The Staff Side would like to ask the following question:
Are members aware of the details of the joint union pay claim and the progress on pay negotiations?
Minutes:
Mr Glenn Kelly stated that when the Chief Executive previously discussed the issue of staff being transferred out from the local authority, he promised that although there would be fewer staff working directly for the Council, they would be better paid. Mr Kelly stated that the LBB workforce had dropped by 15% over the last 4 years, and that this equated to £7m. He expressed concern that although staff numbers had decreased, the Council still had to maintain its statutory obligations and consequently work pressures on staff had increased. There was no indication of staff pay increasing to compensate the workforce.
Mr Kelly stated that since 2010, wages had lagged behind the RPI by 20%, and that this had meant that lower paid workers had in effect lost £1400.00 each, and that middle band workers had lost £3k. He continued by referencing the removal of the Essential User Car Allowance which he claimed had resulted in staff losing £1k per annum in real terms. This was ongoing whilst private sector wages were increasing.
Mr Kelly stated that the Staff Side were asking for a flat rate increase in wages of £1 per hour, and the adoption of the “London Living Wage “ of £9.40 per hour. Mr Kelly declared that 60 LBB workers were being paid below the London Living Wage, and also 461 school workers. Mr Kelly asked the Employer’s side why they did not support the LLW when Boris Johnson did. Mr Kelly stated that he was seeking a guarantee that there would be no further negative changes to pay and conditions. He also asked for a final and fair settlement for schools staff, and support for staff that were paid term time only. Some school workers were unable to claim out of work benefits during school holidays.
The Chairman addressed the issue concerning the claim for £1.00 per hour, and stated that the cost of this would be £4m which was too expensive. It was the case that LBB paid £8.20 as an hourly rate, which was well above the national minimum wage. Cllr Tim Stevens JP remarked that it was absurd to be making a pay claim of this nature, when the money was not available. He further stated that if LBB wanted to adopt the Statutory Living Wage of £9.00, they had until 2020 to do so. There would be confirmation of the staff pay award in due course.
Cllr Angela Wilkins asked if there could be a dialogue concerning these matters, rather than just a blanket response. She asked if the Employer’s Side was going to comment on the matters raised concerning the terms and conditions of teaching staff.
The Director of Human Resources confirmed that the Employer’s Side were aware of the details of the joint union pay claim, and progress on pay negotiations. He asked why the matter was being raised at the LJCC when all parties were already aware. The Director advised that matters were not straightforward, as schools needed to be consulted, and so Members should not comment at this time. He stated that the Unions’ pay claim was going to be looked at by the GP&L Committee. Members would comment subsequent to this. The Director stated that the award was better than the national agreement.
Mr Kelly responded by stating that the agreements were not better if you were an “essential car user”, and that LBB had outsourced may low paid jobs. It was also the case that Bromley was a London Borough with a high cost of living.
Cllr Wilkins commented that she was not aware of the pay claim.
The Chairman commented that the LBB pay award was likely to be fractionally more than the national pay award. Cllr Fawthrop stated that LBB did review issues, and that this would include the whole budget making process and pay and conditions. It was the case that LBB was required to be transparent, and that as well as having a duty to staff, LBB also had a duty to those who paid rates and taxes.
Cllr Colin Smith stated that no promises could be made at this stage; the budget would be assessed in February 2016, and decisions would be made subsequently. He declared that if the Unions pushed for unfundable wage increases, then staff were in danger of being priced out of work.
The Chairman concluded this agenda item by stating that the Employer’s Side was aware of the pay claim, and had answered the questions raised.