Agenda and minutes
PDF 211 KBVenue: County Hall, Kingston upon Thames, KT1 2DN
Contact: Andrew Baird
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND SUBSTITUTIONS
Minutes: There were none. |
|
|
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING [14 JUNE 2017]
To agree the minutes as a true record of the meeting. Additional documents: Minutes: The minutes were agreed as a true record of the meeting. |
|
|
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
To receive any declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests from Members in respect of any item to be considered at the meeting.
Notes: · In line with the Relevant Authorities (Disclosable Pecuniary Interests) Regulations 2012, declarations may relate to the interest of the member, or the member’s spouse or civil partner, or a person with whom the member is living as husband or wife, or a person with whom the member is living as if they were civil partners and the member is aware they have the interest. · Members need only disclose interests not currently listed on the Register of Disclosable Pecuniary Interests. · Members must notify the Monitoring Officer of any interests disclosed at the meeting so they may be added to the Register. · Members are reminded that they must not participate in any item where they have a disclosable pecuniary interest. Minutes: There were none. |
|
|
QUESTIONS AND PETITIONS
To receive any questions or petitions.
Notes: 1. The deadline for Member’s questions is 12.00pm four working days before the meeting (19 July 2017). 2. The deadline for public questions is seven days before the meeting (18 July 2017). 3. The deadline for petitions was 14 days before the meeting, and no petitions have been received.
Minutes: There were no question or petitions to consider. |
|
For Members to consider and comment on the Committee’s actions tracker.
Additional documents: Minutes: Declarations of interests:
None
Witnesses:
Ken Akers, Head of HR & OD Andy Baird, Regulatory Committee Manager
Key points raised during the discussions:
1. Members sought an update on the progress of Action A21/17 and requested a date when the action would be completed by. Officers advised that information was being compiled on the overhead costs to Surrey County Council (SCC) of employing part time staff and that date for completion of this action would be shared with the Committee. 2. Members requested that results of Action A22/17 be added to the Forward Plan for the People, Performance and Development Committee meeting scheduled to take place on 25 September 2017. The Committee stated that the report should clearly demonstrate the number of staff at the top of their pay band within SCC as well as outlining what the implications of the results on the Council.
Actions/ further information to be provided:
RESOLVED:
That the People, Performance and Development Committee monitored progress on the implementation of actions from previous meetings.
|
|
|
Forward Work Programme
For Members to review and comment on upcoming items due for consideration by the People, Performance and Development Committee. Additional documents: Minutes: Declarations of interest:
None
Witnesses:
Ken Akers, Head of HR & OD Andy Baird, Regulatory Committee Manager
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. Attention was drawn to the Council’s Policy Statement which was due for consideration by PPDC at its meeting on 25 September 2017. Members stressed that the Pay Policy Statement needed to be considered at this meeting to ensure that it could be put forward to Full Council for approval on 10th October 2017. 2. Discussions turned to the large number of items scheduled for consideration at the PPDC meeting on 25 September 2017 and it was agreed that the Chairman of the Committee should meet with the Head of HR & OD to review the agenda for this meeting. 3. The Chief Executive’s decision to retire meant that it was no longer necessary to assess his performance through a formal appraisal process. It was therefore agreed that the item scheduled for consideration the PPDC meeting on 30 November for PPDC to review the outcome of the Chief Executive’s appraisal should be removed from the Committee’s Forward Work Programme.
Actions/ further information to be provided:
RESOLVED:
That the People, Performance and Development Committee reviewed upcoming items due to be considered at future meetings.
|
|
|
Staff Survey Results
This report provides an update to members of the People, Performance and Development Committee (PPDC) on the results of the Staff Survey. In particular, this report looks at the services scoring below the ‘ones to watch’ category in 2015 and 2016 to better understand the work and actions being proposed in these service areas.
