12 April 2002
FICSA participated in the three-day meeting of the HR Network in Geneva on 3 to 5 April 2002. FICSA was represented by Ms. Janice Albert, General Secretary, Ms. May Hansen, Regional Member for Europe and Ms. Leslie Ewart, Information Officer. This report combines excerpts from the CEB Secretariat’s draft report and FICSA’s minutes of the meeting. The final report of the HR Network will be sent to members when it is approved.
The HR Network is comprised of human resources senior personnel from throughout the common system. This relatively new body replaces the CCAQ. It meets prior to the ICSC to consider and develop its positions on the items on the Commission’s agenda, and take up other items as appropriate.
A. Review of the Pay and Benefits System
Discussions on the first day focused on the review of the pay and benefits system (These documents have been forwarded to FICSA members previously and are available on the ICSC website). Participants considered that the proposals put forward by ICSC were "the most far-reaching HR management reform efforts contemplated since the founding of the United Nations system". They were intended to address criticisms that the system was too monolithic, lacking in transparency, costly to administer, not supportive of a modern dynamic labour force and teamwork, and based on a "culture of entitlement". Consequently, the new approaches under consideration would:
The work on various components of the pay system review has been broken down into three tiers:
Tier 1 (2002)
Tier 2 (2003)
Tier 3 (2004)
On the issue of timing and priorities, the Network acknowledged the difficulty of advancing the Tier 3 work from 2004 to 2003, and reiterated the need to maintain regular updating of the systems associated with the current pay system: e.g. margin management, base/floor adjustment; education grant; dependency allowances.
FICSA supports maintaining regular updating of the systems associated with the current pay system. The reform of the pay system will take many years. In the meantime, salaries and benefits should be allowed to progress according to established methodologies.
The HR Network welcomed the thrust of the proposals to develop a Senior Management Service and wished to see them carried forward as soon after the ICSC spring session as possible. The work should be carried out in a working group, which would make proposals on:
FICSA recognized the need for improved management in the organizations, but questioned whether the introduction of a Senior Management Service was the best way to achieve that objective. Does the UN system really need "an elite cadre" of staff?
FICSA supported the elaboration of a dual career ladder to ensure that managerial and technical competencies were rewarded on an equal basis. Technical staff should have an opportunity to advance in their career without taking on managerial duties. Three types of career paths were suggested: purely technical, purely administrative, and a mixture of both types of responsibilities (this type of professional could act as an intermediary between administrative and technical staff).
FICSA drew attention to the special characteristics of good UN managers and expressed concern about recruitment of too many managers from outside who are not familiar with the organizations. While recognizing the need for new ideas, managers should also be developed from within the system and this is a career path for some staff.
In view of the lack of specificity in the proposals concerning the SMS, especially the fact that the criteria for choosing senior managers have not been elaborated, FICSA remains uncertain about this aspect of the reform proposals. Our questions and concerns will be raised at the ICSC session.
The Working Group on the Review of the Pay and Benefits System (Paris, March 2002) adopted the following recommendations:
The HR Network endorsed the proposals in respect of the inclusion of the reference to FEPCA and of additional comparators.
FICSA supports the full and proper application of the Noblemaire principle to ensure that UN system salaries are competitive.
The HR Network welcomed the work done to date on job evaluation. The HR Network took note that only the Master Standard and the Grade Level Descriptors would be submitted to the July session of the ICSC as the other proposals were not yet fully developed and many aspects of implementation were not yet clear.
FICSA stated that the proposal to eliminate Factor I requirements, which stress education and experience, was problematic and vague. These factors should continue to be used in evaluating a job to determine its level in the organization. This view drew attention to the distinction between classification and recruitment criteria, with HR participants maintaining that experience and education should be considered as factors for recruitment, not classification. In other words, jobs would be classified without reference to the education or experience required. That information would be added only at the time of recruitment.
The HR Network thought that broadbanding would represent a shift from time to performance as the basis for recognizing the value of a staff member. The Network endorsed the work to date and recommended that it go forward. Several organizations were willing to pilot broadbanding, while one organization objected to pilots on the grounds that they became indefinite and were not necessarily replicated.
FICSA asked how many organizations would be going ahead with broadbanding, and whether any assessment would be made before promulgating a broadbanded pay system for all UN organizations. FICSA was concerned about staff growth and development in a broadbanded system. How would it work? What will staff gain from the new system? Those aspects of broadbanding had so far not been made clear in any of the documents. FICSA does not support the elimination of steps.
The Secretary of CEB expressed concern that the career development and staff growth aspects of the reforms were not obvious. It was recommended that FICSA be involved in organizing seminars to explain the new system to staff.
As a start, FICSA jointly with the FAO administration, would try to organize a seminar in Rome in April or May, and would invite the participation of Gary McGillicuddy, to brief Rome-based staff about pay system reform. Other seminars would be organized later in the year at other duty stations.
FICSA explained that it had distributed the ICSC documents to the membership. However, the information was not straightforward, especially for staff who had not participated in any of the meetings. In addition, care should be taken not to use language which could be perceived as being derogatory to staff or culturally biased as this could make it difficult for staff to have any trust in the reform. FICSA stated that staff should be informed immediately about the ongoing discussions. It was suggested that CEB provide a checklist of issues and inform staff in a simple fashion and there was agreement on this.
The HR Network endorsed the revision of the Master Standard. The ICSC representative informed the group that it was planned to present the new Master Standard and Grade Descriptors to the July session of ICSC, provided that the organizations provided input.
FICSA supports the revision of the Master Standard, particularly with regard to the addition of new professions.
The HR Network felt that new tools were needed to get quality people in the right place at the right time. Those tools might include recruitment and retention bonuses, which would be particularly attractive to organizations trying to recruit staff for difficult duty stations.
FICSA was concerned that the issue of recruitment to hardship duty stations should be addressed separately. Recruitment bonuses should apply to all staff in a duty station. However, they would not be ‘strategic’ if everyone received them. Much more information would be needed before FICSA could support strategic bonus awards. It would be difficult for staff to support any system not based on pay equity or that showed preference or bias to certain groups of staff or individual staff.
The HR Network concluded that it was important to spread information on pay system reform throughout the common system. Information would be targeted to Executive Heads, senior management, staff representatives and staff at large, and Member States.
With specific regard to staff representatives, HR directors should provide an update on progress made, respond to concerns raised and forward questions and comments of a general nature to the CEB secretariat.
For staff at large, briefings should be provided on a regular basis, both electronically and in written form on progress made in reforming the pay system. These briefs should be succinct and in simple language understandable to all staff. In addition, the CEB secretariat would prepare a "user friendly" version of the two-page HLCM annex, and a regular news bulletin that would incorporate a question-and-answer section. HR directors and the FICSA and CCISUA offices should provide the CEB secretariat with examples of those questions and concerns most frequently raised by staff.
The HR Network felt that the ongoing commitment of the representatives of FICSA and CCISUA "in support of a ‘common vision’ of the ongoing reform process would be a crucial element in the success of any information strategy."
FICSA agreed to provide questions on the review of the pay and benefits system.
The FICSA secretariat asks the membership to submit questions and concerns to the secretariat and to report on organizations’ efforts to work together with their respective staff association or union on these issues.
The reform remains very much at the conceptual stage, the few details about implementation having been worked out. Therefore, FICSA cannot give support to all aspects of the pay system reform. Also, in FICSA’s view certain "reforms" would not be needed if present rules and processes were applied in a more consistent manner (apply the proverb: "don’t fix it, if it isn’t broke"). The question, "What’s in it for staff" remains unanswered. Whether the reform can bring benefits to staff and really improve the attractiveness of the UN as an employer is not evident. The proponents of reform should be more explicit and show how the reforms can benefit staff. Staff representatives should carry out their own assessments of the potential gains and losses from the reform.
B. Other items
An adjustment of 5.6% would be required in 2003 to maintain the base/floor scale in line with the comparator’s scale.
The HR Network considered that any proposals to change the current methodology for the determination of the base floor and the relationship of the base floor to the mobility and hardship matrix and the schedule of separation payments should await the outcome of the review of the pay and benefits system.
FICSA agreed. Salary adjustments should continue under the current methodology until the review is completed.
