1. Determination of the appropriate classification level of a general staff position shall be in accordance with this procedure, the ANU Enterprise Agreement and the ANU Appointments Policy.

Principles

2. All classification of general staff positions will have regard for the Position Classification Standards contained within the ANU Enterprise Agreement, other than those appointed to apprenticeships, traineeships, the University's Graduate Recruitment and Development Program or senior management appointments as specified in clause 15 of the Agreement.
   
   
3. Where a staff member is of the view that the University's requirements and responsibilities of a position they substantively occupy are no longer in accordance with these classification standards, the staff member may seek a classification review of their position.
   
   
4. These procedures are to be followed when establishing or reviewing the classification levels of all general staff positions, including Senior Manager (SM) levels, arising from:

• the creation of a new position where the classification level has not been previously determined (e.g. there is no current position with similar role/responsibilities); or
  
• a request to review an existing position; or
  
• prior to recruitment or appointment action for positions at level SM 2-5 to ensure that the classification level is appropriate.
  

5. Decisions to approve a higher classification for a position should be based on increased work value following assessment against the Position Classification Standards.
   
   
6. The decision to approve the classification level of general staff positions is normally made by:

• the College Head or College General Manager for general staff up to and including SM 1 on the advice of the College Staffing Committee; or
  
• for areas outside a College, a Director of an administrative division or relevant delegate for general staff up to and including SM 1 on the advice of the Classification Committee; or
  
• the Director - Human Resources for general staff above SM 1 with advice from the SM Remuneration Committee (formally SAO Remuneration Committee).
  

7. The Director - Human Resources may undertake or request an independent assessment of a position's classification level, including where the HR Director's nominee on a Staffing/Classification Committee does not support a reclassification proposal at the time of consideration.
   
   
8. When a position becomes vacant, the area should review the requirements of the work area in terms of the need for the position, the duties required and, if changes are made, the impact on the classification level.
   
   
9. Where substantial changes are made to the duties and responsibilities of a position because of a restructure within an organisational unit and application of the University's change management procedures, the position may be regarded as a new position.
   
   
10. Classification reviews should be conducted and documented to ensure that the process is transparent and equitable, and carried out in a timely manner.

How is the classification level ascertained?

11. The classification level of a position is based on work value. The work value of a position is determined by the University's Position Classification Standards with reference to:

• the scope of activities covered by the position;
  
• knowledge and qualifications required to do the job;
  
• judgement, independence and problem solving requirements; and
  
• level of accountability and responsibility.
  

12. Reference must be made to the relevant descriptors for the proposed level when preparing a supporting statement and assessing the position's work value.

When is a review of the classification level appropriate?

13. In addition to a new position where the classification level has not been previously determined, the classification level of an existing position should be reviewed when a significant increase in work value has occurred, and the new duties and/or increased responsibilities are on-going.

Do all changes lead to a classification review?

14. Not all changes in work equate to increased work value. In particular:

• increased workload should not be confused with increased work value, as it may be that the additional or new duties have the same work value as existing duties - increased workload should be addressed by the supervisor as a workforce planning and resource issue;
  
• higher level activity instigated by the occupant does not necessarily constitute grounds for an increased classification level, and is subject to the requirements of the work area. The nature, level of duties and job requirements should be reviewed between a staff member and their supervisor in the course of annual HR planning, and the development of work plans/performance objectives;
  
• work value changes are more than an extension of skills already held by the occupant; and
  
• developments in technology and acquisition of new skills, knowledge or qualifications are not by themselves grounds for an increased classification level, although these may be taken into consideration where required to perform the full range of functions of the modified position.

Can reclassification be a mechanism for reward or to retain staff?

15. It is not appropriate to reward above-average performance through an increase in classification level where the higher level is not consistent with the position's work value.
    
    
16. Difficulties in recruitment and retention of staff as a result of market factors should be addressed through the use of market loadings rather than an increase to a classification level which is not consistent with work value.

Developing a classification review proposal

17. A proposal to reclassify a position may be made by:

• the supervisor of the position or other appropriate person with management responsibility for the position; or
  
• the occupant, following preliminary discussions with their supervisor to ensure a mutual understanding about the requirements of the position.

18. The proposal will be given to the College HR area or the Director of an administrative division and include:

• a new position description (with revised selection criteria) which reflects the current and on-going duties, verified by the supervisor as an accurate reflection of the duties required;
  
• documentation defining the changes to the position, aligned with the headings listed in paragraph 11;
• a completed classification application form, which includes the proposed classification level and signatures of the proposer and School Director/Director of an administrative division;
  
• a supporting statement addressing the changes to the duties and responsibilities that has resulted in an increased work value, and other documentation, such as an organisational chart, required by the College Staffing Committee's Terms of Reference (check relevant website) or administrative division/area committee; and
  
• the previous position description/role statement for comparative purposes.

