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)             the meeting notes at the start of the meeting at the item ‘Reserves’ that the Reserve Member is or will be attending as a reserve;

(iv)              if a Reserve Member whose intention to attend has been noted arrives after the commencement of the meeting, then that Reserve Member can only act as a Member from the start of the next item of business on the agenda after his/her arrival.

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:

(a)               all Members of the Committee, Sub Committee, Panel or Forum;

(b)               all other Members present in any part of the room or chamber.

RESOLVED:  To note that the following interests were declared:

Agenda Items 7 – 14: Employees’ Side Report and Response on Early Engagement, Information Report – Housing Peer Review, Evaluation of Accident Statistics in Children’s Services During the Period 2009/2010, Children’s Services Transformation Stakeholder Reference Group, Information Report – Update on Youth Offending Service Reorganisation, Information Report – Update Report on Special Needs Transport, Update on Progress in Discussions on Contractual/Non Contractual Employment Policies and Procedures.

Councillor Bob Currie declared a personal interest in that he was a retired member of UNISON and his son was a Council employee.  He would remain in the room and take part in the discussion and decision making on these items.

Councillor Graham Henson declared a personal interest in that he was a member of the Communication Workers’ Union and his cousin was a Council employee.  He would remain in the room and take part in the discussion and decision making on these items.

Councillor Barry Macleod-Cullinane declared a personal interest in that his sister was a teacher.  He would remain in the room and take part in the discussion and decision making on these items.

Agenda Item 10 – Evaluation of Accident Statistics in Children’s Services During the Period 2009/10

Councillor Barry Macleod-Cullinane declared a personal interest in that he had been a Cabinet Member and the Portfolio Holder for Adults and Housing under the previous administration.  He would remain in the room during discussion and decision making on this item but would leave should his personal interest become prejudicial.

Councillor Susan Hall declared a personal interest in that she had been a Cabinet Member under the previous administration.  She would remain in the room during discussion and decision making on this item but would leave should her personal interest become prejudicial.

That the minutes of the meeting held on 30 June 2010 be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

[It was noted that the Portfolio Holder Decision had been implemented.  A recommendation could not be made to a Portfolio Holder unless it was agreed by a majority of the elected Councillors on the Forum]

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 30 June 2010, be taken as read and signed as a correct record subject to it being recorded that with regard to minute 12 the Employees Side moved an amendment to state that the minute should be modified to read that the policies contained within the Conduct, Dignity at Work and Capability suite be contractual and the associated guidance and toolkits be non-contractual.  The Council Side did not respond to the proposal.

To receive petitions (if any) submitted by members of the public/Councillors under the provisions of Executive Procedure Rule 49 (Part 4D of the Constitution).

RESOLVED:  To note the receipt of a petition containing 150 signatures regarding facilities at the Central Depot.

To receive deputations (if any) under the provisions of Executive Procedure Rule 50 (Part 4D of the Constitution).

RESOLVED:  To note that no public questions were put or deputations received.

Report from the Employees’ Side.

A report submitted by the Employees’ Side outlined its view that there had been a clear breach of the early engagement terms of reference and the agreements that both trade unions had received from the Chair of the Better Deal for Residents Forum (BDfR).  Unison and GMB requested that the Chair of the BDfR Forum adhere to the principles and agreements of engagement, or step down from the position.

The Employees’ Side stated that the Council had a responsibility to consult adequately in respect of ACAS codes of best practice for effective consultation in an environment where their members might lose their jobs and livelihood.  The interpretation of consultation by the current Chair of BDfR undermined the ability of the trade unions to consult.

An employee representative outlined key concerns as follows:

·                    the Management Response referred to agreed funding to provide additional capacity for the trade unions through the full time secondment of a trade union representative to the Joint Secretary role.  However, the Joint Secretary role had been funded through Unison for five months.  It was not a representative role but, a consistent point of contact and all issues had to go back to the unions for decision.  Due to the subsequent engagement of business partners and excessive workload, it was suggested that the unions might need to be revisit funding of the post;

·                    there had been a lack of clarity as to the purpose and form of the blueprint referred to by the Chair of BDfR;

·                    the trade unions did not support the statement that the Chair, and officers who supported the BDfR Trade Union Forum, had made all reasonable efforts to ensure that the trades unions had access to the additional information requested nor that issues raised by the trade unions had been resolved within a reasonable timescale;

·                    an explanation was sought as to why the report to Cabinet on 28 October stated that a full equality assessment had been completed.  The draft had been only been made available for union comment on the previous Friday;

·                    documentation should be made available to the unions at the start of the consultation.  Trade union members had expressed the wish for indicative ballots for action as they were not engaged at first,

·                    it was not considered conducive to good relations that the draft identified resistance from trade unions as a potential issue

Specific statements addressed to the Chair of the BDfR forum included:

·                    why were the first Outline Business Case (OBC) documents presented to the Unions identified as version 2?

·                    the outcome could be impacted by the project lead appointment being affected by the restructuring;

·                    due to the delay in offering two secondment positions, the application process was extended, but for only six days, which was insufficient;

·                    the initiation before OBC consultation ended could potentially increase staff losses by 23-24 posts;

·                    no response has been received to questions submitted by the Sports Development Team regarding proposals for deletion of posts;

·                    management had an advantage in that different processes  ...  view the full minutes text for item 22.

Report from the Divisional Director of Housing.

The Panel received a report of the Divisional Director of Housing which detailed progress against the actions that were agreed to form the basis for working arrangements between housing services and the trade unions.

It was noted that the Employees’ Side were of the opinion that two items remained unresolved.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted.

