Agenda and minutes

To note the attendance at this meeting of any duly appointed Reserve Members.

Reserve Members may attend meetings:-

(i)                 to take the place of an ordinary Member for whom they are a reserve;

(ii)               where the ordinary Member will be absent for the whole of the meeting; and

(iii)             after notifying the Chair at the start of the meeting.

RESOLVED:  To note the attendance at this meeting of the following duly appointed Reserve Member:-

To receive declarations of personal or prejudicial interests, arising from business to be transacted at this meeting, from all Members present.

RESOLVED: To note that the following interests were declared:

To consider whether any of the items listed on the agenda should be considered with the press and public excluded on the grounds that it is thought likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted, that there would be disclosure of confidential information in breach of an obligation of confidence or of exempt information as defined in the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985.

A representative from UNISON expressed concern that the inclusion of agenda item 10 would reduce the time for consideration of a range of issues related to the Middle Management Review.  The Chair explained that it had been included on the agenda as it was felt that a number of the conclusions of the report had implications for the Council’s staff that should not wait until the Forum’s next meeting in November 2005.

RESOLVED:  That (1) agenda item 8 be considered in conjunction with agenda item 9;

(2) in accordance with the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985, the following agenda items be admitted late to the agenda by virtue of the special circumstances and grounds for urgency detailed below:-

(3) all items be considered with the press and public present with the exception of the following items for the reasons set out below:

(Note:  Councillors Mrs Bath, Janet Cowan and Mrs Joyce Nickolay wished to be recorded as having voted for agenda items 8 and 9 to be considered under Part I of the agenda).

That the signing of the minutes of the meeting held on 5 July 2005 be deferred until printed in the next Council Bound Minute Volume.

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 5 July 2005 be deferred until printed in the next Council Bound Minute Volume.

To receive deputations (if any) under the provisions of Advisory Panel and Consultative Forum Procedure Rule 14 (Part 4E of the Constitution).

RESOLVED:  To note that no deputations were received at this meeting under the provisions of Advisory Panel and Consultative Forum Procedure Rule 14 (Part 4E of the Constitution).

To receive questions (if any) from local residents or organisations under the provisions of Advisory Panel and Consultative Forum Procedure Rule 15 (Part 4E of the Constitution).

RESOLVED:  To note that no public questions were received at this meeting under the provisions of Advisory Panel and Consultative Forum Procedure Rule 15 (Part 4E of the Constitution).

To receive petitions (if any) submitted by members of the public/Councillors under the provisions of Advisory Panel and Consultative Forum Procedure Rule 13 (Part 4E of the Constitution).

RESOLVED:  To note that no petitions were received at this meeting under the provisions of the Advisory Panel and Consultative Forum Procedure Rule 13 (Part 4E of the Constitution).

Report of the Executive Director (Organisational Development).

The Forum received a confidential report of the Executive Director (Organisational Development) and a confidential employees’ side report from UNISON on the Middle Management Review (MMR).  A representative from UNISON introduced the employees’ side report and explained the main concerns regarding the MMR process.  Among these concerns was the issue of assimilation.  The UNSION representative read an extract from the Protocol for Organisational Change, which stated that only in exceptional circumstances would staff not be assimilated.  It was further explained that this policy appeared to have changed, without the approval of the Forum.  Further concerns centered on the introduction of ‘development needs.’  The Forum was also advised of alleged inconsistencies in the selection process, whereby some candidates had been appointed with more development needs than unsuccessful candidates.  The UNISON representatives therefore urged clear guidance to be issued to those staff conducting interviews to allow for a greater degree of consistency.  It was concluded by the UNISON representative that the interviewing and selection process was subjective and open to inconsistencies.  Although UNISON recognised that the process had begun with good intentions, attention was drawn to the damaging effect upon those staff involved and the subsequent unsettling working environment.  UNISON representatives expressed doubt as to whether the Council was in a suitable position to undergo further organisational changethrough the Business Transformation Partnership (BTP).

Members were invited to comment on the employees’ side report.  The Forum discussed the role of consultants in the MMR process, including the associated costs and some of the reasons for employing consultants in certain areas of the Council.  Although the Forum recognised that the process of organisational change was rarely without a degree of unrest, Members were keen that the process be further scrutinised.

In response to the employees’ side report, officers introduced the report of the Executive Director (Organisational Development) and responded to the issues raised by UNISON representatives.  In relation to the issue of assimilation, officers confirmed that Protocol for Organisational Change had not changed since the Forum had last received a report on the document.  An officer further reported that during a series of meetings with UNISON, it was explained that jobs in the MMR would be different under the New Harrow Project, which would exclude the possibility of assimilation.  The Forum was referred to page 8 of the agenda and heard an extract of a document that had been the subject of consultation with UNISON and had been distributed to all managers, which explained that all appointments in the new structure would be subject to the same recruitment process.  The Forum was also advised that by allowing appointments to be made ‘with development needs’ a greater proportion of staff had been successful in their application.

An officer read an extract from the conclusion of the report conducted by Dr Sadhev, which gave a generally positive synopsis of the MMR process.  It was noted that a report to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee had revealed some weaknesses in the MMR, which had resulted in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 168.

Report of the Executive Director (Organisational Development).

The Forum received a confidential report of the Executive Director (Organisational Development), which reported the findings of an investigation into the Occupational Health Service and associated matters.  The Forum proposed urgent action on recommendations 13.2, 13.3 and 13.6.  Recommendations 13.1, 13.4 and 13.5 would be considered at a later date to allow UNISON an opportunity to discuss them with their Executive Committee.

RESOLVED:  That the above be noted.

The Forum was informed that a report on an investigation previously conducted would be available to Members of the Forum.  The outcome of the report would be confirmed at a later date.

RESOLVED: That the above be noted.

In accordance with the provisions of Advisory Panel and Consultative Forum Procedure Rule 12 (Part 4E of the Constitution) it was

RESOLVED:  At (1) 10.00 pm to continue until 10.15 pm; and

(2) 10.15 pm to continue until 10.25 pm.