Agenda for Change Reviews and Appeals Niall MacDougall HPA NPC Harrogate 2006

Amicus Guidance See Amicus Guidance on Undergoing A review of Your Matching Outcome –This presentation and handout is a profession specific supplement This is HPA guidance based on experience and knowledge of AfC The HPA is extremely concerned by some results and misapplication of KTE and profiles

Appeal - Breach of Process –Failure of local AfC team to follow national or local protocols Review – The JE result is “wrong” –Happens more often than it should… or should that be more often than not… Appeal, Review? What is the difference?

Appeal –6 Month Time Limit –Grievance related –Can be before or after review Review –3 Month time limit –A second evaluation panel reconsiders outcome –Only one review –Outcome can go up, down or remain unchanged Appeal, Review? What is the difference?

When is it an Appeal? Appeal –did both you and your manager agree your JD and sign it ? –were appropriate advisors knowledgeable about the post questioned on the details ? –have you been matched to the appropriate occupational group? –Did your Trust agree local procedures in partnership with staffside ? –Were the national matching rules followed ?

Review –Does the job statement (top of the national profile) describe what you do? –Are each of the factors applied correctly especially Knowledge and training (KTE factor 2) Freedom to Act (factor 12) –These are the only two factors that must agree with the profile. If factor 2 or 12 do not match the profile the outcome will change. More on factor 2 later… When is it a Review?

Expected Results Know what ‘should’ happen

Trainees Basic Trainees –Should not have matched –Should be paid a % of Band 7 See T&C Handbook Annex U Para 3 Higher Trainees –Ought to have match Registered Physicist profile If argued against on word “register” appeal for breach of process: none of the individual 16 factors mention state registration

Should I Request A Review/Appeal If you are happy with outcome –NO ! If you are unhappy / feeling murderous –Definitely! –more likely to be review than Appeal –Seek Advice… and act NOW –Do not bow to inappropriate pressure!!!

None!!! All been removed Registered Physicist Profile (band 7) Principal Physicist Profile (8a) Consultant Physicist Profile (8c/d) Generic Health Care Science (boo!) –Inappropriate in most cases Professional Managers –Inappropriate in most cases: Appeal! JAQ –This is really fun. Available (relevant) Profiles

What if too much time has passed? All is not lost….

Last chance saloon Clinical Scientist Profiles all removed But, this means Can request rematch if matched to these profiles… –“It is recommended that panels revisit matches to these profiles to satisfy themselves that the outcomes are correct”

Key Issues Factor 2: KTE Read factor definitions and compare with reasons for matching What questions were asked of advisors? This isn’t just about you but the future of the profession…

KTE Basic Trainee (i.e. grade A) –Not Applicable should not be matched Higher Trainee (B8-11 in old money) –Minimum 7 All Others –8 (accept no arguments, ‘cause you’ll get plenty)

KTE 8 Reasons Our job entry requirements (i.e. end of grade A) are level 7 (possibly 8…) –Masters degree is level 7 master plus diploma level 8 (Dip IPEM ?) –See JE hand book V2 KTE definitions Our corporate membership/ registration threshold –Requires 2 more years structured specialist higher training –Para 7.1 page 48 JE handbook V 2

Level 7 to Level 8

Other Issues Working Hours: –Advised to either take TOIL or O/T if you work over contracted hours. This is part of the equal pay package –TOIL DOES apply to bands 8/9. –“Hours as required” IS DEAD

Other Issues Band 8 Overtime No progress, very frustrating –Band 7 staff working same hours as band 8a staff can earn more for same hours when overtime taken into account. How is this “equal pay for work of equal value”?

Review & Appeal Process Get Result Unhappy  Read advice & seek clarification Lodge formal request Urgently –Detail may follow (AfC team may not like this) –Detail MUST be worked on well –Are professional skills are report writing, interpretation of rules provision of evidence, explaining complicated issues to those who struggle to understand them - use all of these and give examples. (See website for further support materials) Informal meeting (likely & may be helpful) Review panel or appeal hearing –WILL DECIDE BASED ON YOUR EVIDENCE

Summary Unless you are content with outcome –Seek immediate advice –Act Quickly –Don’t assume result is correct as you pay is “about the same” –Be persistent –Talk to nice people at HPA!

Thanks To you all for listening To Mark Rawson for some slides