Agenda item

Report DHR15005 (Review of Employee Representation Arrangements) was presented to the GP&L Committee on 26^th March 2015.

Unite would like to ask the following questions based on the report:

Question 1:

Section 3.10 of the report notes:

‘It is therefore proposed that a separate consultative/engagement forum for departmental representatives and a separate consultative/negotiation meeting with the trade unions are created’.

Unite would like to request an explanation of why a commitment to the GPLC and to staff has not been organised?

Question 2:

Section 5.3 of the report states:

‘Ceasing of the existing arrangements will require some funding to be set aside for staff side/trade union work, so it is proposed that the £46,060 is held centrally within the Chief Executive’s budget until officers know how much of this is required, and then the balance will be offered up as a future budget saving’. 

Unite would like to ask how much of this money has been spent compensating departments for staff absences while carrying out Trade Union Duties--especially the Library Service that has had the vast majority of absences?

The Staff Side asked two questions that were based on report number DHR 15005.

This was a report that was looked at by the General Purposes and Licensing Committee on 26^th March 2016. The report was entitled ‘Review of Employee Representation Arrangements’, written by the HR Consultancy Manager, Tammy Eglinton.

The report outlined proposals for restructuring the employee representation arrangements within Bromley Council.  The report proposed to end the current secondment arrangement of staff into staff representation roles (i.e. the trade union and the staff side secretary roles) and to review the role and structure of the Departmental Representatives’ Forum. 

The first question was based on section 3.10 of the report:

Question 1:

Section 3.10 of the report notes:

‘It is therefore proposed that a separate consultative/engagement forum for departmental representatives and a separate consultative/negotiation meeting with the trade unions are created’.

Unite would like to request an explanation of why a commitment to the GP&LC and to staff has not been organised?

The Director of Human Resources responded that meetings were taking place with the unions to fulfill all statutory obligations. These included meetings related to pay, TUPE, and any other meetings where a legal obligation to hold the meeting was required. Additionally, the Director was in the process of setting up a schedule of regular meetings with the Trades Union representatives on a quarterly basis which stood outside of the required statutory ones. The meetings could be about anything that the Union would like to discuss. There had been a meeting recently that had discussed pensions. Separate meetings were taking place with the Departmental Representatives.

The second question was based on section 5.3 of the report:

Question 2:

Section 5.3 of the report states:

‘Ceasing of the existing arrangements will require some funding to be set aside for staff side/trade union work, so it is proposed that the £46,060 is held centrally within the Chief Executive’s budget until officers know how much of this is required, and then the balance will be offered up as a future budget saving’. 

Unite would like to ask how much of this money has been spent compensating departments for staff absences while carrying out Trade Union Duties--especially the Library Service that has had the vast majority of absences.

There appeared to be some confusion from the Staff Side as to the purpose of the £46k that had been set aside. The Director clarified that this sum was related to the former post occupied by Glenn Kelly as Staff Side Secretary. The sum had been set aside while the transition process to the new representative system was developing. The sum was retained for year 1, and then recouped in central funding as a saving.

The Staff Side had understood the sum to allow for payments to compensate departments who were affected by the need to release staff to undertake Trades Union duties, most notably the library service.  The Director advised that that had not been the purpose and that it would always be for the relevant department to bear the cost of releasing staff to carry out Trades Union duties.

Councillor Wilkins asked if the amount of time taken by staff for trade union activities could be quantified, and it was confirmed that this was the case. The Director advised that there would be a pay policy report that would be going to the GP&L Committee in March 2018. Trade Union activities undertaken by staff would be calculated in the document.