Guidelines

1. Introduction

The following procedure and checklists should be followed when deciding whether recruitment and market pay premia are justified for a role. Heads of Department should use the checklist, in conjunction with their HR Adviser, to ensure that all factors have been considered, to provide the rationale for decision making, and to demonstrate the need for a recruitment or market pay premium.

Recruitment premia may be applicable where difficulties are experienced in recruiting suitable staff to a role or there is significant evidence that this will be the case.

Where recruitment problems are actually experienced, Heads of Department should consider the issues outlined in Stage 1 and discuss the most appropriate way forward with their HR Adviser. Where strong evidence exists to suggest that the University pay rate as determined by role analysis alone will result or has resulted in recruitment difficulties, Heads of Department should outline this evidence and discuss it with the Rewards Manager who will be able to provide input on:

Previous difficulties in recruitment
Market pay issues

A paper should be produced by the Head of Department for consideration by the Director of Human Resources in consultation with the Dean.

The Remuneration Sub-Group will meet regularly to undertake reviews of Recruitment premia.

2. Stage 1 - Identifying the problems

1.1 When investigating the cause of recruitment problems the effectiveness of the recruitment process and the appropriateness of the job design should be considered alongside pay issues. A number of sources of information can be used to do this and HR Advisers can advise on the most appropriate methods.
1.2 Where a job is advertised with a specified salary and a large number of appropriate expressions of interest are received this generally indicates that salaries are competitive. If few applications are returned or a high proportion of applicants drop out of the selection process, investigations should focus on areas such as:

how/if information packs can be made more appealing and promote the (often non pay) benefits of working for the University more effectively;
whether application forms and process can be made more 'user friendly' and easier to complete;
whether there are undue delays or specific problems with the selection procedure so that applicants may accept other job offers in the meantime;
whether the design of the job and the person specification are appropriate e.g. are the requested skill sets realistic;

1.3 Where a job is advertised and there is little interest, both pay and non-pay factors should be considered, including:

Whether the advert was placed in the appropriate media for the post(s) in question;
Whether the design and description of the job was appropriate e.g. are the requested skill sets realistic;
Whether the timing of the advert may have affected interest.

3. Stage 2 - Identifying the solutions

2.1 Heads of Department should identify cases where no problems with the adverts or the recruitment process are identified, or where evidence from appropriate sources shows that the main reason for staff leaving is for more pay (other than as part of the normal career/personal development process), or alternatively where problems have not yet been experienced but strong evidence exists to suggest that there will be a market related recruitment issue. They should then obtain objective evidence of the pay rates being offered by competing employers for similar posts, as well as the main features of the labour market. HR Advisers can obtain evidence of pay rates via independent analysts.
2.2 Where the market rate is equal to or lower than the value of the total benefit package offered by the University for the role, Heads of Department will work with HR Advisers to identify other underlying causes of recruitment problems, such as skill shortages or transport problems, and identify the most appropriate way of overcoming them.
2.3 Where pay rates elsewhere are significantly higher than the reward package offered by the University for the role, Heads of Department and HR Advisers will consider ways of improving recruitment such as by offering/making individuals aware of the compensatory, non pay benefits the University offers (which other employers frequently do not) such as:

training and career development opportunities;
flexible, family friendly working hours;
the opportunities to engage in leading edge teaching or research;
the social and community environment of the University.

2.4 Where Heads of Department consider that the measures outlined in 2.1.2 are insufficient to address an urgent recruitment issue they will submit a written case containing all relevant information for consideration by the Director of Human Resources.

4. Stage 3 - Awarding premia

3.1 Where the Director of Human Resources agrees that non pay benefits are ineffective in improving recruitment a market premium will be offered and the rationale for it recorded. Depending on circumstances, the premium, which is not superannuable, will take the form of:

One lump sum payment
Several lump-sum payments made over an agreed period of time. That may be to provide some element of retention, it may be to assist with management of budgets, or it may be an appropriate means of rewarding completion of certain tasks or project stages.
An on-going payment

3.2 The type and size of the premium will be determined from evidence of the features of the particular labour market and the difference between the University's normal pay rate (usually the mid point of the grade for the post as determined by role analysis) and the market rate for the post in question. The median market rate will normally be used for ongoing premia.
3.3 The terms on which the premium will be awarded will be clearly explained to the member of staff and will also form part of the contract of employment.
3.4 For lump sum payments no review date is required. The Remuneration Sub-Group will review the continuation of on-going supplements, and will provide an overview of the system for awarding such supplements and may make comments or recommendations with the aim of improving the working of the process.

5. Reviewing premia

4.1 In order to ensure that University practices support the principle of equal pay for work of equal value, it is essential that premia are reviewed on an ongoing basis and removed once the objective justification for them no longer applies.
4.2 The Remuneration Sub-Group will meet on a regular basis to undertake all reviews that have fallen due in that period. The Head of Department and Departmental HR Adviser will provide the relevant information and will make recommendations for the Remuneration Sub-Group to consider.
4.3 At the review it will be identified if a premium is still warranted and the amount still justified in light of any changes in labour market conditions and/or pay increases awarded by the University. The review will also consider the likely impact on vacancies and turnover of removing or reducing a premium.
4.4 Where the available evidence on pay rates elsewhere and labour market conditions shows that recruitment premia are no longer necessary or appropriate for the role, they will be reduced or withdrawn in line with the University's policy on the use of market related payments.
4.5 The Remuneration Sub-Group will, at least on an annual basis, review the award of premia under this procedure with regard to equal opportunity outcomes. Should the Remuneration Sub-Group find that payments have been made disproportionately to, for example, staff from particular ethnic groups or of one sex, they will investigate the cause and make recommendations for change.

Appendices

Form for Consideration of Recruitment and Market Pay Premium

Document control

Last reviewed: 20 November 2023