The HR Network endorsed the proposed increase in the amounts of hazard pay and considered that it was not appropriate to change the criteria for the payment of hazard pay at the present time.
FICSA agreed, and welcomes the small increases in hazard pay. FICSA drew attention to the need for improved security measures for local staff, particularly regarding evacuation. FICSA would be making a statement on that issue to the Inter-Agency Security Management Network, 13-17 May, Vienna.
The HR Network was concerned about inconsistencies in the document and invited organization s to provide written corrections and clarifications.
The HR Network addressed the issue of the possibility of harmonizing health insurance schemes, as there are presently 19 schemes in the UN system. The Network concluded that any effort at harmonization should be based on the highest possible standards, not the lowest common denominator. The ability of an organization to offer a good health insurance scheme should be seen as a recruitment tool.
FICSA appreciated the attention given to health insurance coverage for HIV/AIDS, and stated that it would like action on long-term care provisions. Also, the quality of present medical plans should not be jeopardized or diminished in an attempt to make cost savings.
The ILO representative introduced the paper, which outlined a decision of the Governing Body to recognize domestic partners for dependency purposes and to offer a very limited range of benefits (payment of travel costs on appointment, transfer and repatriation), on condition that ICSC agreed to it. The Governing Body also asked the ILO to consult with ICSC and then to identify, in consultation with other organizations of the UN common system, what additional benefits or assistance might be granted on a trial basis to domestic partners.
The HR Network was unable to reach consensus on the issue and decided to request HLCM to organize a Task Force or Working Group for HR specialists, legal advisors and staff to clarify legal questions and reconcile the divergent views.
FICSA noted its appreciation for the ILO paper, which sends a positive message to the staff. FICSA asked whether statistics were available on the extent of the difficulty of recruiting and retaining staff who have domestic partners. Was the non-recognition of domestic partnership a hindrance to recruitment and retention?
The HR Network noted the different amounts in the Euro zone, and the need to review the methodology in the context of Tier 3 pay system components.
A progress report was presented on this issue.
FICSA welcomed the progress made. FICSA would attend the Task Force on HIV/AIDS on 8 April and the Inter-Agency Advisory Group on HIV/AIDS on 10 –11 April.
The background document gave an overview of paternity leave provisions throughout the common system. Practices varied widely and thought should be given to harmonizing provisions.
FICSA supported best practice in this area (UNICEF, UNDP, UNHCR) and informed the Network that this benefit is highly valued by staff. Such provisions should be part of a broader plan to support families, which should also include greater flexibility in maternity leave.
The HR Network was not comfortable with the paper presented by ICSC, which was based on completed questionnaires provided by the organizations. The paper contained errors, lacked precision and missed the big picture. Instead of a compilation of current practice, the organizations would have preferred a set of minimum standards. The Network would like the paper to be discussed in a working group, as it was premature to ask ICSC to consider the recommendations.
FICSA indicated the need for transparency and clarity. Staff needed to know where they stood so they could plan their lives. Staff favoured permanent contracts and job security, which would give the organizations a competitive edge with regard to recruitment and retention. With regard to short-term contracts, breaks in service should be eliminated. The UN organizations should be seen as fair and compassionate.
C. Conclusions
A great deal of ground was covered in only three days. It was clear that the administrations are keen to proceed with some of the aspects of the pay system reform and would like staff to support it. However, specific details about implementation and the impact of reform on staff are lacking. It is recognized that staff needs to be kept better informed of the discussions ongoing at the UN common system level To address this concern, the CEB secretariat and the administrations are willing to respond to questions and provide information in a simple format. The importance of working closely with staff associations and unions was acknowledged.
Progress has been made in other areas, most notably with regard to paternity leave, HIV/AIDS in the UN workplace and hazard pay. Some other items are stalled, as consensus was not reached.
FICSA will attend the spring session of ICSC, Rome, 22 April to 10 May, and will have an opportunity there to pursue its positions on pay system reform, domestic partners and contractual arrangements.
The FICSA Secretariat urges members who have not already sent comments to provide their views by 17 April so that their views can be incorporated into the FICSA delegation’s work during the ICSC.