Minutes: Declarations of interests:
None
Witnesses:
Amy Bailey, Employee Engagement Lead Rachel Crossley, Chief of Staff
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. Clarification was sought on the Staff Survey scoring system and how it was determined whether the results achieved by a given service were considered to be good or bad. This query was raised specifically in relation to the Adult Social Care (ASC) Operations Team. Officers advised that SCC had been allocated a ‘One to Watch’ rating which was the equivalent of being assessed as ‘Good’. Best Companies, who conducted the survey, analysed the results to arrive at a score for SCC which was then benchmarked against those of other organisations which had participated in the survey. ASC Operations had been identified in the report on account of the fact that its specific score at fallen beneath the ‘One to Watch’ achieved by the rest of the organisation. An action plan had, however, been developed to target areas of concern highlighted by the survey results which sought to improve staff perceptions of communication, personal growth and wellbeing. It was agreed that the Committee would receive data on the breakdown of the Staff Survey results for the entirety of the Adult Social Care Directorate as a backdrop to the results achieved by ASC Operations. 2. Specific concerns were raised regarding the results achieved by Surrey Fire & Rescue Service (SFRS) and clarification was sought on the steps being taken to improve leadership. Members were advised that an action plan had been created to address the concerns highlighted by the survey which included introducing measures to improve staff perceptions of leadership. The Committee requested that the Chief of Staff reflect Members’ concerns on SRFS’s Staff Service results back to the Strategic Director of Environment & Infrastructure and seek assurances on how the action plan will improve leadership and communication across the Service. 3. The Committee highlighted that staff perceptions of leadership were relatively low across SCC and asked what steps could be taken to change this. Officers stressed that the Council was, by necessity, a diverse and disparate organisation due to the range of services it provides over a large geographical area which meant that a degree of disconnection from senior leaders was inevitable. Work had, however, been done with to improve how senior managers from across SCC engage with staff which it is hoped will improve how staff feel about the way in which SCC is led. Members emphasised the importance of collaborating with the Internal Communications Team to demonstrate that SCC is listening to staff by showing what steps the Council will take to ameliorate concerns articulated in the survey. 4. Discussions took place regarding whether it was necessary for the Council to conduct a Staff Survey annually. Officers indicated that it was important to have some means of understanding staff perceptions of the Council to determine the need to make improvements in how individual services or the organisation as a whole functions. Officers did, however, stress the need balance the ... view the full minutes text for item 52/17 |
|
|
Human Resources Policy update - Industrial Action Policy
To inform the People, Performance and Development Committee of amendments to the Industrial Action Policy which have been made following recent legislative changes.
Additional documents: Minutes: Declarations of interests:
None
Witnesses:
Ken Akers, Head of HR & OD Prodromos Mavridis, Senior HR Advisor (Policy)
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. The report was introduced by officers who advised the Committee that SCC’s Industrial Action Policy had been updated to reflect changes in legislation and that these were outlined within the revised Policy as outlined in Annex 1 of the report.
Action/ further information to be provided:
None
RESOLVED:
That the People, Performance and Development Committee notes the amendments to Surrey County Council’s Industrial Action Policy which have been made in response to changes in relevant legislation.
|
|
For the People, Performance and Development Committee to review and approve proposed changes to Surrey County Council’s Annual Leave Policy.
Additional documents: Minutes: Declarations of interests:
None
Witnesses:
Ken Akers, Head of HR & OD Prodromos Mavridis, Senior HR Advisor (Policy)
Key points raised during the discussions:
1. The report was introduced by officers who informed Members that amendments to SCC’s Annual Leave Policy had been instigated by case law which had demonstrated that there was a clear expectations amount the time that employees were able to carry forward annual leave accrued during a protracted period of absence. This changes also sought to remove an existing provision in the policy which enabled members of staff who were leaving the SCC to take up a position with a different employer to take their remaining annual leave allowance with them to their new employer. This was not consistent with existing employment practices and could potentially lead to extra costs for the Council. 2. The Committee suggested that amendments to the Annual Leave Policy which enabled members of staff to carry forward accrued annual leave for up to two years was generous. Officers suggested that the Policy be revised to enable staff who had been on an extended period of sick leave to carry annual leave forward for up to a year but to include a further provision within the Policy allowing this to be extended by a further year in exceptional circumstances to be agreed by the relevant strategic director as well as the Head of HR & OD. The proposed amendments to the Annual Leave Policy were agreed by the Committee and the recommendations were updated to reflect these changes.
Actions/ further information to be provided:
1. Policy to be updated to state that staff who have been on an extended period of sick leave to carry forward accrued annual leave up to a year following the period of absence. This can be extended for up to two years in exceptional circumstances with agreement from the Head of HR & OD and the relevant Strategic Director. (Action Ref: A29/17). RESOLVED: That the People, Performance and Development Committee agrees to the proposed changes to Surrey County Council’s Annual Leave Policy specifically regarding the accrual of annual leave when officers are absent due to sickness and the facility for them to take such leave during subsequent years. The updated policy allows those who have been on an extended period of sick leave to carry forward accrued annual leave up to a year and a day following the period of absence. This can be extended for up to two years in exceptional circumstances with agreement from the Head of HR & OD and the relevant strategic director. The Committee is also asked to note that the updated policy includes a codification of restrictions which apply to transferring annual leave between employers.
|
|
To provide the People, Performance and Development Committee with preliminary analysis exploring the options available to enhance the provision of key worker housing in Surrey and to determine whether further analysis into a fully costed feasibility study should be undertaken in this area.
