23 August 2002
New York, 22 July to 9 August 2002
The Commission continued its consideration of alternative approaches to the existing pay and benefits system, specifically: the revision of the current job classification system, and the introduction of broad-banding, reward for contribution and a senior management service (SMS).
The proposed new Master Standard retains the present seven-grade level structure but aims to simplify the process of classifying posts by reducing the number of grade-determining factors from six to four, and reducing the evaluation elements from fifteen to seven.
The administrations felt that the new Master Standard would simplify post management and help to create linkages to competency development and performance management. It would also support greater delegation of authority to management for job design and evaluation.
FICSA noted the need for an update of the Master Standard, but expressed concern over the elimination of one of the grade-determining factors, ‘education and experience’, as it might open the door to abuse in terms of unqualified candidates being selected for jobs. During the discussion, it was explained that the new standard would not change the grades for the vast majority of staff, but some posts might be upgraded or downgraded. FICSA reiterated its support for a dual career ladder that placed equal importance on managerial and technical functions so that specialist staff would not be obliged to take on managerial tasks in the sole interest of career development. If greater authority were to be delegated to managers (instead of job classifiers) for job design and evaluation, FICSA cannot stress strongly enough the need for training in the use of the new standard.
A number of the Commissioners similarly expressed concern about the elimination of the ‘education and experience’ factor, but administrations argued that this was a recruitment issue. Furthermore, the development of a new standard should be accompanied by efforts by organizations to strengthen management capacities and accountabilities. The Commission was also of the view that, other than the creation of a dual career track for scientists and technical experts. It expected that 80 per cent of the jobs would be graded at the same level as at present. Of the 20 per cent variance, some posts might be found to be overgraded, and transition measures would be needed to protect the occupant of the post from downgrading.
The Commission decided to:
A broad-banded pay system groups grades into wide salary bands that identify minimum and maximum pay for the band. Steps are eliminated. Staff "move through the band" based on performance and their contribution to achieving programme objectives. Many factors contribute to the success of a broad-banded system. For FICSA, the most important factors are: an effective performance appraisal system, good managers, elimination of patronage, adequate and consistent funding and legal protections for the staff.
The administrations supported a broad-banded pay system because, in their view, it would be more responsive to the management of work. They consider broad-banding as an answer to their need for flexibility.
FICSA told the Commission that it viewed the introduction of broad-banding and pay for performance as problematic. Existing performance management systems were not adequate for implementing such approaches. Instead, priority should be given to improving these systems. In addition, salary movement through the proposed bands was inequitable because it seemed to reward more generously those with fewer years of service. It was not clear how staff would move from band to band, and how the bands related to posts and programmes. Combining grades would be unsatisfactory to some staff who gave importance to the status attached to each grade.
FICSA reiterated its opposition to abolishing the step system. If, as the administrations felt, steps did not distinguish good performance from bad, it was because the rules were not followed as intended and performance appraisal systems were not working. Steps should not be discarded before a serious effort was made to apply the rules and was found to be inadequate. The abolition of steps would also raise the issue of acquired rights.
FICSA felt that it was premature to apply broad-banding system-wide and suggested that one or two organizations or units undertake pilot projects that would be assessed by an independent expert. Approval by the Commission of the concept of broad-banding would depend on the assessment. FICSA stressed that staff who volunteered to participate in the pilot projects should be made aware of all implications. FICSA recommended the establishment of joint staff-management committees to work out the details.
FICSA agreed with the administrations that several models of broad-banding should be tested in the pilot projects. It also requested the ICSC secretariat to review the data on staff who were at the top of their grade. These staff would be alarmed if they were grouped with staff at lower grades with new hurdles to overcome before moving outside their band. FICSA agreed that ultimately only one model should be adopted to preserve the common system. Finally, FICSA stressed that performance management needed to be addressed and that staff would have more confidence in a new system if an evaluation mechanism for managers were in place and staff had the opportunity to comment on their supervisor’s work.
The Commission recognized some merit in the proposal to introduce broad-banding but also raised a number of issues. A credible and reliable performance appraisal system acceptable to all parties was a pre-requisite, and further information was needed. The Commission was especially concerned about financial controls, which they saw as an essential pre-requisite.
The Commission decided that:
The Commission considered the question of the establishment of a Senior Management Service (SMS) in the United Nations common system. In view of the key role of managers in organizational change initiatives, the SMS was seen by the administrations as a critical component in moving forward major organizational reforms aimed at strengthening the international civil service and improving overall organizational performance, by strengthening leadership and managerial capacity, signalling the professionalization of management, and creating a common managerial culture.
Under the proposed membership criteria, the SMS would be a relatively small service composed of senior managers across the system. The administrations noted the SMS could include political appointees. They noted that the inclusion of members in the service would be the prerogative of each executive head, taking into account guidelines defining the responsibilities and characteristics of members, in view of the diverse mandates and structures of the organizations.
With regard to core management competencies, six competencies were proposed for application to all SMS positions across the common system The introduction of a SMS would be complemented by the development of a dual career ladder to distinguish senior line managers from specialists and individual collaborators. The introduction of a dual career system would recognise the value of senior specialists without the assumption of managerial responsibilities.
While agreeing with the perception that there was an urgent need to improve management capacity in the organizations, FICSA believed that a greater emphasis should be placed on the way of "doing business", developing and improving competencies of the current and future supervisors and line managers. FICSA enquired about how managers would be held accountable and what the selection process for entry into the SMS would entail. FICSA expressed concern over the possible stigmatisation of the current D-1 and D-2 staff who were not selected for the SMS.
FICSA felt that the proposal for a SMS sent a signal that the current system had failed in its efforts to create new leaders and as a consequence a corporate culture needed to be created from within the system. FICSA felt that there was a need to look at this within the organizations’ human resources strategies. If the managers were not capable of managing then there was a need to examine the cause rather than the symptoms.
FICSA wanted to know whether current posts would be converted to the SMS and whether the SMS was supposed to be an advisory body. FICSA felt that consideration should be given to training young people to become managers, perhaps through a body like the United Nations Staff College.
Some Commissioners found merit in the establishment of a SMS in building leadership and management capacity, however others were not convinced. The Commission noted that the proposal to introduce a SMS raised a number of issues, particularly the status of the individuals in such a service. The Commission emphasised that no special pay and benefits provisions or other privileges would need to be established for this group of staff.
The Commission did not view the establishment of a SMS as creating a new subsidiary organ, advisory body or category of staff. It would be part of the current professional and higher categories of staff and as such would follow applicable procedures for recruitment and placement.
The question of access to the SMS by external as well as internal candidates was discussed. The Commission considered that the SMS needed to be an "open" service with recruitment from both internal and external sources. Accordingly, the concern expressed by some members of the Commission related to geographical distribution and gender issues seemed to be addressed. The Commission noted that further guidelines would be developed to supplement and illustrate the responsibilities and characteristics of positions identified for inclusion in the SMS which would assist the executive heads.
The Commission decided that:
FICSA submitted a conference room paper on the review of the pay and benefits system (ICSC/54/CRP.5) to the 54th session, which was distributed to the membership on 23 April 2002, and prepared a PowerPoint presentation which was also distributed to the membership.