MEDIA RELEASE
Issued by:
Councillor Mark Johnston
Date of Issue: January 27th 2012
Contact number: 07986 540930
Lib Dem office: 0151 691 8544

LIB DEMS SAY "NO" TO 'BACKROOM DEALS'

Commenting on the use of 'compromise agreements' in relation to staff leaving the Council, Cllr Mark Johnston, Lib Dem spokesperson for employment matters said:

"I am very concerned that the use of so called 'compromise agreements' raises the question as to whether deals are being done 'behind closed doors' to cover up underlying problems, or to remove poorly performing staff quietly and quickly.

"It is extremely damaging to the Council's reputation to be perceived as behaving in this way and has led to various accusations that staff have been 'paid off' to keep quiet or been given 'golden handshakes' to go elsewhere. Already two compromise agreements have been used to remove staff involved in the scandal revealed in the AKA report, a decision that can be taken by Chief Officers, without any involvement in the decision making process by any of the Elected Members.

"I think myself, other Councillors and the wider public are very uncomfortable that former employees may be hiding behind confidentiality clauses in unaccountable and secretive compromise agreements to prevent us from hearing the truth about what has happened. I fully support my Group Leader's calls for a Full Public Inquiry, so that all those concerned can be publicly held to account.

"It's quite simple: If employees break the rules, then they should be subject to the proper disciplinary procedures. If staff are underperforming, then effective management, support and training must be provided to help them improve.

"The process for staff leaving the authority, particularly where it might involve financial arrangements, needs to be far more democratically accountable and transparent, whilst still respecting the individual rights of employees.

"This is why the Lib Dems will be proposing to the Council that better councillor oversight of the termination of employment contracts - particularly where there is a financial element - is put in place. Had this system of councillor oversight been in place when Martin Morton was paid off and pushed out the door, then the whole scandal might have come to light back then. We need to recognise that the public, quite rightly, will not accept 'deals' being done that can be perceived as being secretive, unaccountable and fly in the face of what the average person in the street would consider reasonable."


The motion for debate to be proposed at 13th Feb Council is as follows:

IMPROVING TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY OF SEVERANCE DEALS.
Proposed by: Councillor Mark Johnston
Seconded by: Councillor Tom Harney

  1. Council believes that “compromise deals” can help release employees from the work force, can be an effective tool and have a part to play in Human Resources management.
  2. However, Council also believes that “compromise deals” should be used only in exceptional circumstances and as a last resort, not a routine tool, and that any process should be democratically accountable, open and transparent.
  3. Currently, under the Scheme of Delegation of Functions to Officers (part 3, schedule 4, page 111, paragraph 28), Chief Officers have the right to make compromise deals with staff to end their employment. Such deals only have to be reported to the Employment and Appointments Committee and Members can only have a vote on the matter if there is a pensions cost.
  4. Council notes that current use of “compromise deals” can lead to the perception that deals are being done behind closed doors without the oversight of the Employment and Appointments Committee or Elected Member scrutiny.
  5. Council strongly believes that “compromise deals” that offer financial or other types of incentive, should not be used to remove poorly performing staff from the Council work force. Training, support and, ultimately, the disciplinary procedure are the correct tools to be used in relation to poorly performing staff.
  6. Council also believes that “compromise deals” should not be used to cover up underlying problems, situations of concern or to remove staff quietly and quickly.  To do so has the potential to put the Council's reputation at risk.
  7. Therefore, Council insists that all future “compromise deals”, that include an element of financial or other incentive, are subject to a full democratically accountable process. Council asks that the Employment & Appointments Committee are tasked with forming a Sub Committee to assess and sign off any compromise deals before any such offer is made to employees. The process and scope of reporting to be agreed by this Sub Committee. Members for this Sub Committee are to be co-opted from the list of Members available for the Appeals Sub Committee with a proportionality of 1:1:1. The Chair for any such meeting can be decided by agreement of the Sub Committee.
  8. Council would also ask that all such “compromise deals”, once agreed by the Sub Committee, are reported to the next meeting of the Employment and Appointments Committee, under exempt items if the details are of a sensitive nature.