Public and Commercial Services Union

Moderation review: 10% quota axed

Thanks to our campaign, in other words, your involvement and support, the moderation review has resulted in the abolition of the 10% moderation quota.

Not all good news

However, that is not the end of the story. The HO board, unlike their disinclination to review pay rates with inflation running at 5%, want a 'compromise' solution.

They have therefore sustained the myth that there are roving bands of poor performers out there and moderation panels will still sit to allocate bonuses and test staff against standards every year.

Minor improvements involve the requirement for firmer evidence rather than allowing assessments based merely on hearsay, training for managers and panel members, and better diversity monitoring arrangements. But curiously enough there is nothing here about providing training and development for less effective performance!

Unfinished business

We still need to discuss what will happen to last year's crop of unfairly labelled 'less than effective' staff.

Despite quoting the guidance some mangers are still refusing to give any written feedback and thereby obstructing early resolution.

Many say they are acting on HR advice, which implies that HR are advising managers not to apply the procedures, which would be bizarre.

We also consider therefore that 10% of staff should continue any outstanding challenges and also to seek to have their 'moderated' record to HR wiped out, given the abolition of the quota policy and concerns raised in the review about quality of evidence and unfair judgements based on hearsay.

We have also been told that if you have recently changed post any 'less than effective' label does not travel with you, so staff in this position should contact HR immediately to get their records corrected.

PCS aims

The PCS solution was to stop the panels on grounds of cost of panels and fairness and to reinstate the sign off of PDRs by the heads of units. This remains our objective.

If the PDR and line managers' assessment therein are so unreliable that they require show trials where often the managers are absent, then surely completely different performance management arrangements are required.

Review

We still do not have the full data on the moderation review but in terms of diversity BME staff were twice as likely to be moderated - demonstrably unfair.

There is also no measure of the cost of panels and the effect on morale and working relations, and, as noted above, no mention of the obvious answer to less than effective performance - actual training provision - although we have reminded HR of this in every meeting.

Ultimately the review should be taken with a pinch of salt as it apparently had no success or failure criteria for moderation, even though this was recorded as achieved last July according to the project initiation document!

Conclusion – a success for the PCS campaign

PCS is the only union in the Home Office to have mobilised members against the unfair pay imposition, of which bonus and moderation are integral parts.

We are the only union in the Home Office to have organised a boycott of moderation as part of our opposition. Our campaign has been integral in forcing this important concession.

We have not yet got all we want. However it's a start.

All staff should be clear about their objectives and what is expected of them for this reporting period and to seek actual meaningful training and development, especially if mangers are already expressing any concern over performance.

It's thanks to you that we have got this far so thank you - feel free to keep branch reps and myself informed of any developments.