Report from the Corporate Director of Finance.

The Forum received a report of the Corporate Director Finance which had been submitted as a result of concern expressed at the previous meeting of the Forum regarding the number of physical assaults in the Children’s Services Directorate as reported in the Annual Health and Safety report.

The report evaluated the accident statistics for the financial year 2009/10.  The Forum was advised that active encouragement and resources were given to report all accidents in schools.  The Corporate Director Children’s Services informed the Forum that she would investigate issues regarding behavioural management.  In addition, she would ensure that asbestos training would be mandatory for all appropriate staff.

The Forum agreed that an Employees’ Side question regarding the statistical breakdown for each school, particularly with regard to Health and Safety Inspectorate incidents, be submitted to the Corporate Director Children’s Services and Interim Health and Safety Lead and the response be circulated.

In response to a question, the Corporate Director Children’s Services stated that, as a result of the corporate health and safety contract, the Directorate undertook a quality assurance role.  School Governors had the choice whether to buy into the contract or opt out.  She was satisfied with the training and assistance given by the health and safety unit and the current budget provision.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               the accident statistics in respect of the Children’s Services Directorate for the financial year 2009/10 be noted;

(2)               accurate and timely incident reporting to be emphasised during health and safety training and at the Education Health and Safety Forum;

(3)               it be noted that future annual health and safety reports would contain a more detailed analysis of incidents and trend analysis.

Report from the Director Schools, Quality Assurance and Commissioning.

A report of the Director of Schools Commissioning and Children’s Services informed the Forum of details of the Stakeholder Reference Group set up to manage the stakeholder engagement in the Children’s Services Transformation Programme.

The Corporate Director Children’s Services introduced the report and stated that she would welcome the contribution of the Employees’ Side.

In response to a question regarding Leaving Care – Lean project, the Forum was informed that this project examined the support young people received and identified new ways of working.  As a result of the hard work undertaken by staff, budgets had been reduced significantly.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted.

Report from the Corporate Director Children’s Services.

The Forum received an update on the Youth Offending Team reorganisation which was under review at the time of the last meeting.  Due to the subsequent resignation of a member of staff the planned reorganisation was no longer required and did not take place.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted.

Report from the Corporate Director Children’s Services.

The Forum considered a report of the Corporate Director Children’s Services which set out the response to issues raised by the Employees’ Side at the previous meeting with regard to the Special Needs Transport Service.  It was noted that information on the use of agency staff had been circulated to the Forum.

The Forum was informed that a small number of escorts and drivers continued to be provided on an agency basis, to provide flexibility whilst SNT2 was implemented.  The Corporate Director of Children’s Services undertook to investigate an issue raised by the Employees’ Side on payment made to agency staff attending at the Depot but not required to work.  The Forum was informed that agency staff ordered and subsequently not required, for example due to a sick child, received a minimum payment in accordance with a longstanding procedure.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               the report be noted;

(2)               information regarding statistics and costs be circulated to members of the Forum.

Report from the Divisional Director Human Resources and Development.

The Forum was advised of the current position following the decision of the Portfolio Holder for Performance, Customer Services and Corporate Services to commence consultation with Unison and GMB in order to implement the recommendation from the last meeting that employment policies be contractual and the associated Best Practice Notes and Toolkits be non-contractual.

The officer stated that the notes of the Corporate Joint Committee on 14 July recorded that the discussions with the unions were being held on all employment policies and procedures. Initial meetings with the unions up to 24 September had been positive.

The Forum was informed that, despite positive initial meetings, Unison withdrew from the process stating that its belief was that the Portfolio Holder’s decision applied only to the three current non-contractual procedures – Capability, Conduct and Dignity at Work.  Subsequently, a meeting was held with the Portfolio Holder on 14 October at which both unions agreed to contribute to the consultation process concerning all employment policies and procedures.

A letter from the Unison Branch Secretary dated 15 October 2010 (Appendix 1) listed conditions to which further consultation regarding employment policies and procedures should be subject.

The officer stated that discussions regarding employment policies had been taking place over a number of years.  The aim of the meetings with the unions was to seek to agree a consistent approach across all policies and procedures.

The Portfolio Holder stated that the discussions had taken place since 2007.  He was of the view that it was important to differentiate between policy and guidance elements.  The work needed to be taken forward quickly as some key areas were out of contract.

The Employees Side stated that discussions needed to be transparent.  It was of the view that the previous Portfolio Holder had had a conflict of interest.  The discussion was weighted heavily in favour of the employer and an equal status was requested.

The Employees’ Side were further of the view that the discussion at the previous meeting  related to the three Fair Treatment Suite procedures only.  A Member stated that his Group had also been under this impression which was why they had voted against the resolution.

The Divisional Director of Human Resources and Development suggested that, in meeting the objective of the trade unions that the Fair Treatment Suite policies become contractual, a discussion on all policies would be a logical consequence.  The preconditions set out in the letter from the Branch Secretary would be difficult for the authority to agree to.  Should the trade unions not withdraw the preconditions it would leave staff who transferred to other providers without the benefit of contractual status for policy within Conduct, Dignity at Work and Capability.  The recommendations to the Portfolio Holder had financial and legal implications to ensure that the necessary checks were in place.

The Employees’ Side agreed to remove the preconditions provided the discussions proceeded on a contractual basis.  It stated that the outcome should not be weighed heavily in favour of the employer.  It  ...  view the full minutes text for item 28.

Report from the Assistant Chief Executive.

This item was withdrawn from the agenda as it had been previously agreed to hold a Special meeting on the subject.