ASSET MANAGEMENT

Report as inappropriate Your report has been received

Shared by: HC12091622321

Tags

Stats

views:: 9
posted:: 9/16/2012
language:: Unknown
pages:: 9

Public Domain

Document Sample

CORPORATE RESOURCES AND IMPROVEMENT OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE
4 JANUARY 2010

CORPORATE RESOURCES AND IMPROVEMENT OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY
COMMITTEE, HELD IN COMMITTEE ROOMS 1/2/3, CIVIC OFFICES, ANGEL
STREET, BRIDGEND ON MONDAY, 4 JANUARY 2010 AT 2.00PM.

Present:
Councillor R D L Burns - Chairperson

Councillors Councillors Councillors

D A D Brett D R Pugh P J White
N Clarke M Reeves M C Wilkins
G Davies M Thomas H M Williams
M Lewis

Officers:

L Darley - Scrutiny Officer
S Davies - Legal Officer
A Rees - Senior Cabinet and Committee Officer

Invitees:

Councillor H J David - Cabinet Member - Resources
A Phillips - Head of Property and Finance
J Smith - Chief Accountant
D MacGregor - Assistant Chief Executive - Corporate Development and
Partnerships
S Kingsbury - Head of Human Resources
L Hutton - Employee Resourcing Manager
J Iles - Branch Secretary - UNISON
J Hughes - Assistant Branch Secretary - UNISON
N Birkin - Branch Secretary - GMB

63 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

Apologies were received from the following Members and Officers for the reasons
so stated:-

Councillor P A Evans - Attending a Funeral
Councillor M Gregory - Holidays
Councillor E M Hughes - Holidays

G Moss - Corporate Director - Resources - Unwell

64 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Councillor R D L Burns declared a personal interest in Agenda Item 5 -
Centralisation of HR as he was formerly a Cabinet Member when the
centralisation of HR was initiated.

65 MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING

The minutes of the meeting held on the 9 November 2009 were approved as a
true and accurate record.

69
CORPORATE RESOURCES AND IMPROVEMENT OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE
4 JANUARY 2010

The Scrutiny Officer advised further to minute number 5 - Quarterly Budget
Monitoring that the sum of £100k had been allocated for the demolition of the
former Maesteg School Site in the Capital Minor Works Budget. He also advised
that the actual expenditure incurred in land compensation payments was £238k
and of that, £206k was funded by the Welsh Assembly Government, the
embankment work however would not be covered by WAG funding.

66 DRAFT BUDGET PROPOSALS

The Scrutiny Officer introduced the report on the Draft Cabinet Budget Proposal
for 2010/11. He stated that a Research and Evaluation Panel had undertaken an
investigation in respect of the budget setting process and the role of this
Committee was two fold, namely to consider the overall presentation of the draft
budget proposals in general and specifically to consider the proposals as they
relate to the service areas within the Committees remit and to offer any comment
and recommendations to Cabinet.

The Committee questioned the impact the reduction in the cost of the annual
canvass following a review of processes would have on encouraging people to
register on the electoral register. The Head of Property and Finance informed the
Committee that the reduction had been achieved following a review of processes
by Electoral Services in making minor adjustments to its processes which would
not impact on the public wishing to register.

The Committee questioned whether the settlement of 2.6% included the transfer
of monies for the new Welsh medium school and also whether the Welsh
Assembly Government had waived the requirement for the Council to make
efficiency savings. The Head of Property and Finance informed the Committee
that the level of increase for Welsh Local Authorities was 2.1% for 2010-11,
however the Council would receive a settlement of 2.6% which included the
transfer of monies in respect of the new Welsh medium school. The increased
settlement was dependent on the funding formula used and almost half of the
difference between the Council’s settlement and the Welsh average was down to
the monies in respect of the new Welsh medium school and the better settlement
in the funding formula. The Chief Accountant advised that there was still an
expectation for efficiency saving of 1% to be made. The Head of Property and
Finance informed the Committee that 1% had been put in the budget as pay
inflation, whilst the Council’s settlement from WAG was slightly higher and
expectations from Directorates for growth is more realistic. The Finance
Department had been co-ordinating a rolling programme of base budget reviews
with information being provided on the Members intranet site. The aim of this
process was to change the way in which services were delivered.

