Agenda item

MOTION: IMPROVING TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY

Minutes:

Proposed by Councillor Mark Johnston

Seconded by Councillor Tom Harney

 

(1)  Council believes that “compromise deals” can help release employees from the work force, can be an effective tool and have a part to play in Human Resources management.

 

(2)  However, Council also believes that “compromise deals” should be used only in exceptional circumstances and as a last resort, not a routine tool, and that any process should be democratically accountable, open and transparent.

 

(3)  Currently, under the Scheme of Delegation of Functions to Officers (part 3, schedule 4, page 111, paragraph 28), Chief Officers have the right to make compromise deals with staff to end their employment. Such deals only have to be reported to the Employment and Appointments Committee and Members can only have a vote on the matter if there is a pensions cost.

 

(4)  Council notes that current use of “compromise deals” can lead to the perception that deals are being done behind closed doors without the oversight of the Employment and Appointments Committee or Elected Member scrutiny.

 

(5)  Council strongly believes that “compromise deals” that offer financial or other types of incentive, should not be used to remove poorly performing staff from the Council work force. Training, support and, ultimately, the disciplinary procedure are the correct tools to be used in relation to poorly performing staff.

 

(6)  Council also believes that “compromise deals” should not be used to cover up underlying problems, situations of concern or to remove staff quietly and quickly. To do so has the potential to put the Council’s reputation at risk.

 

(7)  Therefore, Council insists that all future “compromise deals”, that include an element of financial or other incentive, are subject to a full democratically accountable process. Council asks that the Employment & Appointments Committee are tasked with forming a Sub-Committee to assess and sign off any compromise deals before any such offer is made to employees. The process and scope of reporting to be agreed by this Sub-Committee. Members for this Sub-Committee are to be co-opted from the list of Members available for the Appeals Sub-Committee with a proportionality of 1:1:1. The Chair for any such meeting can be decided by agreement of the Sub-Committee.

 

(8)  Council would also ask that all such “compromise deals”, once agreed by the Sub-Committee, are reported to the next meeting of the Employment and Appointments Committee, under exempt items if the details are of a sensitive nature.

 

Amendment submitted in accordance with Standing Order 7(2)

 

Proposed by Councillor Ann McLachlan

Seconded by Councillor Adrian Jones

 

Delete everything and replace with the following:

 

Council welcomes any proposals which improve transparency and accountability across all Council decision-making processes, but believes that Compromise Agreements are an effective protection for the Authority against post-employment claims of unfair or other forms of dismissal from former employees.

 

Council further believes that the delegation of powers to Chief Officers to enter into such agreements should not be undermined as they can be an effective management measure to deal with a range of employment situations.  To require such agreements to be signed off by elected members would create a layer of bureaucracy unnecessary in an organisation which has confidence in its senior managers to manage the workforce effectively.

 

Council recognises that a Compromise Agreement should not be used in circumstances where it would be more appropriate to use the Authority Capability procedure or its Disciplinary procedure.

 

Having applied the guillotine in accordance with Standing Order 7(8) the Council did not debate this matter.

 

The amendment was put and lost (29:36) (One abstention).

 

The motion was put and carried (36:29 (One abstention).

 

Resolved (36:29) (One abstention) –

 

(1)  Council believes that “compromise deals” can help release employees from the work force, can be an effective tool and have a part to play in Human Resources management.

 

(2)  However, Council also believes that “compromise deals” should be used only in exceptional circumstances and as a last resort, not a routine tool, and that any process should be democratically accountable, open and transparent.

 

(3)  Currently, under the Scheme of Delegation of Functions to Officers (part 3, schedule 4, page 111, paragraph 28), Chief Officers have the right to make compromise deals with staff to end their employment. Such deals only have to be reported to the Employment and Appointments Committee and Members can only have a vote on the matter if there is a pensions cost.

 

(4)  Council notes that current use of “compromise deals” can lead to the perception that deals are being done behind closed doors without the oversight of the Employment and Appointments Committee or Elected Member scrutiny.

 

(5)  Council strongly believes that “compromise deals” that offer financial or other types of incentive, should not be used to remove poorly performing staff from the Council work force. Training, support and, ultimately, the disciplinary procedure are the correct tools to be used in relation to poorly performing staff.

 

(6)  Council also believes that “compromise deals” should not be used to cover up underlying problems, situations of concern or to remove staff quietly and quickly. To do so has the potential to put the Council’s reputation at risk.

 

(7)  Therefore, Council insists that all future “compromise deals”, that include an element of financial or other incentive, are subject to a full democratically accountable process. Council asks that the Employment & Appointments Committee are tasked with forming a Sub-Committee to assess and sign off any compromise deals before any such offer is made to employees. The process and scope of reporting to be agreed by this Sub-Committee. Members for this Sub- Committee are to be co-opted from the list of Members available for the Appeals Sub-Committee with a proportionality of 1:1:1. The Chair for any such meeting can be decided by agreement of the Sub-Committee.

 

(8)  Council would also ask that all such “compromise deals”, once agreed by the Sub-Committee, are reported to the next meeting of the Employment and Appointments Committee, under exempt items if the details are of a sensitive nature.