Grade 9 • On recommendation of the DH only • Up to maximum 6 years • Up to maximum 10% (minimum 1%) • Reviewed annually in function of new position in the salary grid • Section Leaders • Consistent approach ; Reference = min Grade 7 • Only SLs below min of Grade 7 • On recommendation of the DH only • Up to maximum 6 years • Up to maximum 10% (minimum 1%) • Reviewed annually in function of new position in the salary grid • Others • No change with current practice Total monthly cost = 60616 CHF (Δ 35605) for 69 persons (WCS)(+ softlanding for those GLs and SLs currently receiving RA and not meeting the new eligibility criteria) 8421 CHF (4p) 13367 CHF (12p) 10125 CHF (9p) 18687 CHF (19p) 10883 CHF (14p) 19123 CHF (29p) 2985 CHF (2p) 1018 CHF (5p) 1018 CHF (5p)

  36. 16959 17072 Gb (32 people, Incl 5 DHs) G10 (36 people, 5 DHs & 4 Directors) 20424 20648 Gf (4 people,Directors) 22727 23900