The Head of Property and Finance clarified that the average increase for all
Welsh local authorities in the provisional revenue support grant settlement was
2.1%, the Council had been allocated 2.6%, of which £500,000 would be
allocated to the new Welsh medium school and the remaining £500,000
attributable to the Council receiving a better settlement.

The Committee requested clarification on the energy reserve being reduced by
£200k due to lower tariff rates which had been negotiated. The Head of Property
and Finance informed the Committee that the review of energy tariffs were
staged throughout the year, with groups of similar sized schools being reviewed
at the same time. The Cabinet Member - Resources commented on the success
of the procurement of energy as part of the Welsh Purchasing Consortium which
afforded local authorities significant buying power.

70
CORPORATE RESOURCES AND IMPROVEMENT OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE
4 JANUARY 2010

The Head of Property and Finance undertook to provide the Committee with
details of the Council’s spend on energy and the savings which had been
accrued.

The Committee requested clarification on the budget reduction relating to the
review of communications and marketing/design operations would not affect the
production of the Member newsletter as part of Member Development. The
Cabinet Member - Resources provided that assurance.

The Committee questioned the growth requirement of £75k for IT software,
licences and an increase in support. The Head of Property and Finance informed
the Committee that IT costs in the Authority had been centralised and licences
reviewed, however there had been an above inflation increase in licence costs
from software suppliers.

The Committee requested that it be provided with an analysis of software costs
and the reasons in the increase in support costs.

The Committee questioned the effect of the budget reductions on the Property
Portfolio. The Head of Property and Finance informed the Committee that a
restructure of staffing had been undertaken in the Property Section, however the
savings would not impact on the repairs and maintenance budget on buildings.

The Committee expressed concern at the descriptions used in the impact column
to describe the budget reductions in the Resources Directorate under items 19,
20 and 22.

The Head of Property and Finance referred to areas of the budget which were
difficult to manage, namely pensions and insurance. He stated that the Highways
Department had brought in a procedure to repudiate claims by the introduction of
an inspection process which protected the Council from claims relating to the
highway. He stated that £100k had been taken out of the insurance budget as a
result of a review of insurance policies, however the insurance market was known
to be volatile.

Conclusions:

1. The Committee noted the content of the report and appendices.

2. The Committee considered that the information provided within the draft
growth and reduction proposals should have contained more detail.

3. Members expressed concern over the potential level of additional savings
required identified within Table 2 of the Cabinet report. The Committee
considered that more information should be provided explaining potential
options for alternative service delivery that could enable the Authority to
achieve the required additional savings of £2,454,000 in 2011/12 and
£5,540,000 in 2012/13.

4. With regard to reference 23 of the growth proposals, the Committee
requested that information be provided on how above inflationary
increases in software licences could be contained in the future.

5. The Committee was concerned at the level of budget reductions on
building maintenance would have on service delivery.

71
CORPORATE RESOURCES AND IMPROVEMENT OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE
4 JANUARY 2010

67 JOB EVALUATION UPDATE

The Scrutiny Officer introduced a report which provided an indication on the
progress being made with the Council’s Job Evaluation exercise. The Committee
had previously determined to include the project on its Forward Work Programme
in order to continue to monitor its progress. The Committee had requested that
representation from the Trade Unions be invited to present their perspective on
the progress of the exercise. He stated that information had been provided in the
officers report as to the position of other Welsh local authorities in relation to the
Job Evaluation Exercise. Information had also been sought from Neath Port
Talbot County Borough Council’s website on the impact of implementing Job
Evaluation.

The Transformation and Development Manager in her role as Job Evaluation
Project Manager provided an update on the Job Evaluation Project and on Equal
Pay. The Council in partnership with Trade Unions is using the Greater London
Provincial Council (GLPC) Job Evaluation Scheme to evaluate posts to fairly and
accurately determine the rank order of jobs across the Council. Job Evaluation
sought to objectively measure the different elemental parts of a job and provide a
score. All jobs are scored in the same way, giving a comparison of jobs across
the Council. A revised project plan had been developed for Phase 2 of the
project which identified key milestone dates in implementing a new pay and
grading structure by February 2011.

A number of issues had been raised by the Committee previously on Job
Evaluation and the Council’s Transformation and Development Manager provided
additional information, namely a Glossary of Terms which were often used in Job
Evaluation.

