To receive any apologies for absence

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Burbage, Dr Evans, Mrs Jones and Saunders.

To receive any declarations of interest

Councillor Story stated that his wife was an employee of RBWM but that this did not result in any conflict with the items on the agenda.

To consider the Part I minutes of the meetings held on 13 and 29 October 2015

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Part I minutes of the meetings held on 13 and 29 October 2015 be approved.

To consider the above report

Members considered the Trade Union pay claim for 2016/17.

Arron Jones, a representative of UNISON, addressed the Panel. Mr Jones stated that UNISON was requesting a 3% pay rise across all bands to match inflation and meet the cost of living increases employees were facing. He was aware that the borough had experienced recruitment and retention issues and asked whether Members had considered how much the use of locum and agency staff would reduce if a pay rise was awarded?

Councillor Dudley explained that an important element for consideration of wage growth was disposable earnings. Under both the coalition and the new Conservative government there had been an increase in the tax free allowance element, the introduction of the national living wage and an increase in free childcare. It was clear that there had therefore been attempts to address the issue of disposable earnings, particularly for those on a lower income. For a number of years the borough had focussed increases to salaries of those in lower pay bands. The council had now introduced a pay reward scheme to incentivise and reward those performing above average. The council was extremely interested in retaining the highest quality staff and having a remuneration scheme to achieve that. There were some specific areas that caused problems, such as children’s social workers and planning. In these instances the terms and conditions had been reviewed. The council tried to be proactive in addressing areas of weakness.

Mr Jones commented that CPI was being used as a measure of disposable income, however he felt that this failed to adequately measure the pressures facing a working household.

Councillor Dudley responded that before the Pay Reward scheme had been brought in, the focus had been on increases for those in lower salary grades. The council would soon be in a position where every employee earned more than the national living wage. The Head of HR confirmed that the Panel would receive a report in January 2016 to address the government’s proposals.

It was confirmed that Members had received UNISON’s survey comments on the Pay Reward scheme when the Panel had reviewed the scheme earlier in 2015. Councillor Dudley commented that one area of concern raised in the survey had been disqualification based on sick leave. Members had agreed with the comments and modified the scheme. The change had been communicated to all employees and fed back to the Trade Unions.

Councillor Brimacombe commented that any Pay Reward scheme needed core principles. It was right, decent and moral to move to a position whereby every employee was paid above the living wage. Any percentage increase was worth less the lower your salary; therefore increments every year were important.  However it was also important to be conscious of the large volume of employees that would be involved and therefore the large bill that resulted. The more an individual earned the more career focussed they were and scarcity in the market meant they were more likely to move jobs. Therefore pay  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

To consider passing the following resolution:-

“That under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the remainder of the meeting whilst discussion takes place on items 6-7 on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 1-7 of part I of Schedule 12A of the Act"

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the remainder of the meeting whilst discussion took place on items 6-7 on the grounds that they involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 1-7 of part I of Schedule 12A of the Act.

To consider the Part II minutes of the meetings held on 13 and 29 October 2015.

To consider the above report