Additional documents: Minutes: Declarations of interests:
None
Witnesses:
Ken Akers, Head of HR & OD Gill Kearney, Strategic Business Partner
Key points raised during the discussions:
1. Some Members expressed disappointment at the recommendations contained within the report and challenged officers on whether the proposals would deliver any tangible benefit in addressing staff shortages in key positions. Evidence from officers on the recruitment and retention of frontline staff at a previous PPDC meeting had stated that the cost and accessibility of housing in Surrey was making it more difficult to attract applications for vacant positions which seemed to be at odds with the conclusions drawn in the report. 2. Discussions turned to the cost of operating a key worker housing scheme given the financial resources that were required to run a similar initiative by SCC in the past. A Member of the Committee suggested that the provision of key worker housing could help to reduce the costs associated with employing locums and agency staff by improving retention of permanent staff. This was challenged by the Committee who stressed that the amount spent on locums constituted a relatively small part of SCC’s staffing budget and that the cost of operating a key worker housing scheme would outstrip any potential savings which could be achieved by reducing reliance on locums. Officers further stated that changes in legislation that brought taxation for the self-employed in line with PAYE would encourage more locums to become permanent employees and therefore contribute to a reduction in the amount that SCC was required to pay in staff salaries. 3. The Committee discussed staff members’ motives for leaving SCC to determine whether the cost and availability of housing in Surrey is a key reason why employees seek other opportunities. Officers indicated that the Council does not routinely undertake exit interviews with departing members of staff due to the difficulty in getting staff to engage meaningfully with the process although they had recently been introduced by Adult Social Care Directorate and trialled by Children’s Services for a year to contribute to their understanding of significant push factors. Members suggested that housing was not the primary concern of staff as exemplified by the low uptake of the Council’s previous key worker housing scheme. 4. Discussions took place regarding the definition of what constitutes a key worker and the processes that would be required to ensure that housing was made available to the right members of staff. Members suggested that it would be problematic to establish and resource a system that would ensure that housing was targeted at the most challenging areas of recruitment and retention for the Council. 5. Attention was drawn to recommendation ii which proposed asking district and borough councils to expand their eligibility criteria for key worker housing to include staff members from within the County Council that posed recruitment and retention challenges. Some Members suggested it was not realistic to expect district and borough councils to engage with this proposal in the absence of any recompense being offered by SCC. ... view the full minutes text for item 55/17 |
|
|
Leadership and Management Development
To provide the People, Performance and Development Committee with an update on the shape and nature of the developing leadership offer; to help build Surrey County Council’s leadership capability and culture in line with the Behaviours Framework. This follows the review of the findings outlined in the 2016 High Performance Development Programme evaluation project undertaken by the University of Surrey which was presented to the Committee in November 2016.
Additional documents: Minutes: Declarations of interests:
None
Witnesses:
Ken Akers, Head of HR & OD Lavern Dinah, Strategic OPD Manager David McNulty, Chief Executive
Key points raised during the discussions:
1. The report was introduced by officers who informed Committee Members that the decision had been taken to revise SCC’s leadership and management development offer following a review of the High Performance and Development Programme by the University of Surrey. The offer outlined within the report has identified three groups of leaders within the Council and proposes a distinct development offer for each group. Member were further advised that the proposals contained within the report focussed on self-directed learning to balance both the cost and delivery of the scheme. 2. The Committee asked about the processes in place to identify and support aspiring leaders at SCC. Officers confirmed that identifying potential in such a large organisation wasn’t straightforward but that processes were in place to support this. Managers were encouraged to talk to staff about career aspirations thereby enabling them to identify opportunities for them to achieve these. The improved appraisal process had also helped to ensure that staff had at least one conversation a year with their manager about development opportunities. This was supported by proposals contained within the leadership and development offer which enable those recognised as future leaders to participate in stretch projects designed to develop their skills and experience in a way that is cost effective. 3. Referencing the outcomes of the Staff Survey, Members enquired as to why managers were not successfully inspiring and motivating staff. Officers indicated that there had been some improvement in the extent to which staff felt motivated and listened to by leaders within the organisation but acknowledged that there was still work to do in this area. The Committee was informed that motivating and inspiring staff were perhaps the hardest elements of management and that SCC would seek to improve the way in which senior leaders reached out and articulated a clear vision for the future of the organisation. 4. Members agreed that recommendation i should be expanded to include reference to potential leaders within the Council.
