SINGLE STATUS CONSULTATION UNISON ABERDEENSHIRE RESPONSE

index

3.3 TECHNICAL OPERATIVE FAMILY

3.3.1 Janitors - widespread concern that their mapping letter made no mention of the continuation of guaranteed overtime. This has been clarified and management confirm this will continue.

3.3.2 Janitors - the mapping at Tech Op D is questioned and it is felt that Tech Op E better reflects the role and responsibilities.

3.3.3 Hallkeeper - members responsible for large halls/complexes are mapped at C as if they were simply cleaners. Their role is much more responsible involving security, health and safety, etc. It is felt that a mapping at D is justified.

3.3.4 Relief Cook (Social Work) - this post has been mapped as a domestic assistant at Tech Op B when the role is clearly that of cook, requiring menu planning, food safety, preparation, etc. The only mention of these duties is the job family is at Tech Op F.

3.3.5 Assistant Cook (Ythanvale) - while the post is titled Assistant the postholder sees it more as a job-share with duties evenly shared when on shift, etc. A mapping at Tech Op C does not reflect the duties or the responsibility of cooking for older people in a Care Home. Tech Op F is the only job role where cooking features.

3.3.6 Duff House, Senior Steward - the mapping for this job needs re-assessed. Senior Stewards when on duty at weekends have full responsibility for the House and its collection, worth many millions. This is not reflected in the mapping given.

3.3.7 Duff House, Tea Room Assistant/Cook - there is a confusing mixture of contracts and job titles which has followed into the mapping. Why have two employees with exactly the same role and job title been mapped differently? One as Tea Room Assistant/Cook at B and B, the other as Tea Room Assistant/Cook at B and C. Again, the only reference to cooking duties in the job family appears at Tech Op F.

top

index

3.4 TECHNICIAN FAMILY

3.4.1 Technical Assistants (Secondary) generally mapped at Technician D but feel that the job roles in the guidance are too vague to properly reflect their duties but E better reflects their actual role. Similarly Supervisory Technicians feel they should map up to a higher level.

3.4.2 Senior Animal Health and Welfare Inspector - mapped in at Tech J but feels that the role and remit is appropriate to Practitioner K.

3.4.3 Authorised Officer - Environmental Health - mapped as Tech I but feels that the job fits the role of Practitioner in every respect therefore should be K.

3.4.4 Technicians (Planning and Environmental Services) - have been mapped at Tech H but feel the job sits well within the job role at I.

3.4.5 Employment Officer (Social Work) - this is mapped at Tech H and postholders (18 of them) are of the view that J is more appropriate. They manage and supervise and they feel their role has not been fully understood in the mapping process.

3.4.6 Pupil Support Worker - it appears that this post has been mapped by its title rather than the job content. The role carried out sits well in the Practitioner K slot.

3.4.7 Technical Assistant (Alford Academy) - this postholder cites the different role carried out by the IT centre located within the school. The post is mapped at Technician D but would justify a higher mapping if evaluated separately.

3.4.8 Clerk of Works - concern over consistency of mapping with some mapped to Tech H and some to I. The job appears to be the same - should the pay not be also!

3.4.9 Planners, Engineers and others - Where PDS or TDS Schemes are currently in place the mapping has caused significant confusion. This despite the footnote in the Guide and reference in letters. Clearly employees on PDS have been mapped across at their present salary level which reflects their position in the scheme, into the Technician family. Others who have progressed through the PDS are mapped currently as Practitioners. This results in some who do the same jobs as their Practitioner colleagues being cut off and "demoted" as Technicians. They also see this as a possible block on future progression. It has been suggested that if there were practitioner levels below K this could resolve their concerns, in the same way as Tech and AP scales cover the same salary points. It is also stated that if the rate for the job is Practitioner K, they all do the same job with the result that all should be on K.

3.4.10 Career Development Schemes - as referred to above is causing much confusion. Many question whether these can exist within a pay model built on equal pay principles. Others wish to see these opportunities extended into other areas e.g. admin. There is an absence of detail on this in the proposal leaving people unsettled and unsure of their future employment.

3.4.11 Authorised Officers (Consumer Protection) - some mapped at I, some H but all do the same jobs (PDS issue?). At any rate all feel that the role is comfortable mapped at J.

3.4.12 Access Officer (Planning) - this post has been mapped straight across in salary terms at Tech I. The role is clearly one of Practitioner and should be at K. This is another of the posts cut adrift from its professional role and status.

3.4.13 Technicians (Transportation), T&I - these posts are mapped at Tech I which is seen as a misrepresentation and undervaluing of the role carried out - Practitioner K.

3.4.14 Literacies Workers - this group have in the past been on the same level as Senior Community Learning Workers but are now mapped as Technician J. They feel that there is nothing technical in their job role and see this placing as a insult. Should be Practitioner K.

3.4.15 Senior Housing Officer (Repairs) - mapped at Tech J, feels should be Practitioner K.

3.4.16 Assistant Housing Officer - feels that the aspect of the job relating to supervision and levels of responsibility has been undervalued. Mapped at Admin F, feels should be Tech G.

3.4.17 Senior Housing Officer (Options) - this role involves managing two separate residential units. The role has never been evaluated and has been passed over on several occasions awaiting the single status solution. Mapped at Tech J is an insult, should be at K or L at least as Practitioner or Team Leader.

3.4.18 Area Supervisors (Cleaning) - these postholders have consistently made the case that their primary function is one of management. They manage the cleaning operatives over a wide geographical area at many sites. To be mapped at Technical J seriously understates their role. They feel that Team Leader M or Team Manager N is fully justified.

3.4.19 Cost Surveyor (Housing and Social Work) - the postholders believe that the level of duties and responsibilities have been undervalued. Mapped at Technical H - should be I.

next

top