The Transformation and Development Manager outlined the communication
strategy which had been developed and agreed with the Trade Unions whereby
stakeholders would be kept informed of significant milestone dates within the
project and progress being made, this also included regular staff bulletins being
issued to all employees. The Committee was informed of the workforce data as
at the 12 December 2009. The communication bulletins are to be issued jointly
with the Trade Unions to ensure all employees were made aware of progress
throughout the next year. Employees, whether in a Trade Union or not will be
notified of any Trade Union ballots of their membership via a Bridgenders bulletin
issued before and after and on the Council’s Intranet. The Council had a
statutory duty to notify each individual, in writing, of the outcome of Job
Evaluation and of all changes affecting their terms and conditions of employment
including pay.

The Transformation and Development Manager advised the Committee on the
potential options for a pay and grading structure, the adoption of a new pay and
grading structure would be subject to an independent equality impact assessment
in accordance with equal pay legislation and would be robust enough to establish
a defence against potential future equal pay claims.

The position of other Welsh local authorities in relation to single status and job
evaluation was outlined.

The Trade Union representative commented that the number of staff shown as
being in a Trade Union in the workforce data would be higher as not all staff

72
CORPORATE RESOURCES AND IMPROVEMENT OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE
4 JANUARY 2010

made Trade Union contributions through the TRENT payroll system but by
means of Direct Debit.

The Assistant Chief Executive - Corporate Development and Partnerships
informed the Committee that Steffan Cross is a firm of Solicitors who represent
employees in equal pay claims. The Trade Union representatives concurred that
Steffan Cross Solicitors had attempted to get a foothold in representing
employees in English local authorities in connection with equal pay claims and
had also recently attempted to establish a similar foothold in some Welsh local
authorities and there was very little appetite from employees to use their services.

The Committee questioned whether the implementation date for Job Evaluation
of April 2010 was on target to be achieved. The Transformation and
Development Manager informed the Committee that the implementation date for
the project was now February 2011, this was due to the project being re-scoped
in order to adopt a more consistent approach. A large number of jobs had been
evaluated and it was important that each job was evaluated appropriately which
resulted in all forms having to be re-checked. Separate to the Job Evaluation
process was the pay and grading structure which was subject to affordability and
fairness, there were a number of different pay and grading structures that could
be utilised . Pay modelling was taking place as jobs were being evaluated.
Equal Pay claims were being received which were being dealt with in parallel to
Job Evaluation. The Trade Union representatives expressed their
disappointment that the implementation of Job Evaluation had been delayed but
preferred this course of action in order to get the scheme right. The Trade Union
representatives confirmed that there were a significant number of equal pay
claims being made.

The Committee asked whether employees were made aware of progress which
had been made with the Job Evaluation process. The Assistant Chief Executive -
Corporate Development and Partnerships informed the Committee that the Job
Evaluation process had commenced some time ago and that both sides were
together in this process. Significant progress had been made in the last two
years, the range and disparity for like jobs was immense which was being worked
through with the Trade Unions. He commentated that the Job Evaluation process
would need to be completed before a pay and grading structure could be
recommended. The timescale to deliver Job Evaluation by February 2011 was
tight.

The Committee was informed of the importance of not evaluating like jobs in
isolation as it gave rise to equal pay claims. The objective was to have a fair pay
and grading structure in place, given that like jobs had different demands placed
on them.

The Committee requested information on the composition of the Job Evaluation
project board. The Assistant Chief Executive - Corporate Development and
Partnerships advised that the Group comprised of himself, the Head of Human
Resources, the Head of Property and Finance and the Transformation and
Development Manager on the management side and the Trade Unions were
represented by regional representatives and local representatives. The Board
met on a monthly basis and had developed a communication strategy to update
all employees. The Head of Human Resources informed the Committee that all
staff received regular bulletins irrespective of whether they were in a Trade Union
or not.

