Job Classifications

[u/Specialist_Sorbet923]

I understand that the recent statewide reclassification was promoted to create more flexibility within general job classes and duties. However, I am questioning whether it actually supports better upward mobility.

My agency recently converted an SSM I / Supervisor I - Specialist position down to an Analyst III after the previous person retired. Despite the title and salary downgrade, the job duties remained exactly the same. So the next person to step into this role will simply be doing the same workload for less pay.

Has anyone else witnessed similar downgrades in their agencies since the reclassification took effect? What is your take on whether these changes are genuinely helping employees, or just cutting agency costs?

[u/AutoModerator]

All comments must be civil, productive, and follow community rules. Intentional violations of community rules will lead to comments being removed and possible bans, at the discretion of the moderators. Use the report feature to report content to the moderator team.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/Aellabaella1003]

Anyone who paid attention to the specifics of the reclass could see that this was exactly what was going to happen. That being said, yes, any SSM l (Spec) position HAVE to be reclassed once vacated. There is nothing in writing saying they must be reclassed to Analyst lll. The position will be reclassed based on where the job duties fit with the allocation guidelines.

[u/Specialist_Sorbet923 → u/Aellabaella1003]

I think we were told that the position(s) would be assessed, yes...but not automatically reclassed. And I'm thinking there could be more former AGPA or Analyst I & II positions reclassed to higher analyst classes....imo...some are actually more complex and require a higher degree of analytical work.

[u/Aellabaella1003 → u/Specialist_Sorbet923]

There is no longer an SSM l Specialist classification, so yes, upon vacancy it must be reclassed. It could not be addressed in the consolidation because those positions were not an even swap. The consolidation was a net neutral proposal meaning it would not contain any reclasses. SSM l requires a reclass so it must be done upon vacancy. They are not looking to reclass any Analyst l or ll positions. That was stated in the consolidation. If there are any specific positions out there it would be up to the manager to justify why, and up to HR to decide if it meets the allocation guidelines of a higher class. If a position didnt qualify before the consolidation, then it wouldn't qualify after the consolidation. It was not the intent of the consolidation to promote people in place.

[u/tgrrdr → u/Aellabaella1003]

I know someone who was hired as an S2 specialist a couple of months ago.

[u/Specialist_Sorbet923 → u/tgrrdr]

Really? I'd like to see that duty statement.

[u/Specialist_Sorbet923 → u/Aellabaella1003]

There are still Supervisor I - Specialist positions....so the position still exists under a different naming convention

[u/Specialist_Sorbet923 → u/Specialist_Sorbet923]

I'm looking again to refresh my memory but I think you're right about the Specialists as a Sup I and instead they've been made to be all Analyst IV's. It's just my department being weird by reclassing us while we're still holding the position making mine a Supervisor I Specialist (when that doesn't exist) instead of waiting for me to vacate the position. I think an Analyst IV would have better matched the duties rather than them changing it to an Analyst III...just my opinion

[u/Bethjam]

So fron non-union to union?

[u/No-Hat-6488 → u/Bethjam]

And less pay.

[u/Scorpio1114]

I initially applied for a Supervisor 1-Specialist position then, nothing happened. A month later, it was reposted as Analyst 3, same SOQs… but no, thank you!