Search results

The feasibility of using job evaluation procedures to establish non‐biased pay structure is a central issue in the debate over comparable worth. Results of two investigations indicate that even under carefully controlled conditions job evaluation results are highly susceptible to random and systematic errors on the part of the evaluators, and are apt to vary significantly from the concept of worth underlying the evaluation plan. The choice of evaluation instruments or scoring procedure can also have a major impact on results. Thus, the feasibility of using job evaluation results as the governing criterion of the relative worth of jobs is highly questionable.

Employee representatives′ perceptions of job evaluation are explored and the impact of job evaluation on the collective bargaining procedure, pay differentials, motivation and performance is considered. In conclusion, an assessment of the advantages and disadvantages of job evaluation is given.

The aim of this article is to identify some of the factors that contribute to the implementation of “unbiased” job evaluation schemes. The data used for the present analysis were collected as part of a major survey concerned with the extent and nature of job evaluation schemes in operation in the United Kingdom, sponsored by the Department of Employment. We focus particularly on the unbiasedness of pay between female and male workers.

S.l(2)(b) of the UK Equal Pay Act provides that where a woman's work has been rated as equivalent with that of a man — in other words given an equal value under a job evaluation scheme — she is entitled to equality of treatment for any term of her contract covered by the scheme. The Act, however, does not oblige employers to carry out job evaluation exercises. Women who are not, therefore, employed on ‘like work’ with men (S.1(2)(a), and who are not covered by a job evaluation scheme, cannot claim equal pay under UK law.

How useful is the procedure used to identify work of equal value between the jobs of men and women?

There is a substantial literature describing the various methods of job evaluation, all of which are essentially concerned to rank different jobs in a pay hierarchy according to rational criteria. Also, the aims and effectiveness of job evaluation schemes in terms of labour cost containment and as an aid to economic growth have been extensively discussed and evaluated. Moreover, in an era of incomes policies and the relative decline of industrywide bargaining, commentators have explored the feasibility of national job evaluation or alternative procedures for the consolidation of consistent acceptable differentials or ‘relativities’ between different work groups and industries at the level of the economy.

The purpose of this research is to examine the use that critical philosophical concepts can have within management studies.

The paper introduces the notion “performativity” from the American philosopher Judith Butler and shows its fertility for organisation theory. It applies the notion to a case of the introduction of a job evaluation system within the Dutch police.

Although the notion of “performativity” has a broad range, its effects for gender are especially significant. The paper identifies what meanings are reproduced in the job evaluation system; examining what are the consequences of the system for women and how does it influence the gender division. Job evaluation, it is concluded, creates an organisational reality, which produces.

Using philosophical reflection processes of meaning making in practice are revealed and clarified. Gender bias in job evaluation is made visible.

Engagement with Judith Butler's work in critical management studies reveals how philosophical “moves” lead to concrete insights.

This paper aims to focus on the use of job evaluation used as a mechanism to increase gender pay equality, drawing on data from the UK local government sector.

Several research methods are used to collect data, including requesting information from local councils using the Freedom of Information Act, 2000, together with document analyses and interview data.

While the paper questions the effectiveness of job evaluation in achieving pay equality objectives, within a pay and labour market that tends to favour male‐dominated jobs, it nevertheless finds some pay improvements for women resulting from job‐evaluated pay system changes and suggests the use of pay progression systems could lead to further pay advancements for women.

This research has a number of limitations and further inquiries are needed to assess the impact of the slow progress of pay and grading reviews within local government. Methodologically isolating the effect of job evaluation from that of the other pay determination factors presents a significant challenge.

Focuses on the implementation in the local government sector of the 1997 single status agreement (SSA), which has been very slow. While overall funding and resources to implement the agreement have been low, there are, it is argued in this paper, other issues, centering on assumptions about job evaluation and its use to reduce gender pay inequality, which contribute to implementation difficulties.

In July 1982 the European Court of Justice ruled that the United Kingdom's Equal Pay Act infringes Directive 75/117 of the European Economic Community, which provides for equal pay for men and women where the same work, or work of an equal value is being performed. The ruling of the European Court has necessitated changes to the Equal Pay Act in order to give effect to the principle of “equal value” and attention has focused, therefore, on how to give the concept practical expression. To date, the most commonly used method of measuring value is job evaluation, which is said to measure the demands a job makes on a worker. This raises the question as to whether a job evaluation scheme in itself, is an effective instrument for ensuring equality of treatment in assessing the value of men's and women's jobs.

Legislation is being prepared in both Canada and the USA to force a new social reality on the workplace in which pay systems will be made equitable. The vehicle will be job evaluation. This article details, in practical terms, how job evaluation techniques can be used as a means of social‐reorientation towards a new era of industrial relations.