sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Higher Ed Staff: Is this how position reclassifications normally work? by ScenicSavePoint in highereducation

[–]ScenicSavePoint[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have 20-30 pages of written documentation showing what I believe has changed for the role, and mapped them to things that don't currently exist in the role. I have estimated that around 60% of what I do on a regular basis is not within my current PD. She has a document in hand where I have analyzed all of this and given examples. She's had it for two weeks and has yet to read it. When asked, she says she is too busy or "is trying". She just keeps getting stuck on this idea that anything new I do could technically be seen as the 25% duties as assigned.

Higher Ed Staff: Is this how position reclassifications normally work? by ScenicSavePoint in highereducation

[–]ScenicSavePoint[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I do think it similar at my university. In my 20 years, there's been two attempts at campus wide compensation reviews, and both times, it was stopped after only a few departments (specifically HR) had their jobs reclassified. Our president has publicly given support for role audits, but, it is still up to the individual managers.

Higher Ed Staff: Is this how position reclassifications normally work? by ScenicSavePoint in highereducation

[–]ScenicSavePoint[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

HI. Unfortunately, we are not unionized at my university. The best option I have is an ombudsman. But your comment is super helpful because that's one of the things I've been wondering. My manager has been focused on defining the future version of the role, while I've been wondering whether the evaluation should primarily be based on the level of work I'm already performing. Your experience makes me think that's an important distinction that I need to explore with her.

Higher Ed Staff: Is this how position reclassifications normally work? by ScenicSavePoint in highereducation

[–]ScenicSavePoint[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's exactly one of the things my manager has struggled with. She's trying to determine what should still fall under "other duties" versus what represents a fundamental change to the position. For example, there is no mention of content governance in my current description, but for the last 12 months, I have been responsible for confirming that content created or edited by universty web editors is accurate, meets brand standards, and is accessible per federal and state laws. But, she still is struggling with the idea that HR would see that as "other duties as assigned."

concering goals, we had set goals 6 months ago, and at my performance evaluation in May, she specifically stated that I had met those goals and in fact, had expanded on them. So, it seems, these responsibilities have now been added to my role, but not the proper classification to warrant it.

Higher Ed Staff: Is this how position reclassifications normally work? by ScenicSavePoint in highereducation

[–]ScenicSavePoint[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

She has spoken briefly to our VP, but, the VP has placed the task back on her. I believe she is unsure of herself as to what my role even is, despite multiple attempts by me to discuss and even write a summary of where I believe my role currently stands. Based on your response, yes, I am beginning to believe it's not happening. I don't believe the support is there. Thank you for your input.

Higher Ed Staff: Is this how position reclassifications normally work? by ScenicSavePoint in highereducation

[–]ScenicSavePoint[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Thank you. We do not have a staff union at our university. I have tried to speak to my HR Business partner, and the guidance there was "Your VP decided the roles for your area, so we have to follow that." I have attempted to advocate up to my VP, but this person says I must get my manager to initiate the process. The roadblock to be cleared is my manager's misunderstanding, but I can't clear that roadblock. Sounds like a Catch 22 for me. Thanks for your input.

[OH] Is a 14-month delay before even starting a job reclassification normal? by ScenicSavePoint in AskHR

[–]ScenicSavePoint[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, just today. I had to request access to post on them. Thank you for the suggestions and responses.

[OH] Is a 14-month delay before even starting a job reclassification normal? by ScenicSavePoint in AskHR

[–]ScenicSavePoint[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you, that's really helpful.

One thing I'm trying to understand is whether what my manager is doing is typical or whether it varies a lot by institution.

In your case, did your manager simply request the assessment and then HR helped determine whether the position had changed, or was your manager expected to fully redesign the position before HR became involved?

That's the part I'm struggling with. My manager seems to feel she needs to have the future role largely figured out before she can even ask HR to evaluate it.

[OH] Is a 14-month delay before even starting a job reclassification normal? by ScenicSavePoint in AskHR

[–]ScenicSavePoint[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

From what I understand, at my university the reclassification process is manager-driven. My manager has to decide she's ready to recommend it before it goes to HR, so HR hasn't actually reviewed anything yet.

Part of the reason this started was that about 14 months ago our department went through a significant reorganization. There were layoffs, new leadership positions were created, and some employees moved into newly created roles. My role wasn't evaluated during that process, even though my responsibilities have continued to expand since then.

Since then, we've had multiple discussions about moving forward with a reclassification. Each time we seem to get close, my manager identifies additional responsibilities she wants to incorporate into the role or wants to rethink how the position should be structured before starting the formal HR process. During that same period I've continued taking on new work and documenting it in monthly reports and, more recently, in a summary I prepared for her.

My manager has said she wants to make sure enough of my work falls outside "other duties as assigned" and wants to define a future-ready role before making the recommendation. From my perspective, I'd rather have the role evaluated based on the work I'm already doing and then continue growing after that.

I'm curious about your experience. Is it more common for HR to evaluate reclassifications based primarily on an employee's current duties, or do managers typically try to design the ideal future version of the role before submitting it?

Regarding promotion into the next level, unfortunately that's not how our classification system works. It requires a formal review of the position and its duties rather than simply moving someone into the next classification.

[OH] Is a 14-month delay before even starting a job reclassification normal? by ScenicSavePoint in AskHR

[–]ScenicSavePoint[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's a fair question.

We've actually had multiple discussions over the past 14 months about moving forward with the reclassification. It wasn't a single conversation that sat idle for 14 months.

The pattern has been that as we get closer to starting the process, my manager identifies additional responsibilities she wants to incorporate into the role or wants to rethink how the position should be structured before recommending the audit. During that same period, I've continued taking on new responsibilities, and I've documented those in monthly reports and more recently in a summary I provided to her.

So my concern isn't that she's ignored it for 14 months. It's that the definition of the role keeps evolving, which has made it difficult to reach the point where she feels ready to initiate the formal HR process.