Location: Kadoma Room, Daneshill House
Present: Employer Side: Councillors K. Vale (Employer Side Chair), R.A. Clark, R.G. Parker (from 6.15pm) and S. Taylor. Staff Side: Roland Ayles - DES Admin & Direct Services - Street Cleansing DSO (UNISON), Jim Brown - DCS Community Development (UNISON), Pam Chapman - DCS Housing Services (UNISON)(Staff Side Chair in the Chair) and Peter Terry - DES Architects & Property Services (UNISON).
Others: Bill Welch - Assistant Chief Executive, D. Williams - Acting Head of Personnel Services and Diane Rodgers - Principal Personnel Officer (as advisers to the Employer Side) and Ian Gourlay (Committee Administrator).
Duration:
Start: 6.00pm
End: 6.35pm
Status: Noted
Business: Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Courtney Giles (UNISON), Darron Nicholson (T&GWU) and Gary Palmer (AMICUS/UCATT). There were no declarations of interest.
Decision:
Status: Agreed
Business:
Decision: It was RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 27th January 2004, having been circulated, be taken as read, confirmed and signed by the Staff Side Chair as a correct record.
Status: Noted
Business: MINUTE 5 - AGREED CONSULTATION AND DISCLOSURE PROCEDURES
On behalf of the Employer Side, Councillor Taylor apologised for the delay in responding to the Staff Side with regard to the specific reason as to why the Trades Unions had not been provided with the Play Review report prior to its submission to the Resources and Corporate Management Review Panel on 10th November 2003. The Staff Side had been provided with a copy of her response just prior to the Joint Consultative Committee meeting.
The Staff Side Secretary noted that the specific reason quoted in the response was that the body that had commissioned the report (namely the Resources and Corporate Management Review Panel) had wished to consider it in advance of it being sent to the Unions. The Staff Side Secretary was of the view that this reason was inadequate, as Staff Side representatives had been present in an ex-officio capacity at the meeting of the Panel at which the report had been commissioned, but the Staff Side was not provided with the completed report nor invited to attend the 10th November 2003 Panel meeting, at which the report was first considered.
The Staff Side Secretary referred to another statement contained in the Employer Side's response to the effect that the Resources and Corporate Management Review Panel had no Executive powers and, in respect of the Play Review, had agreed a number of recommendations for submission to the appropriate decision-making body. The Staff Side Secretary acknowledged this fact, but commented that the Panel may have made some different recommendations had the Staff Side been present at, or had been given the opportunity to make representations to, the Panel meeting on 10th November 2003. The Staff Side Secretary added that the Unions were provided with a copy of the Play Review report a day or so before the Performance, Priorities and Improvement Group, the body which next considered the matter, but that this had allowed insufficient time for them to submit meaningful comments to this body.
MINUTE 6 - PAY PROTECTION FOR EMPLOYEES REDEPLOYED DUE TO INDUSTRIAL INJURY (INCLUDING BULLYING AND HARASSMENT)
In response to the Staff Side Secretary, the acting Head of Personnel Services advised that a report on the general issue of pay protection was to be submitted to Chief Officer Board within the next month. In respect of the specific case referred to in this Minute, the Acting Head of Personnel Services undertook to investigate this matter.
Decision:
Status: Noted
Business: The Staff Side Secretary understood that the Employer Side Chair was attending a Regional Employers meeting on Friday, 5th March 2004, and wished to put forward the case for UNISON's 2004 Local Government Pay Claim, which he hoped would be supported by the Employer Side.
The Staff Side Secretary commented that it had been 2 years since the last Pay award, and he considered that the current pay claim was modest, realistic and sought to address issues of low pay in local government. The Staff Side Secretary summarised the 10 points of UNISON's 2004 Pay Claim as follows:-
(1) Abolition of the bottom 3 Spinal Column Points (SCPs) - a number of local authorities had already abolished these SCPs as part of their adoption of low pay policies and new grading structures. Stevenage Borough Council still had staff employed on the bottom 3 SCPs, which started at a pay rate of £5.53 per hour. UNISON considered this rate to be too low.
(2) A 4% pay increase for all employees - although the inflation rate was just below 3%, the Local Government Pay Commission had identified that local government pay had fallen behind other public and private sector organisations.
(3) A £200 lump sum for all employees - which tapers the claim to the particular benefit of the low paid.
(4) An agreement with the National Employers that all Pay and Grading Reviews using an agreed Job Evaluation Scheme, as required by the Single Status Agreement, should be completed in every authority within the next 2 years. The majority of local authority employees in the eastern region had now had their jobs evaluated using an agreed scheme. Now that a local version of the Scheme had been produced, the Staff Side hoped that progress towards its implementation could be speeded up. The Staff Side Secretary commented that, although the implementation of the Scheme would be at a cost to the Council, this would be less than the alternative of the Unions pursuing a number of Equal Pay Claims through the Courts (which they had resisted doing for several years pending the introduction of the Job Evaluation Scheme).
(5) Urgent completion of the Workforce Training and Development Agreement - a useful agreement, which demonstrated good partnership working between Employers and Unions.
(6) An increase in the basic entitlement for Annual Leave from 20 (+ 2 statutory) days to 25 (+ 2 statutory) days - this latter figure was now the norm in other areas of the public and private sectors. This item was popular with staff as it reflected a shift towards recognising the need for a work/life balance.
(7) An increase in paid maternity leave to 8 months full pay and 4 months half pay, and a reduction in the qualifying period from 1 year to 6 months.
(8) An entitlement of 2 weeks fully paid maternity support leave (currently 1 week full pay and £100 for the second week) - the Staff side felt that this would be of minimal cost to the Council.
(9) The introduction of additional maternity leave to reflect the pressures and difficulties resulting from premature birth.
(10) The introduction of paid adoption leave, similar to the maternity leave scheme, for staff wishing to adopt under 18s - the Staff Side considered that this, too, would be of minimal cost to the Council.
The Staff Side Secretary summarised the Claim by commenting that the Local Government Pay Commission had stated that the case for above inflation pay increases could be justified on equalities grounds. The 2004 Claim sought to narrow the gender pay gap, particularly amongst the lower paid, who were invariably women in part-time jobs. The Staff Side Secretary concluded by stating that there was no reason why the Council could not adopt local conditions to address some of the 10 points, even if they were not all agreed nationally.
The Employer Side replied by stating that the 2004 Pay Claim would need to be considered in the context of the Council's Budget. A savings exercise had been carried out for the 2004/05 Budget, without resulting in any dramatic reduction in service provision. This was against a background of various constraints, including the threat of Council Tax capping by the Government. The Council had budgeted for a 2.5% staff pay increase and the Budget would need to be reviewed should agreement be reached on a Pay Award in excess of that figure.
The Employer Side acknowledged the 10 points raised by the Staff Side, particularly the issues of work/life balance and additional maternity leave for premature birth. Some of the issues could perhaps be reviewed locally if not agreed at national level.
Decision:
Status: Noted
Business: There were no items of urgent business.
Just prior to the conclusion of the meeting, the Employer Side Chair offered congratulations to Peter Terry (Staff Side Secretary) and Pam Chapman (Staff Side Chair) who were both shortly to leave the Council to take up new positions elsewhere (in Peter's case, on a temporary secondment basis). In wishing Peter and Pam every success in their new positions, the Employer Side Chair thanked them for their contribution to the Committee over the past few years.
Decision: