20894-Operations Realignment

In relation to the A&E operations realignment process in 2018, please can you confirm:

1. The reason there was a 2 year qualifying period for non-substantive staff to be slotted into roles or ring fenced for role at the level above

  • Reference:
    20894
  • Response:

    In relation to the A&E operations realignment process in 2018, please can you confirm:

    1. The reason there was a 2 year qualifying period for non-substantive staff to be slotted into roles or ring fenced for role at the level above

    The Change Management Redundancy and Redeployment Policy was utilised in considerations for appropriate pools.

    EEAST considered section.1.7 of the policy in regards to the treatment of fixed term/temporary roles. The following considerations were undertaken when identifying the appropriate pools to ensure genuine consideration has been given to the pool and that EEAST has acted as a reasonable employer. We have considered the type of work which is disappearing and the employees who have been undertaking that work. There are employees who have been in fixed term/interim positions for over 2 years. We believe that there is a need to consider these employees in the relevant pools as they have been carrying out the relevant type of work for a significant period of time. Giving thought to the fixed term regulations we have identified the 2 year cut off point.

    1. How many substantive supervisors were ring fenced for the realignment for LOM interviews?

    56

    1. How many non-substantive supervisors were ring fenced for the realignment for LOM interviews?

    9

    1. How many supervisors were invited to apply for the LOM role as they were not eligible to be ring fenced?

    After the initial ring-fencing the role was open to full recruitment

    1. All candidates were given the same notice for interview/assessment days?

    There was more than one assessment process, so no, not all candidates would have had the same notice.

    1. When the additional recruitment dates - 28/8 and a date in September were arranged?

    Week commencing 20th August

    1. How many candidates were successful - provide a breakdown of 2 categories developing 65-74% and substantiated 75% and above, and whether the candidates were substantive supervisors prior to appointment?

    For the LOMS there were 7 candidates in 65 – 74% and 51 candidates in 75% .

     

    1. When the decision was made regarding development roles/opportunities i.e the 65-74% pass mark.

    This decision was made at the beginning of the assessment process

    1. The development plan for the 6 month positions - trust wide requirement to fulfil objectives to bring up to 75%

    We would be grateful if you could clarify exactly what information you are requesting here.

    1. What the process is for those LOMs who do not fulfil the development requirements post 6 months?

    The development process was for 6 months. However had it been the case that someone was not achieving the development plan it would be expected that the manager would have identified this and provided support where necessary. Should someone have been unsuccessful appropriate individual options would have been considered.

    1. How many different interview panels were involved in the process?

    A wide variety of panels were made up of a pool of assessors. As there were such a volume of assessment centres were to be undertaken a team of core assessors were used to ensure consistency across the dates. These core assessors came from a variety of backgrounds including service delivery, HR, OD, Clinical, Unison. Assessors were used on consistent exercises to ensure continuity. There was also a pool of additional assessors available.

    1. Were all scores cross marked?

    Each exercise was marked by the team of assessors assigned to that exercise to ensure for fairness in the marking of each exercise. In addition each exercise was marked independently from the other exercises so there was no effect from the marks of other exercises.

    1. What was the assurance process for the entire day for consistency?

    All of the group marks were collectively reviewed to provide the narrative for feedback ensuring a thorough review. The use of core assessor also enables consistency. Since the process has been completed all of the recruitment files have been audited.

    1. Who decided the process for the assessment day?

    The final decision rests with the Director of Service Delivery

    1. Has the assessment day subsequently been reviewed?

    There have been additional activities added to the portfolio for selection when recruitment takes place. Lessons learned have provided improvement in documentation which has been taken forward.

    1. Is it the intention to use the same assessment day process going forward for LOM recruitment?

     The Trust is utilising these assessments going forward

    1. If a candidate met the 65% criteria for development—how long do they stay ‘on the list’ for development opportunities?

     As part of the restructure process for a small number of staff they are in a recruitment pool for 12 months

     

  • Area:
    Trust wide
  • Category:
    • Human Resources
    • Trust Structure
  • Month:
  • Year: