Agenda item

The Board is asked to review and scrutinise the decision of the Cabinet taken on 4 September 2024 in relation to the item of business relating to ‘Pay and Reward Final Position’, following the receipt of a valid call-in request from the pre-requisite number of councillors.

In accordance with the Constitution, the Board must determine whether or not to offer any advice in relation to the decision. If advice is offered, Cabinet will be required to reconsider the decision in light of the advice but is not obliged to follow it.

The Monitoring Officer presented a report, a copy of which had been circulated to each Member and a copy of which appears as Appendix 'A' to these Minutes in the Minute Book. The Monitoring Officer advised that following receipt of a valid call-in request from three Members of the Overview and Scrutiny Board, the Board was asked to review and scrutinise the decision of the Cabinet taken on 4 September 2024 relating to the business item “Pay and Reward Final Position”

The Board was informed that the call-in request has been considered as valid, as there were reasonable grounds that the decision was not made in accordance with the decision-making principles set out at Article 12 of the Constitution and in particular Article 12.1 h "explain what options were considered and give the reasons for the decision”

The Board was invited to consider the process by which Cabinet made its decision as opposed to the content of the substantive decision itself.

To assist the Board a procedure for the call-in was circulated:

·       Opportunity for the Trade Unions to input

·       Councillor presentation of the Call-in

·       Response to the Call-in by the Cabinet

·       Summing up – 10 mins

·       Debate

·       Motions/Voting  

Following the Monitoring Officer’s introduction representatives of Trade Unions, Unite and GMB both addressed the Board and shared concerns around the call-in and the potential delay to the Pay and Reward Process and information on the union’s involvement with the Pay and Reward process up to this point.

The Lead Call-in member then went on to advise of their reasons for calling-in the decision and explained that the decision would impact almost 5000 members of staff and it was important to get this right for both staff and BCP residents. It was noted that there was a statement within the Cabinet report which made the assumption that there were no other options for the Cabinet to consider and therefore this did not allow the Cabinet to make a fully informed decision. The other members who had signed the call-in also made statements to the Board to explain their reasons for supporting the Call-in, a particular concern being that whether the information supplied to Cabinet was sufficient.

It was suggested by the Call-in members that the Board may wish to offer the following advice to Cabinet:

1. The OS board recommends that Cabinet reexamines its decision to agree the final negotiated position and financial costs associated with implementing pay and reward to consider:

a)    All options considered in formulating the final negotiated position;

b)    The short, medium and long term cost effectiveness of the final position, by comparison of all other options considered;

c)       If the annual incremental pay structure results in a structure that ensures colleagues are treated equally and fairly, and that colleagues doing the same work will receive equal pay.

2.     That following approval of Pay and Reward Cabinet requests, the Audit and Governance Committee to review the process used by the Council in formulating, negotiating and approving the pay and reward system to check that it has been conducted appropriately and in accordance with the Constitution, and to make recommendations to Council if considered necessary.

3.     That Cabinet refer the decision to Full Council due to the cumulative effect of financial implications of this decision, which would ordinarily indicate it to be a key decision.

The Call-in members wanted to ensure that what the Constitution said in terms of Key Decisions was being followed in the decision-making process.

The responsible Cabinet Portfolio Holder then went on to respond to the issues raised in the call-in. It was noted that the issue of Pay Bands had already been agreed along with the pay structure under the pay bands by the previous Conservative administration in July 2022. The report presented to Cabinet on 4 September summarised the background but did not ask Cabinet to revisit the decision on the pay structure. The decision that Cabinet was being asked to make was on the extra costs involved in the revised offer to staff. The Portfolio Holder outlined a number of instances when pay and reward had been previously considered by a scrutiny body and that the Overview and Scrutiny Board had considered a report in June 2024 when no concerns had been raised.

The Board was advised that the Pay Bands had been agreed since a 2022 decision taken by Chief Executive in consultation with the Council Leader. The Director of People and Culture went on to explain that the pay review involved a complex decision process and that a future pay model had to comply with a number of elements. The Trade Unions had their own non-negotiable points, such as that employees due a pay decrease would receive pay protection and that the distribution of impact should be across all pay bands. The model also needed to give due regard to equal pay legislation. There was a need to find a balance against all the issues to be able to come up with a solution to reach the best outcomes for colleagues and the Council.  It was also explained that the pay band differentials was fairly normal and greater differentials could be found in other local authorities’ pay structures.  The Board was advised that Trade Unions were not in favour of spot rates.

The Board sought clarification on whether the proposals offered to the Trade Unions had been agreed by Cabinet/Council. It was explained that this was made by delegated authority in consultation with the Leader.

The Monitoring Officer advised that if the Committee were minded to offer advice, there may be some legal implications and this may have an impact on the Council’s relationship with staff and there were significant issues within the Cabinet report for which there may be a requirement of legal advice to be given without the press and public present. The Board discussed this and it was agreed to hear this advice and it was therefore:

RESOLVED that under Section 100 (A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 4 in Part I of Schedule 12A of the Act and that the public interest in withholding the information outweighs such interest in disclosing the information.

In the non-public session the Board considered information provided by the Council’s legal advisors on the potential impact of a decision from the Board to offer advice.

The meeting resumed in public session.

The Lead Call-in member summarised the position regarding the call-in.

The Cabinet Portfolio Holder summarised the Cabinet’s position.

The meeting adjourned at 7:59pm and resumed at 8:06pm

The Board began debate on the call in.

A motion was proposed and seconded that the Overview and Scrutiny Board do not offer advice to the Cabinet.

Members of the Board commented that they could not see an issue to offer advice on and it appeared that, the relevant decision making was delegated to the relevant people at the relevant time. Other comments made concerned the fact that the process had already gone on for a very long time and that they did not see a reason for it to be delayed further. Opinions were also offered that it appeared that a lot of work had gone into the process and that there did not seem to be a reason to support the call-in

It was also suggested that whilst there were certain elements of the process which would have benefitted from being put more clearly within the Cabinet report or explored more thoroughly, it was not felt necessary to delay it further by offering advice to Cabinet.

It was noted that some interesting points had been made around the costs involved and that it had been good to hear the points made from officers and Portfolio Holders.

Following debate on the motion it was

RESOLVED that the Overview and Scrutiny Board do not offer advice to the Cabinet.

Voting: 9 for, 3 against, 0 abstentions

The Monitoring Officer confirmed that the decision of the Cabinet may now be implemented immediately.