|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 391
Sage
|
Sage
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 391 |
We did too Rob. I agree completely.
It was for a different purpose, as I recall, but the sentiment should be the same now with AfC.
When we talk about raising our profile, professional accreditation etc etc, the way people follow the principle of "..if we don't tell anyone what we do they may leave us alone.." is a feature which will not help in raising our national standing in healthcare science.
Why worry, Be happy!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 969 Likes: 1
Philosopher
|
OP
Philosopher
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 969 Likes: 1 |
Anyone who hasn't downloaded the revised Job Evaluation Handbook should do it now the "Definitions and Notes" are very useful indeed. As Ken pointed out, you can now score a level 5 for section 6 "Responsibility for patient/client care" because you calibrate or maintain highly specialist or highly complex equipment. This scores 30 points instead of 9 points for level 2 so in the scoring I did above the total moves up to 494 which is much more comfortably in the Band 7 spread. I'm wading through the other 47 pages now to see what else I can extract ! 
Today is the day you worried about yesterday - and all is well !
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 71
Scholar
|
Scholar
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 71 |
Roy
Do you have the link to the revised Job Evaluation Handbook on the AfC website? Or are you using the Amicus link?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,020
Hero
|
Hero
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,020 |
The NHS modernisation web site contains all the information for AfC. One of the links is to a booklet "Proposed Agreement" which contains much detail including the points appropriate to each pay band. This link however goes to the DoH homepage, with no further reference to the booklet. Does anyone know where this information now resides? Thanks Robert
My spelling is not bad. I am typing this on a Medigenic keyboard and I blame that for all my typos.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 136
Expert
|
Expert
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 136 |
The JE handbook can be found on the dh site by following AfC links from the alphbetical list. This will eventually get to the right page and the JE handbook can be downloaded in pdf format. Alternatively try - www.dh.gov.uk/assetRoot/04/06/52/02/04065202.pdf The only problem is that it is still the first edition from March 2003!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,020
Hero
|
Hero
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,020 |
Thanks but it is not in the JE handbook, it is in the Proposed Agreement habd book. This also has payscales but as it is the March 2003 edition I last saw I am trying to find an up to date copy. Robert
My spelling is not bad. I am typing this on a Medigenic keyboard and I blame that for all my typos.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 7
Newbie
|
Newbie
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 7 |
The nationally agreed job profiles are now out of date with the revised definitions. As has been previously said the job description is the most important piece of information that the job matchers will have and everyone must endeavour to ensure it contains as much information as possible and not just what your manager thinks the job is. I believe the BUZZ words need to be incorporated into the JD to help steer the matchers to the level required in each factor.e.g. Highly Complex and Highly Specialised. The JD cannot say any other duties commensurate within the salary scale as this cannot be scored. We are fortunate in Sheffield as we can choose whether to go onto A4C or not, because we have had a local single pay spine for all staff for 8yrs.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 464
Sage
|
Sage
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 464 |
My job description went to a matching panel over 3 months' ago. I haven't heard anything since, so I assumed that I'd been matched - wrong! I've been told that, even after all this time, the panel might not have been able to match my JD. I still might have to complete a Job Analysis Questionaire(JAQ).
Strung along or what!
Cheers Mark
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 90
Adept
|
Adept
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 90 |
Our job descriptions went to a matching panel last week but were sent back as unacceptable. - Too detailed (4 pages)and too many phrases which looked as if they came out of the AfC manual. I'll not deny they did contain key words and phrases relating to the AfC levels but apparantly interpreting job descriptions and matching to the bands is the panels job - they objected to being pointed at specific levels. What more can I say. Graham
|
|
|
|
1 members (daisizhou),
7,901
guests, and
290
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums26
Topics11,280
Posts74,583
Members10,392
| |
Most Online69,877 Jul 17th, 2026
|
|
|
|
|
|