Role of the Chair

19. The Chair of a Staffing/Classification Committee will be responsible for the following:

• Convening the Committee, ensuring a reasonable gender balance in the composition of Committee;
  
• Circulation of the documentation to the members prior to the meeting;
  
• Arranging for the occupant of the position and the supervisor to be available to meet with the Committee as necessary;
  
• Preparing the report in consultation with the other Committee members;
  
• Forwarding the final report with accompanying documentation to the authorised delegate;
  
• If the proposal is unsuccessful, providing feedback to the occupant; and
  
• Ensuring, as far as possible, that the process is completed within a reasonable timeframe from receipt of the proposal (usually no more than 3 months).

General Terms of Reference for Staffing/Classification Committees

20. While the Terms of Reference for each College provides sufficient flexibility to accommodate area-specific variations, proposals to ANUO 6 and above will be reviewed by a Committee; and the Committee will include a General Manager from another College for proposals to ANUO 8 or above to provide a more consistent approach for classification reviews.  At the discretion of the College Head, the Committee may include academic membership.  Other than formal submission rounds within a College, assessment by the Committee may be via electronic circulation or at a meeting as determined by the Committee Chair.

Determination of reclassification proposals ANUO Levels 3 - SM 1 (inclusive)

21. The College Staffing Committee/Classification Committee will be convened with a minimum of three members including a nominee of the Director - Human Resources to ensure consistency.  The College Staffing Committee may also consider requests for salary loadings/allowances at the direction of the College Head. To avoid any potential conflict of interest, the committee should not include the direct supervisor or a staff member at the same or lower classification level who holds similar responsibilities. 
    
    
22. For proposals to ANUO 8 and above for new or existing positions, the committee will also include member/s external to the area with a good understanding of the specialised nature of the role.   The Committee's assessment will take into consideration the classification levels of similar roles outside of the work area and will usually include discussion with the occupant and/or the supervisor except where all of the members are satisfied that the proposal contains sufficient evidence/examples to demonstrate a significant increase in work value that meets the proposed level.
    
    
23. It should be noted that the amount of change in responsibilities and duties that constitutes sufficient increase in work value for reclassification will differ depending on the classification level.
    
    
24. Where the decision is to approve reclassification, the date of effect is usually the date of approval; the date of submission where there has been a significant delay in reviewing the proposal; or in accordance with the College Terms of Reference (e.g. the closing date for submissions of a formal round).  
    
    
25. The initial increment step is normally the base of the new classification.  In exceptional cases (i.e. where the staff member has gained experience at the higher level through extended periods of Higher Duties), a step above the base may be more appropriate.  An occupant of a reclassified position in receipt of a Long Service Allowance (LSA) will be transferred to a salary step in the new level that absorbs the allowance.  If reclassification is supported and the occupant is in receipt of a Market Loading, the amount of the loading should be reviewed against current market forces.
    
    
26. The occupant and the supervisor will be informed by the delegate, in writing, of the decision.  If the proposal is not approved, a further proposal will not be considered for the same position within a minimum period of 12 months except where the Committee that reviewed the proposal recommends a further review within a shorter period (e.g. where the documentation supports the higher level but the occupant has not had sufficient time to demonstrate that he/she is undertaking the new duties at the proposed level).  Any further submission must provide evidence by the supervisor and occupant that there have been additional significant changes to increase the position's work value since the last review. 
    
    
27. If it has been determined that the existing classification level is appropriate, the Chair of the committee should offer to discuss the written decision, in person, with the occupant.  The Chair may recommend to the School Director/Head of the Budget Unit appropriate career development strategies.
    
    
28. If the reclassification has been approved, the area's HR Office will arrange payroll action. All documentation will be placed on the staff member's personnel file held in University Records.

Determination of classification levels and remuneration packages of Senior Managers 2 - 5

29. Proposals to create new positions, reclassify existing positions or increase the remuneration package of a position at Senior Manager (SM) Levels 2 - 5 will be examined by the College Head/Director of an administrative division, and a recommendation forwarded to the Director - Human Resources for referral to the Senior Manager Remuneration Committee.  An increase to a salary package includes the conditional or private use of a motor vehicle or payment of a loading.
    
    
30. Any proposals to pay loadings/allowances to general staff which results in the total remuneration being within the salary range of the SM level 2 - 5 salary schedule must be referred to the Director - Human Resources for consideration by the SM Remuneration Committee.
    
    
31. Classification proposals will include an organisational chart showing the reporting structure within the section/branch, and where the position's responsibilities include supervision of staff, the number and levels of staff being supervised (excluding casuals).
    
    
32. The Senior Managers (SM) Remuneration Committee will assess the classification level and salary packages of SM level 2 - 5 positions (including vacant positions prior to recruitment action), as well as proposals for loadings/allowances which would increase the remuneration package to within the SM 2 - 5 salary range.
    