73
CORPORATE RESOURCES AND IMPROVEMENT OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE
4 JANUARY 2010

The Committee questioned whether the technical nature of jobs had been
recognised during the Job Evaluation process. The Assistant Chief Executive -
Corporate Development and Partnerships confirmed that the content and
supervision aspect of jobs was taken into account in the Job Evaluation process.
The Transformation and Development Manager informed the Committee that the
Greater London Provincial Council Job Evaluation Scheme had been a tried and
tested scheme and outlined the requirements of the Job Evaluation questionnaire
and the waiting used. The GLPC scheme involved the use of software in
evaluating jobs, there was no scope for any human input when assessing forms.
The Transformation and Development Manager informed the Committee that
questions on the Job Evaluation questionnaire were weighted. In response to
question from the Committee, the Trade Union representatives felt that their
members were concerned at the implementation of the Job Evaluation but it was
hoped that appeals would be kept to a minimum. The Trade Union
representatives referred to the completion of the implementation of Job
Evaluation by Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council and expressed concern
at the length of time at the implementation of Job Evaluation by BCBC. The
Trade Union representatives felt that equal pay was more of a priority than Job
Evaluation, however it was important that both schemes were correct.

The Committee requested information on the amount of research allocated for
Job Evaluation and that there had been no increase in the budget provision. The
Assistant Chief Executive - Corporate Development and Partnerships informed
the Committee that there had been an increase in the provision in the budget for
Job Evaluation, the cost of equal pay claims was not known as this was given
directly to the Solicitors acting for the Council to respond in a timely way in order
to defend the Council’s position. The Council’s budget had provision for £3m
each year for Job Evaluation and equal pay claims. The Head of Property and
Finance informed the Committee that equal pay claims were being defended and
the Welsh Assembly Government had made available borrowing consent which
was at the expense of funding for other services. Provision had been made in
the budget of £3m for the last three years in order to protect pay. The Assistant
Chief Executive - Corporate Development and Partnerships confirmed that the
provision of £3m in the budget was for Job Evaluation and Equal Pay claims.

The Committee asked whether consideration had been given to a maximum cap
for potential reductions to pay. The Head of Human Resources informed the
Committee that negotiations had commenced on the protection of salaries.

Conclusions:

1. The Committee determined to continue monitoring the progress of the Job
Evaluation exercise and a report on progress be made to the Committee
in six months.

2. The Committee be provided with the gant chart on the Job Evaluation
Project so that it was kept informed of progress and that the Committee
requested minutes of the Project Board for information.

3. The Committee congratulated Linda Hutton on her new post and wished
her well for the future.

4. The Committee requested information on what continuity arrangements
would be put in place on the project as the Project Manager would be
leaving the Authority.

74
CORPORATE RESOURCES AND IMPROVEMENT OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE
4 JANUARY 2010

68 CENTRALISATION OF HR

The Scrutiny Officer introduced the report on the Centralisation of HR which
formed the second of a two part review of the Centralisation of Services. The aim
of the review was to identify the different effects of centralisation of the ICT and
HR functions. This will be achieved by comparing and contrasting the different
experiences of the two services by means of considering key questions with
invitees.

Comparisons of the Human Resources and ICT Services were reported to the
Committee.

The Assistant Chief Executive - Corporate Development and Partnerships
informed the Committee that it was difficult to compare the centralisation of the
HR and ICT functions as they were very different services to each other. The
Head of HR informed the Committee that the centralisation of the Human
Resources Service took place as of the 1 April 2007. The initial phase was
designed to bring the devolved HR Sections together into a single location;
restructure the management arrangement within one service unit and deliver
savings on employees costs, a notional cost of £369k per annum was set by the
HR Programme Board. The second phase was to develop further actions in
connection with Shared Services. The initial phase was completed within
timescale and provided savings in excess of the target. The Head of HR outlined
the medium term effect of centralisation in that significant savings had been
achieved, in excess of £0.5m. There had been a greater level of consistency and
advice from the Employee Relations Team, whilst the Criminal Records Bureau
Team had been the subject of an internal audit and a business process re-
engineering exercise. Key policies had been agreed with the Trade Unions.
Upgrades had been carried out to the TRENT system and the new organisational
structures in TRENT were in the process of being re-built and it was only after
this and an assurance about data integrity that the Authority could look to
consider any element of “self-serve”.

The centralisation of the Corporate and Social Care Workforce Development
Programme Teams had not altered the impact of either team. The loss of the
Development Manager who had been promoted elsewhere in the organisation,
the need to reduce budgets and the possibility that the services will transfer to a
Shared Services Organisation meant that an interim structure was in place for the
remainder of the financial year. He also reported that the Health and Safety
Team which was under her remit had been the subject of an internal audit and
shown promising signs of improvement. Should the Shared Services Project be
approved this will re-present the changes faced by the centralisation of HR,
possibly on a bigger scale. If the Shared Services Project did not proceed, it is
likely that the service unit will need to engage with other similar initiatives for
example, collaborative working across local government in Wales.

