Whereas
the job evaluation exercise represents an effective and useful approach to assess
internal relativities and, hence, reward which should be associated with any
roles available within an organisation, market pricing is widely acknowledged
as an effective method to determine and finalise internal pay systems taking into
due consideration what actually happens in the external environment.
Indeed,
there are two other additional approaches employers can have recourse to in
order to develop more efficient, consistent and competitive pay systems. One of
them is actually concerned with the internal environment and aims to achieve
fairness, namely the felt-fair test, whilst the other is concerned with the
external environment and is mainly directed at attracting and retaining
particularly talented professionals in presence of particular circumstances,
i.e. market forces.
In
general, the impact of market forces is actually taken into consideration for technical
and professional roles when employers find it particularly difficult filling some
specific kind of jobs.
Market forces definition
Since
market forces are actually concerned with the external environment, it could be
argued that data gathered by means of updated and well devised market pricing
investigations should already provide employers with the figures reflecting the
current reward trends concerning the relevant position. However, whereas market
pricing is an approach used to determine external reward trends in normal
circumstances, market forces aim to reflect the impact that exceptional
circumstances might have on reward with reference to the specific moment at which
they are considered. It can be said that the former approach represents the
rule, the method employers use as a matter of course, whereas the latter represents
the exception, an approach to which business resort to, in fact, in exceptional
circumstances.
Yet,
market forces consideration requires a deeper knowledge and understanding of
the current labour market conditions. Whilst data collected by means of market
pricing could, in fact, be affected by widespread pay discrimination practices
existing in the market, the impact of these should be identified and eventually
removed when considering offering an individual a market forces supplement.
The
impact of market forces in reward is practically reflected in the recognition
of a money supplement in addition to the salary associated with the grade
related to a given role or position. This sum of money, which is also known as
market supplement, has to be granted as long as the exceptional circumstances
justifying its payment persist.
Why
Substantially,
the consideration of market forces materialises in granting a premium to one or
more individuals in order to attract or retain him/her/them when exceptional
circumstances have arisen. The existence of these exceptional circumstances
will account for making it impossible for an employer attracting and/or
retaining individuals with a particular expertise having recourse to the salary
usually associated with the grade to which that role or position relates.
It
is particularly important highlighting the fact that, as for the case of job
evaluation, also in the case of market forces what matters is not the person in
question but the role in question. To put it another way, the arrangement of the
salary supplement has not be justified on the ground of who is filling the
role, but on the basis of the difficulties that a particular role is causing
the employer in order to properly be filled. Of course, the decision to offer
the position to an individual, rather than to another, will be taken by the
employer according to the outcome produced by the selection process carried out
and hence of the individual’s qualities and skills.
Essentially,
the reason for a business resorting to market forces supplements are, and
should be limited, to attract and retain talented and particularly skilled
individuals when the labour market is showing crystal clear signs that this result
is everything but straightforward to achieve. So that, before considering paying
market forces supplements, employers should, at worst, have previously tried
the usual recruitment and selection procedures. An employer should seriously
consider resorting to market forces additions only after having ascertained
that the usual procedure has turned to be ineffective and unproductive.
When
A
market forces supplement is essentially used to determine the total salary to
be paid when labour market pressures, usually as a consequence of qualified
applicants, skills and/or expertise shortage, are pushing salary rates for a
determined role up. These situations will surely account for the “going rate”
associated with the role in question to increase (Equality Human Rights, 2012).
In such cases, if an organisation would refuse to consider the indications
provided by the labour market it would clearly risk to remain with that
particular role or position vacant or, alternatively, filled with the wrong
person. And it would actually be rather tricky to determine which of these two
options will be the worst for the employer (most likely the latter).
Obviously,
the salary addition will be granted to the person as long as he/she: a) is
covering that role and b) the pressure of the labour market will justify its
payment. This consequently means that if the individual concerned would change his/her
role within the organisation, he/she will no longer be entitled to receive the
additional market forces element.
This
also implies that employers should regularly monitor, review and assess the
existence of the exceptional circumstances at the basis of the additional
payment. In the event these should no longer be considered existent and
justified, the employer will have to take action accordingly removing the
supplement.
Regular
reviews can also turn to be particularly important not only in order to remove
the market forces supplement but also in order to take appropriate decisions on
whether updating, increasing or decreasing, the amount initially agreed according
to the eventually changed circumstances.
How
Since
recourse to the market forces element can be considered justified only when
particular reasons to pay above-the-grade salary level occurs, it would be
really pointless and definitely counterproductive for an organisation offering,
although to the right candidate, the market forces element on a permanent basis
as part of his/her fixed salary.
This
addition has to be granted, in fact, on account of exceptional circumstances
only, so that it would be a massive blunder do not separately regulating the
payment of this element. Market forces have, hence, to be considered as a
separate supplement paid on a temporary basis.
As
anticipated above, in order to decide if this supplement has to be maintained
or modified, the market forces element has to be subject to regular review. A
review should also be scheduled a few months before the end of the initial
period agreed. The length of this period clearly depends on the different circumstances;
nonetheless the total sum agreed is usually paid on a monthly basis.
In
general, employers will renew the market forces element payment when two main
factors basically still persists: the presence in the labour market of a higher
than the internal grade salary for that position and a clear difficulty for the
employer to retain or attract individuals capable to properly and effectively
fill the position concerned.
Such
a review should be conducted reasonably in advance vis-a-vis the expiration of
the payment period agreed. So that, in the case the assessment should reveal
that the circumstances on the basis of which the supplement has been granted do
no longer exist, it will be possible giving to the individual concerned a reasonable
notice. Notice has to be given either in the case the market forces supplement
will be removed or in the case it could be reduced.
Legal aspects
As
maintained by Bratton (2012), governments, by means of their legislative power,
can in many cases exert a certain influence over reward management and market
forces supplements payment clearly represent one of them.
Equal
pay and pay equity legislation, in fact, respectively providing for employers
paying the same salary for the same job and jobs of equal value, clearly limit employers’
latitude and capacity to differently reward individuals. In general, draconian
job evaluation exercises can properly and effectively help employers to be
compliant with equal pay and equal value legislation. It cannot necessarily be
said the same, instead, for market forces supplements payment which, as
anticipated above, can actually be offered only on the ground of exceptional
circumstances.
In
order to eventually properly and effectively support the grounds for which
market forces additions have been granted to one or more individuals before a
Court, employers need to gather and keep all the evidence they can. From a
legal point of view, in fact, payment of market forces practically represents a
case in which employers pay unequal salary for work of equal value on grounds
of recruitment and/or retention-related issues. Providing evidence to the
Court that before conceding an individual the salary supplement careful consideration
to the issue has actually been given and that all of the possible options has
been investigated and eventually tried, will clearly shows to the Court that
the market forces explanation has not just been used by the employer as an
excuse or a sham justification (Equality Human Rights, 2012).
In
the event an employer who has offered market forces supplements should be
brought before a Court on pay discrimination claims, this should not clearly conduct
his defence on the grounds of what happens in the labour market, which could actually
be affected by discriminatory practices. Employers could not, in fact, base
their defence on the basis of the principle “this is what other businesses
pay”, they should instead provide evidence that the additional element was
necessary and determinant in order to attract or retain that particular
individual for his/her qualities (Equality Human Rights, 2012).
It
can be said that Courts, at least in the UK, openly recognise the effects
played by labour market forces over pay. During the proceedings relating to the
case Newcastle Upon Tyne NHS Hospitals Trust v Armstrong & Ors, in fact, Mr.
Underhill (2010), Judge of the UKEAT, referring to Rainey v Greater Glasgow
Health Board case, maintained that “it is well-established that a … defence
based on market forces is admissible in principle.”
The
same viewpoint was practically expressed by the European Court of Justice when
examining the case Enderby v Frenchay Health Authority, brought before it by
the Court of Appeal of England and Wales. The ECJ basically maintained that the
proportion of pay increases attributable to market forces can be accepted
provided that “the pay differential is objectively justified to the extent of
that proportion.” The ECJ also upheld that it is the national Court which has
to assess if and for which proportion salary differences can be attributable to
market forces.
This
court case clearly highlights the circumstance that when a higher than the related
grade salary is granted on account of market forces it also needs to be
determined if labour market pressures justify the whole additional payment. In
other words, whenever market forces supplements are conceded they have to be
proportionate to the recruitment difficulties and cannot be higher than
reasonably suggested by the labour market pressures.
It
can, then, be said that, in exceptional circumstances, jobs of equal value
could be paid differently, by means of market forces supplements consideration.
Nonetheless, employers should be extremely careful and ready to show and
provide evidence, if and when required, of the objective grounds justifying
this. As anticipated above, this will clearly reveal to be crucial in the event
a salary discrimination claim should be brought before a Court.
Prior
to conceding a market forces supplement employers should always strive to
recruit and retain quality staff offering salaries included within the range of
the grade relating to that particular job. Only once all of the attempts made
have revealed to be unproductive employers should consider offering market
forces supplements. Difficulties in attracting and retaining quality staff have
to be verifiable, as well as the attempts to having had recourse to possibly improved
recruitment and retention approaches.
The
circumstance that the supplement is regularly assessed and reviewed will also
turn to eventually be useful in front of a Court. This will, in fact, provide
evidence that market forces defence is not an excuse to justify salary
differences, but that it is actually a consequence of the labour market
pressures, and that that is why the labour market is constantly monitored and the
supplement regularly assessed and reviewed.
Another
definitely important aspect, also emerged by the Enderby v Frenchay Health
Authority case, is that employers should always be able to keep separate the
salary related to the job grade and that associated with the market forces in
order to eventually enable the Court to determine the impact of the latter over
the former.
Checklist
Employers
offering market forces supplements should both ensure that some activities will
be regularly carried out and that others are, instead, constantly monitored.
First
of all, as often anticipated above, the market forces element should be kept
separated from fixed pay and of this should be given clear evidence in the salary
slip of the individual concerned.
All
of the possible evidence which have accounted for having resort to the market
forces supplement have to be gathered and maintained. These have to be relevant
and proportionate to the additional sum granted to the individual or to put it
another way, they should be able to support the grounds for which the entire supplement
has been paid and not just being able to justify part of it.
Evidence
will include failure of the recruitment process, eventually tried also by means
of external recruitment consultants, agencies and specialists, as well as the regular
assessment and review of the conditions which have accounted for granting the supplement.
If the exceptional circumstances persist, the addition will continue to be
paid, differently it has to be proportionally reduced or completely removed
according to the circumstances.
Finally, as a good
rule of risk management, cases for market forces payment should be prepared
according to two main characteristics, more in particular they should be both specific
and measurable.
Longo, R., (2012), Influence of market forces over individuals’ reward and likely legal
pitfalls, HR Professionals, Milan [online].
For an extended version of this article and much, much more click here
For an extended version of this article and much, much more click here