HAY evaluation and regrading of posts (FOI)

Request

Please provide the following information:

A

By department, the number of all HAY (or any other re-grading system used) re-evaluated / re-graded uplifts for existing Civil Servant posts, using Civil Service Grades, during the Work Force Modernisation (WFM) period (1 January 2017 to 7 March 2018 when it was withdrawn).

Please include any additional information to support the reason for the uplifts.

B

By department, the number of all HAY (or any other re-grading system used) re-evaluated / re-graded uplifts for existing Civil Servant posts, using Civil Service Grades, during the current transformation period (8 March 2018 to 31 December 2018 inclusive).

For both questions please can you use the following format:

• Department name

• Civil Service grade from

• Civil Service grade to (including grades above CS15 and number of uplifts in each range)

• Detail

Response

A and B

To answer this request would require significant work in the collation of the information requested, some of which is not held in a manner which is conducive to easy understanding and / or interpretation. Manipulation of the data held would be required.

This would exceed the cost limit provisions allowed under article 16 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 and the 12.5 hours maximum allowed under regulation 2 (1) of the Freedom of Information (Costs) (Jersey) Regulations 2014.

Even if the information was held in the format requested, it should be noted that there is a strong probability that such information would be exempt under Article 25 (Personal Information) or Article 39 (Employment) of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011.

Please find below a link to a decision notice of the Office of the Information Commissioner upholding the withholding of similar information:

OIC Decision Notice

Articles applied

Article 16 - A scheduled public authority may refuse to supply information if cost excessive

(1) A scheduled public authority that has been requested to supply information may refuse to supply the information if it estimates that the cost of doing so would exceed an amount determined in the manner prescribed by Regulations.

Regulation 2 (1) of the Freedom of Information (Costs) (Jersey) Regulations 2014 allows an authority to refuse a request for information where the estimated cost of dealing with the request would exceed the specified amount of the cost limit of £500. This is the estimated cost of one person spending 12.5 working hours in determining whether the department holds the information, locating, retrieving and extracting the information.

Article 25 Personal information

(1) Information is absolutely exempt information if it constitutes personal data of which the applicant is the data subject as defined in the Data Protection (Jersey) Law 2018.

(2) Information is absolutely exempt information if –

(a) it constitutes personal data of which the applicant is not the data subject as defined in the Data Protection (Jersey) Law 2018; and

(b) its supply to a member of the public would contravene any of the data protection principles, as defined in that Law.

Article 25 is an absolute exemption and as such, does not carry a public interest test. Information is absolutely exempt if it can identify an individual.

Article 39 Employment

Information is qualified exempt information if its disclosure would, or would be likely to, prejudice pay or conditions negotiations that are being held between a public authority and –

(a) an employee or prospective employee of the authority; or

(b) representatives of the employees of the authority.

Justification

The Scheduled Public Authority (SPA) would withhold this information as it believes that to release it could prejudice ongoing evaluations which take place as part of the day to day management of employment conditions within the States of Jersey. The SPA would also be concerned that any future evaluations may be affected due to the release of information.

Article 39 is a qualified exemption, which means that a public interest test is required to be undertaken by the SPA. It is therefore necessary for the scheduled public authority to examine the circumstances of the case. Following assessment the SPA has to decide whether, on balance, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information. Although there is a need for transparency, accountability, and good decision making by public authorities this information relates to negotiations between the States of Jersey and their employees. On balance, it is our view that the public interest does not outweigh the potential prejudice of release.

Following a request for an internal review an additional response was provided:

Internal Review response

This review has been completed by two senior members of the Government of Jersey, independent of the original decision making process. They requested that data be produced for them as far as could be achieved within the time limit permitted by the legislation. This information is shown below. Given the current limitations of data systems, the reviewers are satisfied that obtaining and providing any further information, as requested, would exceed that maximum time allocation.

Article 25 (Personal Information) of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 has been applied to movements of fewer than five posts.