Issue - meetings

The update on the Parking Services Contractor Performance Review was provided by the Interim Head of Parking Services. Kim Challis (Regional Managing Director of APCOA) attended to answer questions from Members.

The Interim Head of Parking Services outlined the main issues and concerns that had been highlighted in the report. These were:

·  Enforcement levels needed to improve

·  APCOA staff retention was a concern—attrition rates were high

·  A high number of CEO errors in the issuing of PCNs

·  The ANPR equipped moped had not proved as effective as had been hoped

·  Concerns had been raised regarding the reliability of the machines used in Council car parks

·  Revised beat sheets had been provided by APCOA, but these had not been able to be signed off by officers

·  The results from mystery shopping exercises had been disappointing and there were instances where PCNs should have been issued but were not

·  There were issues that needed resolving concerning the transport and deployment of CEOs

Ms Challis expressed the view that staff turnover was high in Bromley because of an increase in the level of verbal abuse suffered by CEOs. In some cases there had also been physical attacks, and these incidents had been reported to the police.

Ms Challis continued that the issue of pay levels for CEOs was also a significant factor that contributed to the high turnover of staff. APCOA were paying above the national living wage (NLW), but were not paying the London Living Wage (LLW). APCOA had asked LBB if they would like to pay the London Living Wage, but LBB had declined. Ms Challis said that in many cases (because the LLW was not being paid) staff had left to find alternative employment with higher rates of pay.

A Member responded that the rate of pay administered by APCOA to its staff was not the responsibility of the Council, and it was APCOA’s responsibility to recruit and retain suitable staff. The Chairman agreed with this, commenting that ultimately, the pay rates were set by APCOA and not the Council.

In response to this, Ms Challis stated that the rates of pay provided by APCOA would be determined by the rates that had been previously agreed in the contractual agreement between APCOA and the Council. LBB had not agreed in the terms of the contract to pay the LLW. The rates had been agreed with the authority during the tender process. The example was given of LB Southwark, where Southwark Council had agreed to pay the LLW during the tender process.

.

The Chairman disagreed with this, and maintained that the rates of pay provided by APCOA to its staff was their responsibility. Ms Challis informed the Committee that two pay awards had been provided recently and APCOA were doing what they could to improve pay rates subject to affordability limits.

A Member noted that a new Contracts Manager had been appointed since February, and she was interested to see if the new appointment would have any effect on reducing  ...  view the full minutes text for item 19