Last week The MJ asked the national employers to put their case for the revised 1%-1.25% pay offer which has caused a split among council leaders and opposition from authorities such as Birmingham City. This week, The MJ asked Birmingham City’s Cllr Alan Rudge, cabinet member responsible for equalities and HR, to explain why his council is so opposed to the revised pay offer
Times are hard in local government – and getting harder. Together with the rest of the public services, we will be paying the price of the current government’s economic policy and bail out of the banks for many years to come. So now is really not the time for us to fall out among ourselves, especially over such a fundamental issue as pay. But enough is enough.
The row over the 2009 pay offer demonstrates clearly that the current arrangements for national bargaining must be reformed, both in process terms and politically.
The latest pay offer was a disastrous public relations and reputational own-goal. Our staff have good pay and working conditions. Many of the people the city council serves are facing pay cuts and redundancy. Regrettably, Birmingham now has one of the fastest-growing rates of unemployment in the country, not least because our local economy is manufacturing based. The Engineering Employers’ Federation has just reported that 67% of engineering employers have imposed pay freezes this year. Just as local government staff must share the good times, they must also share the bad.
The national employers – rather those who are not Conservative – have shown themselves to be completely out of touch with reality. The economic challenges facing local government are enormous, and worsening fast. Birmingham, the largest local authority in England, opposed the 0.5% pay offer made in April. When it was made, we at least expected the national employers to live up to their resolve and take it off the table when rejected by the unions. Instead, they’ve found some weasel words to justify continuing to negotiate. It’s no good talking tough and then behaving in this manner. Then, even worse, without any proper consultation with councils, the employers make a new offer which will cost Birmingham more than £6m. A cost which may have to be met from reduced services and job cuts.
We don’t want our staff to be priced out of the market. My party, the Conservative Party, is the largest party in local government. We have the biggest membership of the LGA. It is outrageous, therefore, that on the essential issue of pay, we do not have the decisive say.
How did this come about? Perhaps it is unrealistic to expect the national employers to reconcile the very different perspectives of enormous unitary councils like Birmingham, district councils, the London boroughs and the shire counties.
Each of us employs staff to achieve different objectives and priorities. We operate in different and various employment markets. We must find a way of ensuring that we have greater local influence, perhaps control of pay and conditions in the future, reflective of the markets we operate within and our own business objectives. If we fail to secure this, we effectively abrogate responsibility for the largest and most vital element of our cost base. I’m afraid if this means we break up the arrangements as we currently know them, then, regrettably, so be it.
We have to ask what the national employers now contribute. With the implementation of single status, national conditions are, essentially, a framework agreement. But even so, in several areas they act as a bar to local business flexibility. Perhaps we don’t need them? If we can’t rely on pay settlements to reflect our business needs, perhaps we no longer need a nationally-negotiated pay spine either. Size helps here. The former GLC managed exceptionally well in operating its own collective bargaining systems. I suspect that Birmingham approaches a similar critical mass. Nevertheless, I prefer a more inclusive approach. The great strength of local government has been its commonality, fostering an openness in recruitment and training, and avoiding some of the worst excesses of competitive leap-frogging of grades between councils.
We must work hard to maintain this. So, I foresee a stronger development of the regional focus, working with other councils, building on the ‘local place’ concept, and perhaps embracing all public services. Among other things, this will foster efficiencies and economies of scale.
We’ve made no decisions, but my officers are actively considering the options available to us, and consulting with regional colleagues. The national employers have forced our hand but really, the current arrangements have had their day. We must face up to and deal with those issues thrown up by recent events, now.
Cllr Alan Rudge is cabinet member for equalities and HR, Birmingham City Council
The row over the 2009 pay offer demonstrates clearly that the current arrangements for national bargaining must be reformed, both in process terms and politically.
The latest pay offer was a disastrous public relations and reputational own-goal. Our staff have good pay and working conditions. Many of the people the city council serves are facing pay cuts and redundancy. Regrettably, Birmingham now has one of the fastest-growing rates of unemployment in the country, not least because our local economy is manufacturing based. The Engineering Employers’ Federation has just reported that 67% of engineering employers have imposed pay freezes this year. Just as local government staff must share the good times, they must also share the bad.
The national employers – rather those who are not Conservative – have shown themselves to be completely out of touch with reality. The economic challenges facing local government are enormous, and worsening fast. Birmingham, the largest local authority in England, opposed the 0.5% pay offer made in April. When it was made, we at least expected the national employers to live up to their resolve and take it off the table when rejected by the unions. Instead, they’ve found some weasel words to justify continuing to negotiate. It’s no good talking tough and then behaving in this manner. Then, even worse, without any proper consultation with councils, the employers make a new offer which will cost Birmingham more than £6m. A cost which may have to be met from reduced services and job cuts.
We don’t want our staff to be priced out of the market. My party, the Conservative Party, is the largest party in local government. We have the biggest membership of the LGA. It is outrageous, therefore, that on the essential issue of pay, we do not have the decisive say.
How did this come about? Perhaps it is unrealistic to expect the national employers to reconcile the very different perspectives of enormous unitary councils like Birmingham, district councils, the London boroughs and the shire counties.
Each of us employs staff to achieve different objectives and priorities. We operate in different and various employment markets. We must find a way of ensuring that we have greater local influence, perhaps control of pay and conditions in the future, reflective of the markets we operate within and our own business objectives. If we fail to secure this, we effectively abrogate responsibility for the largest and most vital element of our cost base. I’m afraid if this means we break up the arrangements as we currently know them, then, regrettably, so be it.
We have to ask what the national employers now contribute. With the implementation of single status, national conditions are, essentially, a framework agreement. But even so, in several areas they act as a bar to local business flexibility. Perhaps we don’t need them? If we can’t rely on pay settlements to reflect our business needs, perhaps we no longer need a nationally-negotiated pay spine either. Size helps here. The former GLC managed exceptionally well in operating its own collective bargaining systems. I suspect that Birmingham approaches a similar critical mass. Nevertheless, I prefer a more inclusive approach. The great strength of local government has been its commonality, fostering an openness in recruitment and training, and avoiding some of the worst excesses of competitive leap-frogging of grades between councils.
We must work hard to maintain this. So, I foresee a stronger development of the regional focus, working with other councils, building on the ‘local place’ concept, and perhaps embracing all public services. Among other things, this will foster efficiencies and economies of scale.
We’ve made no decisions, but my officers are actively considering the options available to us, and consulting with regional colleagues. The national employers have forced our hand but really, the current arrangements have had their day. We must face up to and deal with those issues thrown up by recent events, now.
Cllr Alan Rudge is cabinet member for equalities and HR, Birmingham City Council
