Agenda item

The Secretary to the Staff Side submitted a report which considered the impact of restructures on staff and Council Services and referred to two examples affecting Community Projects and Democratic Services Sections.  She referred to the fact that all services had been affected by the proposed restructures and that this was not only stressful, but affected staff in terms of morale, energy and goodwill.  She referred to the possibility of changing terms of conditions under the guise of a restructure, the promotion of redundancies to delete certain posts, of the impact on service delivery of reduced staffing levels and how this will impact on talent retention. 

The Secretary to the Staff Side stated that following consultation, CMT had decided that they would not delete the post of Senior Democratic Services Officer and one staff member had agreed to redundancy.  She referred to the fact that reducing staffing would affect the service in that statutory committees would continue to be staffed, but non-statutory would not.

The Secretary to the Staff Side stated that in accordance with the Panel’s Constitution an Officer had been co-opted onto the Panel to put forward the perspective of the Community Projects Team in relation to the suggested restructures.

Valdis Belinis referred to the role of the Community Projects Team in supporting the Council’s corporate priorities and of the fact that 2.5 staff were being asked to carry out a disproportionate amount of work and questioned how three part time officers could deliver seven corporate short/medium term outcomes by 2013.  He referred to the significant partnership role to be played by the team in terms of the Local Strategic Partnership, the demands of the Localism Bill and working with the community, the role of the team in relation to projects allocated under the New Homes Bonus, and their responsibility for implementing a transport strategy. 

A Member stated that 3.5 staff to 2.5 was not a 50% reduction in staff adding that one FTE member of staff would be lost.  He emphasised the role of the Council as an “enabler” and of the need to find other partners to undertake the work which the Council could not undertake.  The Secretary to the Staff Side reminded the Member that all organisations appeared to be cutting jobs and of the difficulties in getting partners to take on functions which the Council could no longer undertake.  The Staff Side stated that the Council had ploughed money into certain areas at the expense of more vulnerable areas of the community.

Validis Belinis referred to the fact that the team had been reduced from six to three and half FTE and stated that a further reduction in the light of aforementioned demands would be unrealistic.  He stated that under previous proposals, 7.5 staff were identified as being responsible for delivering priorities.  He stated that the role of “enabler” was not a function mentioned in the Job Description.

A Member acknowledged the good work of the team having worked closely with them in the past.  She hoped that the Council would continue with its good progress and find ways of working with partners to achieve its aspirations better than the Council might provide itself.  She said that the team should be congratulated for its innovative ways of working and achieving its outcomes.  

The Director of Internal Services emphasised the need for the Council to work within its means and sought feedback in terms of possible alternatives to the restructure.  The Secretary to the Employer’s Side acknowledged that restructures were stressful but that the Council consistently applied its policies, e.g. in relation to recruitment, redeployment and selection and that jobs were ring-fenced or “slotted in” wherever possible. 

The Staff Side stated that Members needed to understand what could be delivered with limited resources and of the incorrect expectation on the part of Members, that things would carry on the same but with reduced staff.  Officers stated that Job Descriptions needed to be realistic.

A Member referred to a survey which revealed that 1/6 of staff were prepared to work less hours to make savings. The Secretary to the Staff Side reminded the Member that there had been considerable negative changes recently on employees’ pay and pensions since that survey had been taken.

The Panel debated the suggestion by the Staff Side that there should be an Equalities Impact Assessment carried out on areas where restructuring was taking place.  The Secretary to the Employer’s Side stated that the Council carried out an equalities impact assessment on staff.  The Staff Side suggested that one should be carried out to measure the impact of its policies on services provided by the Council.  A majority vote in favour of this recommendation was not supported.   

The Local Joint Panel received the report and agreed that the Secretary to the Employer’s Side should report back to the next meeting providing details of the outcomes of all recent restructures including the total number of voluntary and compulsory redundancies, early retirements / resignations resulting from the restructures during the civic year 2010/11. 

RESOLVED – that (A) the report be noted; and

(B)   the Secretary to the Employer’s Side provide details of the outcomes of all recent restructures including the total number of voluntary and compulsory redundancies and early retirements / resignations resulting from restructures during the 2010/11 civic year to the next Local Joint Panel.