What the proposed UN compensation changes mean for you

In early August, the International Civil Service Commission convened in Vienna to determine a “simplified, modernized, fit-for-purpose” compensation package for the United Nations system. Instead, the independent expert body, established by the U.N. General Assembly, presented a “complicated, pieced-together package,” according to one source close to the matter who wished not to be named. A review meant to modernize the compensation system has “bowed to political pressure from certain member states bent on cutting costs,” U.N. Staff Union President Barbara Tavora-Jainchill told Devex. While the proposal is sprinkled with a few positive aspects — mostly the unchanged parts, she said — if approved it would hit single parents hard, as well as geographically mobile staff, staff in the field and those with working spouses who currently receive supplemental income by virtue of their children. The proposed changes have generated plenty of internal buzz, and an online petition, “Protect U.N. humanitarian aid workers: Reject cuts to pay and family leave,” has more than 10,000 signatures. Human resources representatives from UNICEF, UNOPS and UNDP declined to comment to Devex on the proposal, although it’s widely known that chiefs of several agencies, including UNICEF, the World Food Program and UNHCR, have jointly voiced their concern that the pay changes are not “fit for purpose” in terms of meeting the U.N.’s ambitions for a more diverse staff and increased mobility. The ICSC’s Salaries and Allowances Division did not respond to multiple calls and messages from Devex regarding questions about the report. While waiting for finalization of the proposal, here are several of the most contentious proposed changes we do know, with the help of Tavora-Jainchill and a source close to the matter. 1. If you’re a single parent, you’re not going to like the looks of this. Single parents will see a considerable financial setback if the U.N. General Assembly decides to approve the ICSC’s proposal. Currently, single parents' first child receives a dependency amount equivalent to that received by staff members with a spouse not working or working but receiving very little compensation. It’s about 6 percent more than what a staff member with no dependents receives, but the proposal suggests cutting the dependency amount and instead providing a low fixed amount each month per child. A midcareer employee with no spouse and one child currently receives a supplement of about $7,000 a year, according to Tavora-Jainchill. If the suggested changes are approved, the person instead would receive closer to $3,000. The effects could be more dramatic in other employment categories, and on average single parents will lose around $6,000 a year, she said. The staff union has started a petition specifically on this issue, which has been spurred on by what Tavora-Jainchill heard may have been stated during ICSC discussions — that single parents don’t need a dependency amount since most are receiving alimony. The ICSC could not be reached to confirm or correct this statement. “Why did commissioners propose this regarding single parents? It doesn’t make sense. Why cut from them? There are people without child support,” Tavora-Jainchill said. 2. You might lose 6 percent of your pay. The proposal has suggested that there be one salary scale for all staff to replace the single and dependent scales currently in effect. The big change will be for the 7,500 U.N. staff with working spouses, who are paid on the current dependent scale once they have a child. Under the new system, these staff will not receive a spouse allowance and will only be paid a child allowance for each of their children. So, single parents and staff with working spouses could make 3-6 percent less. In order to reach those reductions, those affected will see a one percent pay cut per year until they reach the new salary. 3. You could stand to make more if you’re already at the top. If the proposal is approved as is, entry-level professionals — or P-1s and P-2s — would gain steps with lower initial pay while their highest pay remains largely unchanged. P-3s and P-4s, meanwhile, would lose steps and their highest salaries would be lowered significantly. The same would happen with P-5s, which are considered midcareer professionals in the U.N. system. But the proposal includes additional steps for senior-level professionals, or D-1 and D-2 levels. As a consequence of the increased steps, particularly at the D-2 level, assistant secretary-generals and under secretary-generals will see a 10 percent raise. “So the bottom of the scale will finance the top,” Tavora-Jainchill said, adding that the change more generally increases pay inequality between the top and bottom ends of the scale. But this isn’t the case, according to the source with knowledge of the matter. Instead, it’s decompressing the U.N.’s compressed salary scale as well as making top-level U.N. positions more competitive and attractive. It does mean that ASGs and USGs will see an increase, but “a lot of people don’t have a problem with that” for the reasons mentioned above, according to the source. 4. In a C or E duty station? You’ll need to stay put longer. The current R&R system will be maintained, but accelerated home leave in C to E duty stations — or those deemed the most difficult — will be discontinued. While previously those working in the most difficult conditions worked on a leave cycle that allowed them leave every 12 months, they will now operate on 24-month cycle like all other stations. But for health and other reasons, it’s important for families in C and E duty stations to be able to leave more frequently than once every two years, Tavora-Jainchill said said. 5. You might see a bump, or decrease, in hardship allowance. The current five hardship levels remain unchanged, but single staff and those with dependents would receive the same hardship allowance, with no loss for dependents and gains for singles. For staff posted to nonfamily duty stations, the additional hardship allowance, now called nonfamily service allowance, would be maintained with differentiation between staff with and without dependents, but there’s no longer a difference in payment by grade. The increase in payments for single staff is welcome, Tavora-Jainchill said. But cuts to front-line workers overall have garnered a lot of negative attention from groups like UNHCR and the World Food Program. “Some of us think that the current package that we have for those on the frontline is not the best,” Adnan Khan, WFP’s country director in Sudan, told Devex. “And I think decreasing that package is harmful to our operations.” 5. A move to headquarters won’t garner you mobility allowance. The commission recommended to the General Assembly that a mobility incentive be introduced in lieu of the current mobility allowance to encourage the mobility of staff to field duty stations. The mobility incentive would be paid upfront every year for five years following a move to a non-H, or nonheadquarters, duty station. But the staff union’s position and that of management was that the mobility allowance should also apply to staff who move to H duty stations, as mobility is disruptive regardless of destination, Tavora-Jainchill said. 6. You might be shipping more wine. Staff will continue to receive 30 days of daily subsistence allowance and 15 days of DSA per dependent in order to help with temporary lodging while they find proper accommodation. But the payment for shipping costs still hasn’t been agreed upon and has proved complex for the ICSC. There are two options in the proposed package — either the organization moves you or you receive a lump sum of 70 percent of the cost of the move. The option of a fully paid move might encourage bad behavior, or people choosing to move everything — and throw in a few palettes of wine, too — because the organization is paying for it. “That’s the behavior we’re trying to discourage,” according to the source familiar with the matter. Not only is the lump sum plan easier to administer, but it would encourage more responsible thinking about what it does and doesn’t make sense to move — maybe selling electrical equipment that won’t function in your next station or storing things instead of shipping them. “We are concerned at the lack of progress on shipping costs in case the result penalizes staff,” Tavora-Jainchill said. 7. You’ll be making less than colleagues in New York if you start as general service staff. The commission has recommended that the salaries of current New York-based staff members in the general service and related categories — such as security staff and language teachers — wouldn’t be readjusted by the Consumer Price Index until a percentage of 5.8 percent is recovered. This means future staff members in those categories would be hired earning 5.8 percent less than current employees. “We do not believe that the salary survey which reached this result was done properly and asked the secretary-general to reject this ICSC recommendation,” said Tavora-Jainchill, explaining that one of the competitive businesses selected for the local salary survey should have been dropped, but that the ICSC ignored the union’s request for review. The ICSC could not be reached by Devex for comment on this matter. The proposal was already reviewed by the the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions, a subsidiary body of the General Assembly, but it has not yet issued its report. The Administrative and Budgetary 5th Committee is scheduled to review the proposal in mid- to late-November, and will take the report of the ACABQ into consideration. Read more international development news online, and subscribe to The Development Newswire to receive the latest from the world’s leading donors and decision-makers — emailed to you FREE every business day.