Agenda item

The staff side wish to raise its concerns with regards to breaches of the current procedures which are costing the council unnecessary time and money. Please find attached the Council’s Procedure for Managing Employee Health.

Concern was raised, by the Staff-side, with regards to breaches of the current procedures in relation to ill health which had been costing the Council unnecessary time and money. The Council’s Procedure for Managing Employee Health was attached to the agenda.

The Staff-side Secretary explained a long established procedure delivered the lowest sickness rate for councils across London. He was however, concerned about the way in which one particular part of the procedure was being operated. With reference to paragraph 5.2 (b) and (c), when other sickness management processes had not achieved that necessary improvement in performance a manager could then refer the matter to their Chief Officer for consideration. This could have three outcomes – no further outcomes, an extension of the review period already in place to see if the required improvement could be achieved or dismissal on grounds of capability. Five officers were present at each review panel and the reviews were very time consuming for everyone involved and very stressful for the employee being reviewed. The Secretary stated that he felt that the criteria set out in paragraph 5.2 (c) should be met. Managers had been approaching their Chief Officers recommending an extension of the review period. This was a waste of the panel’s time as each manager had the power to extend the review period without recourse to the Chief Officer. The Staff-side Secretary asked that managers be instructed to use the procedure correctly.

The Assistant Chief Executive, HR agreed that the Council had an excellent sickness record. He felt that the process was tough but fair as the procedure had to be defended at employment tribunals etc. Staff side were of the opinion that those staff members who maintain a good attendance record could become demoralised when sickness absence issues of other members of staff was not addressed.. Chief Officer’s were part of the management structure and when managers came to the point where they felt they could do no more, then they could ask their Chief Officer to intervene. The Chief Officer might not agree. The Assistant Chief Executive, HR had no difficulty defending the balance of the procedure as it was right and fair in all cases. He felt that it was right and proper to allow managers to ask their Chief Officer to make the ultimate decision.

The Staff-side Secretary reiterated that managers should not recommend a further review period to Chief Officers and should implement an extension of the review period themselves. It was not the role of the Chief Officer to call a panel simply to extend a review period.

The Chairman felt that since this was a criticism of the system it would be a good idea for officers to provide evidence for the Committee to assess and discuss and he asked if officers were agreeable to this.

The Vice-Chairman asked the Committee to remember that the people involved in these reviews were ill. She had represented officers who had been made more ill by the process. The procedure must only be undertaken when absolutely unavoidable as the current use of the procedure and the threat of a Chief Officer review, as described by the Staff-side Secretary, was causing people to come to work when they could be taking time off to recover. As it was a number of these cases had been thrown out by Chief Officer panels as untenable.

The Staff-side Secretary reiterated that he had no problem with the procedure and no problem with a manager asking for Chief Officer intervention when all other avenues of action had been exhausted. He was asking that Chief Officer reviews were only called into use when absolutely unavoidable. There had been at least a dozen instances in the last 12 months where an extension of the review period had been recommended when calling a Chief Officer panel.

RESOLVED a report, containing evidence on how the procedure set out in paragraph 5.2 (b) and (c) of the Council’s Procedure for Managing Ill Health is used by managers and Chief Officers, be submitted in the first instance to the Local Joint Consultative Committee and then to the General Purposes and Licensing Committee.