| Time: | 3.00pm | Place: | Committee Room 1, Council Offices, Gernon Road, Letchworth Garden City |
| PRESENT: | Councillor Tricia Cowley (Chairman), Councillors T.W. Hone, Lawrence Oliver, F.J. Smith and Martin Stears-Handscomb (substitute) |
| IN ATTENDANCE: | John Robinson, Kerry Shorrocks, Liz Goddard, C Corr, Susanne Gow |
| ALSO PRESENT: | Mr B Leverett and Mrs D Levett, UNISON |
| Item | Description/Resolution | Status | Action | |
| PART I | ||||
| 1 |
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Judi Billing, for whom Councillor Martin Stears-Handscomb acted as substitute. |
Noted | ||
| 2 |
MINUTES Minutes It was agreed that the Minutes of the JSCC meeting held on 16 December 2009 be confirmed as a true record of the proceedings and be signed by the Chairman. |
Agreed | ||
| 3 |
NOTIFICATION OF OTHER BUSINESS No other items were presented for consideration by the Committee. |
Noted | ||
| 4 |
CHAIRMAN'S ANNOUNCEMENTS Members were reminded that declarations of interest in respect of any business set out in the agenda and the nature of the interest, should be declared as either a prejudicial or personal interest at the commencement of the relevant item on the agenda. Members declaring a prejudicial interest should leave the room and not seek to influence the decision during that particular item. The Chairman suggested that Agenda Item 9 be taken before Item 8, so that the chosen discussion could be held, followed by a choice being made for discussion at the next meeting in June 2010 on a date yet to be decided. Members agreed to this proposal. |
Agreed | ||
| 5 |
STAFF CONSULTATION FORUM Minutes of 20 January 2010 Minutes of 3 February 2010 Draft Minutes of 3 March 2010 The Corporate Human Resources Manager (CHRM) referred the JSCC to the Minutes for the meetings of the Staff Consultation Forum (SCF) held on 20 January, 3 February and 3 March 2010 for details of the meetings, actions taken and items carried forward. She provided a summary of the main points held at each meeting, with particular reference to: Essential Car User and Lease Car Benefits, discussion of which was ongoing through the Staff Consultation Forum; the Green Group which had now been dissolved and had been replaced by a regular item on the Staff Consultation Forum (SCF) Agenda; the staff survey which had been distributed and would be out for a total of eight weeks; the course run by HR on Managing People in Difficult Situations, a second session of which was provided on 8 March. Cllr Stears-Handscomb asked whether there was a particular problem and he was informed that there was not and that levels of stress were not particularly high. The CHRM stated that reminders would be put outside to ensure that smoking was carried out in a location where cigarette smoke could not enter DCO through the windows. Councillor Stears-Handscomb enquired as to what had happened to the staff Fair Trade Group which had operated in the past. Officers confirmed that they had no recollection of such a group, but agreed to double-check this. Discussion turned to the amount of recycling done, and the Strategic Director of Customer Services (SDCS) remarked that NHDC tried to concentrate on extracting recycling that has a value - plastics are expensive to treat. He confirmed that the Waste Team are looking at cost effective ways to recycle materials. During general discussion on the SCF Minutes, the UNISON Branch Secretary commented that communication in a big organisation is difficult and staff seem to feel that reorganisation does not involve them. He considered that the issue is to establish two-way communication. The SCF representative stated that some staff feel that there should be more consultation, while others just need to air their opinions. It was commented that hopefully the NHDC restructure process had improved over time and had been handled sensitively. It was agreed: That the information provided in the three sets of Minutes of the Staff Consultation Forum be noted. |
Agreed | ||
| 6 |
PEOPLE STRATEGY 2008/2011 - UPDATE Report and appendices The Corporate Human Resources Manager (CHRM) presented the report, and explained that three people had fallen on the ice, sustaining injuries during the bad weather in the winter months. This had put pressure on the Human Resources Department amongst others, as a member of the maternity cover had been one of the victims of the accidents, but luckily another member of staff had returned to work early which had helped enormously. The Committee were informed that the Agency Preferred Supplier Agreement project was unable to go ahead following advice from Legal Services, but matters should be in place by June/July 2010. The CHRM reported that good progress had been made with absence control, putting the target of 9 days within reach. This was remarkable in a year which had included the incidence of swine flu, falls on ice etc. Short term absence numbers were down, and all line managers had attended a Managing Absence workshop. Cllr Oliver asked for, and was given, clarification of the Solace programme. He noticed an error in the figures for turnover for April to February 2009/2010 and noted that the figure should read 7.55% instead of 7.55 days. Councillor Hone declared a personal interest in the item regarding REIP, as he sits as their NHDC representative. He suggested working with other local authorities regarding agency suppliers, to demonstrate that NHDC are providing the best value for money. The CHRM informed the Committee that the benefits of the current agency being used had been examined, together with extended options, as well as those agencies used by other local authorities. However, substantial savings had been made by having a preferred supplier arrangement. The Skills Pledge had been signed and an action plan outlined to encourage officers to attain a Level 2 qualification. A short workshop entitled ‘Working in a Political Environment' had been piloted and had received good feedback. Further workshops were planned. It was agreed: That the Committee note the progress made against the implementation of the updated People Strategy actions 2008-2011. |
Agreed | ||
| 7 |
