Agenda item

In accordance with the Scrutiny Procedure Rules, to review the attached delegated decision of the Director of Resources in relation to Budget Action Plan Staffing Issues.

The Head of Scrutiny and Member Development submitted a report setting out the details of the following delegated decision (ref D35201) of the Director of Resources, which was the subject of the Call-In:-

Consultations and negotiations with the trade unions have been held regarding a range of measures to change terms and conditions.  The Director of Resources has agreed that these will now be implemented with effect from 1^st April 2009.  The changes are:

- charging staff for the use of city centre car parking permits

- revising the Council’s Managing Work-force Change Policy; which includes reducing the period before notice of to end employment will be given from 12 to 9 months

- changing the timing extra-statutory holidays to ensure services are open on the Tuesdays after bank holiday Mondays at Easter, and Spring and August bank holidays.

NB  Since putting this decision in the Forward Plan, the number of permits taken is 207, generating less than £100k, making this a major rather than key decision.

The above decision had been called-in for review by Councillors Gruen, Taggart, Driver, Renshaw and Nash on the following grounds –

·  Due consultation, and the taking of professional advice from officers;

·  Clarity of aims and desired outcomes;

·  An explanation of the options considered and details of the reasons for the decision.

In response to the Call-In notice, the following people were present at the meeting, and either presented evidence or responded to Members’ queries and comments:-

Councillors Gruen, Taggart, Driver and Renshaw

Paul Rogerson, Chief Executive

Lorraine Hallam, Chief Officer – HR

Helen Grantham, Catherine Marchant and Val McLaughlin, HR

Dave Roberts, Secretary, LCC Joint Trade Union Committee

Dick Banks, UNITE

Brian Mulvey, UNISON

Lynn Brook, GMB

In brief summary, the main discussion points were:-

·  Whether or not the decision had been correctly interpreted by the Director of Resources as a ‘major’ decision, as opposed to a ‘key’ decision, within the definitions of each category contained within the Council’s Constitution.

  In view of the fact that the called-in decision directly related to Council staff, and not the general public or service users, a view was expressed that to try to categorise it as a ‘key’ decision, on the grounds that it was likely to have ‘a significant effect on communities living and working in an area comprising two or more Wards’ was too liberal an interpretation of the definition of a ‘key’ decision;

·  The timescale for the publication of the called-in decision, and why insufficient time had been allowed under the Council’s formal constitutional arrangements for the decision to be published and subject to the normal call-in arrangements before the proposed implementation date of 1^st April 2009 had passed.

An explanation was provided that, due to an administrative misunderstanding, the actual decision had been published on 25^th March, as opposed to 23^rd March, the day the decision had been signed-off, and this two day delay had directly led to the five day call-in period overlapping the proposed implementation date of 1^st April.

Members expressed dismay at this set of circumstances, especially as the issues contained in the decision had been the subject of active discussion and consideration since December 2008.  Members also expressed their dismay and frustration that this was the third time in the current municipal year that the Council’s decision making process had been subverted, despite instructions being issued by the Monitoring Officer following earlier breaches of the procedures;

·  The reasons for and the relative merits, or otherwise, of the proposed changes contained in the called-in decision, with contributions from the Council’s officers, Members and the trade union representatives present.

Whilst differing views were expressed, the Board as a whole expressed concern at the conflict situation which the Council currently found itself in vis-à-vis the trade unions, and expressed a desire to see a restoration of proper and meaningful consultations and negotiations on the whole range of issues affecting Council Services;

·  The level of involvement, if any, of Executive Members in the decision making process.

(N.B.  During the course of the discussion of this item, Councillor Illingworth declared a personal interest, in his capacity as a member of ASTMS).