    
33. The Director - Human Resources, with advice from the SM Remuneration Committee, will decide whether to approve or not approve the proposed classification level or increased salary package.
    
    
34. The Director - Human Resources will advise the College Head/Director of the administrative division and the occupant (where appropriate) of the decision in writing.
    
    
35. If the decision is to approve the proposed classification level or increased salary package, the HR Division will arrange payroll action. The documentation will be placed on the staff member's personnel file held in University Records.
    
    
36. As appropriate, the SM Remuneration Committee may refer particular cases to the Vice-Chancellor for approval.

Appeal procedures

37. The occupant of the position proposed for reclassification has the right of appeal on the grounds that procedural fairness was not applied and/or relevant evidence provided with the application was not considered, and such grounds may have been sufficient to alter the outcome of the assessment. The appeal must be made in writing within 5 working days from the date of notification and forwarded to the Director - Human Resources, or if he/she was the decision maker, the office of the Vice-Chancellor.
    
    
38. The appellant must provide, in writing, reasons for the appeal and any relevant documentation to support the grounds for appeal.
    
    
39. The Director - Human Resources, Vice-Chancellor or the Vice-Chancellor's delegate may reject appeals that he/she believes are frivolous or vexatious. The process by which the proposal for reclassification was considered will be assessed, not the merit of the case.
    
    
40. The Director - Human Resources, Vice-Chancellor or the Vice-Chancellor's delegate may seek clarification from the College Head, Director of the administrative division, Chair of the relevant committee or advice from other relevant staff. Such clarification will be restricted to information directly related to the grounds of the appeal.
    
    
41. The Director - Human Resources, Vice-Chancellor or the Vice-Chancellor's delegate must decide whether procedural fairness was applied and relevant information was considered, being sufficient to alter the outcome. The decision of the Director - Human Resources, Vice-Chancellor or the Vice-Chancellor's delegate will result in:

1. confirmation of the decision to deny reclassification; or
   
2. the reclassification proposal being re-considered by an alternative committee such as the SM Remuneration Committee.

42. The occupant will be notified in writing of the outcome of her/his appeal.

Attachment A

CLASSIFICATION COMMITTEE FOR AN ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION

Purpose

To ensure a consistent process for classification reviews across the University, reclassification proposals for general staff positions outside of a College will be reviewed by a Classification Committee.

Role of the Committee

Following assessment and advice from the Classification Committee, reclassification proposals up to and including Senior Manager 1 may be approved by the Director of the Division or the authorised delegate if he/she is satisfied that there has been a significant increase in the position's work value, and the role and responsibilities meet the Position Classification Standards for the proposed level.  

For proposals below ANUO 8, assessment by the Committee may be via electronic circulation or at a meeting as determined by the Committee Chair.

Proposals to ANUO 8 and above for new and existing positions will include an organisational chart showing the reporting structure within the section/branch and, where the position's responsibilities include supervision of staff, the number and levels of staff being supervised (excluding casuals).  The committee will also include member/s external to the area and a member with an understanding of the specialised nature of the role (which may be the external member).  

The Committee's assessment will take into consideration the classification levels of similar roles outside of the work area and will usually include discussion with the occupant and/or the supervisor about the changes to the role except where all of the members are satisfied that the proposal contains sufficient evidence/examples to demonstrate a significant increase in work value that meets the proposed level.

Membership of the Committee

Including a nominee of the Director - Human Resources, the Committee will have a minimum of three members:

• A staff member at Senior Manager level 2 - 5 as the Chair, normally from within the area and with some understanding of the role, nominated by the Director of the area;
  
• Normally a senior College representative or, depending on the role, a HR Manager/Executive Officer of another Division to support improved parity across the areas; and/or
  
• For proposals to ANUO 8 or above, the committee will also include member/s external to the division with a good understanding of the specialised nature of the role or relevant technical expertise relating to the position.

To avoid any potential conflict of interest, the committee should not include the direct supervisor or a staff member at the same, or lower, classification level who holds similar responsibilities. 

The Director may require the HR Manager of the area to provide advice or support to the Committee.

Role of the Chair

The Chair will be responsible for the following:

• Convening the Committee in consultation with the Director of the area, ensuring a reasonable gender balance in the composition of Committee;
  
• Circulation of the documentation to the members prior to the meeting;
  
• Arranging for the occupant of the position and the supervisor to be available to meet with the Committee as necessary;
  
• Preparing the report in consultation with the other Committee members;
  
• Forwarding the final report with accompanying documentation to the authorised delegate;
  
• If the proposal is unsuccessful, providing feedback to the occupant; and
  
• Ensuring, as far as possible, that the process is completed within a reasonable timeframe from receipt of the proposal (usually no more than 3 months).

Procedure updated to reflect outcome of reviews for College Staffing Committees and HR Delegations.