Job Audit Manual Fourth Edition, February 2011



Download 1.19 Mb.
Page9/20
Date23.04.2018
Size1.19 Mb.
1   ...   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   ...   20

2.11 APPEALS


What is an appeal of a classification decision?

An appeal is a written protest of the allocation or reclassification of a position addressed to the Human Resources Director (delegated) or the Commissioner of MMB (not delegated). It may dispute: 1) the classification determination, or 2) the determination of change in allocation or reallocation, or 3) both. Most agencies require the appeal to be submitted within 30 days after the audit decision is released.



Who can appeal?

An appeal may be submitted by a supervisor/manager or an incumbent employee affected by a position allocation or reclassification (or denial thereof) decision.



What information should be included in an appeal?

An appeal should include:



  • new information which was not provided with the initial request, and/or

  • clarification of information presented in the initial reclassification request. This may be necessary because an analysis of the rationale provided for the classification decision identifies that previously presented information was unclear, misleading or not correctly understood.

Example 2: Appeal Rights Statements

Delegated:

You may appeal this classification decision in writing to the Human Resources Director, within 30 days, stating reasons for the protest and a rationale for any alternative proposed. To warrant reconsideration, an appeal must include new material and exhibits relative to the classification of the position.   If new information causes a change in determination, the date of receipt of that information will be used in determining back pay eligibility under collective bargaining agreements and plans.



Non-Delegated:

An appointing authority or an incumbent of a position affected by a classification determination may appeal in writing, within 30 days, to the Commissioner of MMB stating reasons for the protest and a rationale for any alternative proposed. To warrant reconsideration, an appeal must include new material and exhibits relative to the classification of the position. If new information causes a change in determination, the date of receipt of that information will be used in determining back pay eligibility under collective bargaining agreements and plans.



When is an appeal not acceptable?

An appeal is not appropriate if it merely expresses disagreement or unhappiness with a determination. An appeal is not acceptable without rationale or support for a different determination or examples to provide job auditors a better understanding of the position and of the rationale for a preferred class comparison. Also, lack of an “on-site” audit is not a basis for an appeal.

An appeal cannot challenge the consensus rating resulting from a Hay evaluation session. An appeal can challenge the classification decision made based on that rating.

What is the role of the agency Personnel Officer in the appeal process?

The agency Personnel Officer will relate, to the affected employee and/or supervisor/manager, the basis for the classification decision. The Personnel Officer will also advise the employee and/or supervisor/manager of the right to appeal the decision and the information to be provided on appeal for it to warrant consideration.



Note: When a determination is revised based on the submission of new information provided on an appeal, the date the new information was received in the Department of MMB (not delegated) or in the agency HR Office (delegated) becomes the “date of properly documented request” on which back pay calculations are based. This too is included on the notice of appeal results.

Can the results of an appeal be challenged?

No. The authority of the Commissioner of MMB or delegate for the classification system must be recognized and accepted. We cannot support a program allowing unlimited appeals. The appeal process is provided as a quality control check. One appeal and reconsideration must be sufficient.

Figure 8: Appeal Process






2.12 Auditor Checklist

This list includes many of the questions identified in the previous pages plus other items recommended by experienced raters. Check off the items and indicate the source of your information (Supervisor(S) and/or Incumbent (I)), jot notes for your analysis. (See also Appendix B.3 Sample Audit Decision Documentation)



Questions

S

I

Notes

Why does the job exist?










Review written job description. Does the supervisor agree with the description of the work?










  1. What work is done?










  1. What does the incumbent spend the most time doing?










  1. How is it done?










  1. What methods, tools or other aids are used?










  1. To what extent are procedural restrictions (rules, regulations, policy, contracts, etc.) a factor in the incumbent’s freedom to act?










  1. Have the duties actually changed, or just the way the task is completed?










  1. Has the level of duties increased or just the volume of the same duties?










  1. Where did the old duties go?










  1. Are new duties still appropriate for the current class?










  1. Have the changes occurred gradually over a period of nine months to two years?










  1. Did the change occur abruptly as a result of management action or over a relatively short time frame, say < 9 months?










  1. Are the changes within the normal learning curve of the class/position?










Review class specifications. How does this job compare? Be specific, not simply a statement that the job compares to the class specification.










How does the position compare with similar positions within the unit/division/department? Be specific.
























The ideal critical thinker is habitually inquisitive, well-informed, trustful of reason, openminded, flexible, fair-minded in evaluation, honest in facing personal biases, prudent in making judgments, willing to reconsider, clear about issues, orderly in complex matters, diligent in seeking relevant information, reasonable in the selection of criteria, focused in inquiry, and persistent in seeking results which are as precise as the subject and the circumstances of inquiry permit.” Peter A. Facione, author of “THINK_Critically”

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A – TERMS AND CONCEPTS


Download 1.19 Mb.

Share with your friends:
1   ...   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   ...   20




The database is protected by copyright ©ininet.org 2020
send message

    Main page