LOCAL GOVERNMENT ANNUAL PAY NEGOTIATIONS 2010/2011 Report The Corporate Human Resources Manager (CHRM) presented her report, which was to be a standing item on the JSCC Agenda. She stated that there had been very little action on Annual Pay Negotiations, as nothing more had been heard from either the employers or the Union. The UNISON Branch Secretary declared that he had not heard anything new and that the unions were still working in the background. His opinion was that considering the rate of inflation, £500 would have kept low-paid local government employees on a par with other public sector employees and he suggested that it was not an ‘over-the-top' request for an annual pay increase. The CHRM volunteered to monitor the situation regularly and to keep the SCF representatives informed of any developments. |
Noted | ||
| 8 |
HUMAN RESOURCES STRATEGIC FORUM Topics List After some discussion, ‘Member Development' was suggested as the discussion topic for the next meeting in June, as it was observed that, except for specialist areas, some Members tended not to acknowledge that they would benefit from training and therefore had gaps in their knowledge. It was proposed that, especially with new Members who would also be offered mentoring, other local authorities could be observed to see what they did and how well they coped. Another Member proposed discussing 'Delivering More for Less', as this was seen as important in the current economic climate. From the ensuing debate, the suggestion was made that both subjects - Member Development and Delivering More for Less - be linked together, and the Committee agreed that this would be very useful. It was agreed: That the subjects to be discussed at the next meeting of the Joint Staff Consultative Committee in June 2010 be "Member Development" and "Delivering More for Less". |
Agreed | ||
| 9 |
DISCUSSION - APPRENTICESHIPS Discussion paper The Corporate Human Resources Manager (CHRM) introduced the subject of Apprenticeships for discussion. She gave a broad outline of the discussion paper and explained the new term NEET (a young person aged between 16 and 24 years who is not in employment, education or training). She also highlighted the downward spiral for some young people to drug abuse, violent crime, ill health or suicide, stressing that research in one Northern city had revealed that one in seven NEETs were dead within 10 years. NEETs were also 20 times more likely to commit a crime and 22 times more likely to be a teenage mother. It was stressed that apprenticeships can take between 1 and 4 years to complete, and that training for 16-18 year-olds is fully funded. The Committee were informed that the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) were aiming to facilitate 20,000 Backing Young Britain internships of 8-13 weeks and 5,000 two-week work placements for 18-24 year-olds. Ideally, more employers should target more posts, specifically to bring young people into the workforce. In addition, the 16-18 age group should be supported in getting qualifications for employment, combining work and study over three levels: Level 1 - 5 GCSE passes/vocational qualification at grades A-C Level 2 - 2 GCSE A levels Level 3 - Foundation degree level. The CHRM explained that the Council was committed to providing work experience places and revealed that three students from Hitchin Boys' School were currently at North Herts District Council, working in the IT, Human Resources and Waste Management departments. More places were to be offered to Knights Templar students in June 2010. The workplace barriers outlined in the Discussion Paper were emphasised as: Prejudice Buy in Manager commitment Planning (what to do/training) Support Time. Discussion ensued, with the Committee being informed that NHDC had apprentices in Museums and Building Control Services, and one was currently being recruited for Human Resources. A drive was ongoing to persuade Heads of Service to consider employing apprentices when a vacancy came up in their area. It was agreed that this scheme could result in enthusiasm and good value. The CHRM declared that Hertfordshire County Council had a good Shared Services scheme in place. The Strategic Director of Customer Services (SDCS) reminded the meeting that reduced staffing levels and outsourcing meant that opportunities for the right sort of jobs may become more limited in the future. Points were raised, covering: apprenticeship posts which could be sourced through Jobcentres; that young people could leave with a qualification; the number of apprentices in this area was not known; in smaller organisations apprentices were not immediately obvious; that managers needed to recruit young people with slightly different skills who should be given work that has value and which matters, not to be given only the dull and menial jobs; that young people generally have excellent IT skills. The Committee were informed that Hertfordshire had the lowest NEET rate in the country, below the national average, and that: Apprentices should come from North Hertfordshire; Apprenticeships should be considered first for vacancies in an organisation; Managers should be convinced to consider apprentices first for a vacancy. The Committee was reminded that work experience was provided for the second and third years of some degrees, and offered by schools in Years 10/11. Use of apprentices was becoming more important as the labour market changed dramatically, although this could change again during recessionary times. The point regarding use of apprentices by NHDC contractors was raised and it was confirmed that Stevenage Leisure Limited used them, as did the Grounds Maintenance contractor John O'Conner Ltd, but the Waste Management contractor Veolia Environmental Service had little need for apprentices, as they used unskilled labour and nothing had been included in contracts requiring the use of apprentices. The CHRM cited the bank staff at Careline as a possible user of apprentices and the Branch Chair of UNISON reminded those present that there had been an apprentice scheme in the past to employ young people who moved round departments in the Council and were paid £80 per week, which was Government funded. The CHRM agreed, and clarified that this was a Grade 1 salary, coming out at £12,000 to £15,000 per annum. It was agreed: That the discussion paper on Apprenticeships be noted. |
Agreed | ||