Equality and Human Rights Commission

E1. Has the impact of job evaluations, re-evaluations and appeals been monitored by gender, ethnicity, disability and age?

You can monitor the impact by comparing the rank order implicit in the pre-evaluation pay structure with that resulting from the evaluation exercise (and any subsequent re-evaluations and appeals) and identifying the gender or ethnic dominance of jobs that have moved up or down the rank order.

If the pre-evaluation pay structure was biased against 'female' job characteristics, then upward moves would be disproportionately among female dominated jobs. Otherwise, one would expect moves to be roughly proportionate to the gender composition of the workforce. For more details see checking the rank order.

E2. Has the positioning of the grade boundaries been checked to ensure that they do not contribute to pay discrimination against one gender, ethnic group, those with disabilities or of different age groups?

For example, if a grade boundary has one or more significant predominantly female jobs immediately below it and male jobs immediately above, it may appear to have been positioned in order to prevent the females from achieving equal pay with the males. See positioning grade boundaries for more information.

E3. Is there an appeal or review system for dealing with new or changed jobs and grading grievances through the evaluation system?

An appeals or review system allows for any evaluation errors which have escaped the consistency checking process to be corrected. It also allows for the system to be updated through re-evaluation of new or changed jobs.

This is important. Otherwise the system will become ossified and quite quickly jobs will exist which have not been subject to evaluation and are thus outside the scope of the evaluation system and the potential defence it provides to equal pay claims. See appeals for more information.

E4. Have all aspects of grading and pay been checked to ensure that those whose work has been rated as equivalent share the same pay and terms and conditions except where there is clear justification for doing otherwise?

Once jobs have been rated as equivalent, the clear legal implication is that all aspects of pay and other terms and conditions of employed should be harmonised, except where there is justification for making a distinction. For example, holidays should normally be the same for those rated as equivalent, but additional payments may be justified, for example, to those who work weekends compared to those who work only Monday to Friday. See changes in grading for more information on how to deal with this issue.

E5. Is there a system for ongoing monitoring and maintenance of the job evaluation system?

This ensures that you can continue to demonstrate that the job evaluation system is fair and non-discriminatory. For more details see ongoing monitoring and maintenance.