The Committee questioned the effects on employees within the HR service as a
result of a relatively large number of redundancies and also some officers
remaining unable to let go of the past. The Head of HR commented on the
difficulties which had been overcome over the last two years in centralising HR.

The Committee questioned as to why the HR service did not have Investors in
People accreditation. The Head of HR informed the Committee that IIP
accreditation was generally for the whole of the organisation to achieve, the HR
function had focussed its attention on every day services, job evaluation and data
cleansing of the TRENT system and progressing the Shared Services Project. A

75
CORPORATE RESOURCES AND IMPROVEMENT OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE
4 JANUARY 2010

customer survey had been carried out in respect of the HR service and a number
of audits undertaken on the Health and Safety, CRB Team and Payroll Team
which showed signs of improving.

The Committee questioned the progress being made to rationalise mileage rate
to produce an annual saving of £400k which had been rejected by UNISON. The
Head of HR informed the Committee that a decision would need to be taken on
the implementation of mileage rates rationalisation, however the Trade Unions
felt that negotiations should not be taking place on part three rates.

The Committee questioned the collaborative working with Newport City Council
on securing more favourable rates that HAYS provide to the Authority for agency
workers. The Head of HR informed the Committee that directorates had been
instructed to monitor the use of agency workers in the Authority, there was no
direct impact on the use of agency workers on HR as the costs of engaging
agency workers was paid for by directorates.

The Committee questioned whether new employees would be placed on the
proposed new mileage rate. The Head of HR informed the Committee that no
new rates could be imposed on new employees as this would give rise to equal
pay claims.

The Committee commented that not all of the objectives of the HR Flagship
Project had been achieved and questioned whether the performance had been
measured or whether customer satisfaction surveys had been carried out. The
Head of HR informed the Committee that a customer satisfaction survey would
be carried out later in 2010. As highlighted the achievements of the initial phase
of the HR Flagship Project. The HR Service had been subject of reports by
internal audit, the Council’s Occupational Health provider, whilst the Council’s HR
policies were in better shape now. The establishment of the Centre of Excellence
had brought about improved project management methodology with a standard
approach being taken in the implementation of projects. Monthly meetings were
taking place with Directorate Support Business Managers to discuss sickness
absence and regular meetings were taking place with the Council’s Occupational
Health provider.

The Assistant Chief Executive - Corporate Development and Partnerships
referred to the report of the Internal Audit Service on the centralisation of HR
which found that there was a lack of corporate direction previously with the
devolved HR Units operating within individual directorates. He commented that
on the difficulties of comparing the centralisation of HR with the centralisation of
the ICT Service. He stated that he had been encouraged with the feedback
received from directorates following the centralisation of HR although there were
still issues which needed to be progressed. He also referred to the impact on
staff following the large number of redundancies in HR and that the Head of HR
had worked with her managers to be more customer focussed. He also referred
to the more structured approach of looking at projects following the introduction of
the Centre of Excellence.

Conclusions:

1. The Committee requested a report on the current status of the Shared
Service Project. Members asked that this report outline the business case
for the project and detail how the Authority, as the Lead Authority in the
project intends to implement the lessons learned from the Centralisation
experience that occurred within HR. The Chair suggested that if there

76
CORPORATE RESOURCES AND IMPROVEMENT OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE
4 JANUARY 2010

were any commercial sensitivities surrounding the project that the
Committee could consider the issue as a confidential item.

2. The Committee tasked the Scrutiny Unit to develop a process to enhance
the interface between Audit and Scrutiny in order to avoid duplication of
effort in the monitoring of the Outcomes of the Audit reports on the
Centralisation of HR and ICT.

3. The Committee be provided with information on the financial cost of the
centralisation process.

4. That if the proposed £400k on the rationalisation of mileage rates was not
approved that it be referred to the Budget Research and Evaluation
Panel.

69 FORWARD WORK PROGRAMME UPDATE

The Scrutiny Officer presented a report outlining the items due to be considered
at the meeting on the 18 January 2010 and sought confirmation of the information
required for the meeting to be held on the 22 February 2010.

Conclusion:

The Committee noted the topics due to be considered at the meeting on the 18
January 2010 and the 22 February 2010 and agreed the invitees it wished to
attend.

The meeting closed at 5.05pm.