Actions/ further information to be provided:
None
RESOLVED:
That the People, Performance and Development Committee: i. notes the development of corporate leadership expectations for all leaders and potential leaders employed by Surrey County Council that link to and support its behaviours framework;
ii. notes the key elements driving a different approach to the leadership offer being developed and the learning outcomes agreed; and
iii. notes the approach of targeted development for specific high priority groups of managers and leaders that include those who fulfil positions with direct impact on resident experience (frontline), and to support succession planning for those who demonstrate potential.
|
|
|
Apprenticeship Reforms Update
To update Members of the People, Performance and Development Committee on Surrey County Council’s progress with regard to targets and future plans for utilising the Apprenticeship Levy.
Minutes: Declarations of interests:
None
Witnesses:
Ken Akers, Head of HR & OD Sandie Hamilton, Learning and Development Manager
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. The Committee received an introduction to the report from officers who informed Members that SCC was required to pay 0.5% of its annual pay bill towards the Apprenticeship Levy which equated to a commitment of £2.1m every year. Officers advised that the Council would seek to leverage as much as possible from the Levy by using the scheme to improve the skill set of existing staff members which could also lead to reductions in allocations to the Council’s annual training budget of £250,000. It was further highlight that SCC also aimed to save money by hiring apprentices to fill entry level positions. Officers stated that SCC was well-positioned to take advantage of funds made available through the Levy and it was forecast that SCC would secure £2.15m from the centralised Apprenticeship Levy fund in the first year. 2. Concern was expressed by the Committee that the term ‘apprenticeship’ could deter existing staff from undertaking training courses funded by the Levy. Officers confirmed that consideration would be given to how training delivered through the Levy was marketed to staff members. 3. Members asked whether officers had considered the use of learning agreements to help SCC retain skills paid for through the Levy. Officers advised that employers were prohibited from using learning agreements for training delivered through the fund. 4. The Committee congratulated officers on the work that they had done in ensuring that the £2.1m that the Council was required to pay into the central Apprenticeship Levy fund would deliver a net benefit to the Council.
Actions None RESOLVED: That the People, Performance and Development Committee noted the contents of the report and comment on the conclusions.
|
|
|
Pay Exceptions Analysis 2016/17 Quarter 4 and End of Year report
The People, Performance and Development Committee acts as the Council’s Remuneration Committee under delegated powers, in accordance with the Constitution of the County Council. This report provides the fourth quarter and end of year 2016/17 pay exceptions analysis for consideration by the Committee.
Additional documents: Minutes: This item was considered after item 15
Declarations of interests:
None
Witnesses:
Ken Akers, Head of HR & OD
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. Members asked if the number of pay policy exceptions applied to the starting salary of social workers in the Children, Schools and Families Directorate suggested that pay bands need to be revisited to give social workers a higher starting salary. Officers stated that it had been necessary to employ a number of experienced social workers to contribute to improvements in Children’s Services following the Council’s Ofsted inspection in 2015 and buying this experience had meant temporarily approving starting salaries that were above the pay band minimum. The Committee observed that the combined cost of increased starting salaries within the Children, Schools and Families Directorate over the past two years was over £500,000 and emphasised the need for this additional expenditure to deliver improved performance within Children’s Services. 2. Discussions took place regarding whether it was necessary for the Committee to receive quarterly updates on the pay policy exceptions and agreed that PPDC should instead receive this update annually.
Actions 1. Updates on Pay Policy Exceptions should be provided to PPDC annually rather than quarterly.
Resolved: That the People, Performance Development Committee noted the analysis of pay exceptions for the period April 2016 to March 2017
|
|
|
Exclusion of the Public
Recommendation: That under Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information under the relevant paragraphs of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.
Minutes: RESOLVED: That under Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information under the relevant paragraphs of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act. |
|
|
Chief Executive Recruitment
For Members of the People, Performance and Development Committee to discuss the impact of funding cuts on Surrey County Council and changes required to the organisational structure of the Council. An introduction to the report will be provided by the Leader of the Council.
Minutes: Declarations of interest:
None
Witnesses:
Ken Akers, Head of HR & OD David McNulty, Chief Executive
Key points raised during the discussions:
The report was introduced by officers. The Committee asked a number of questions which were responded to by the officers present before moving to recommendations.
Actions/ further information to be provided:
The Committee agreed a number of actions which are recorded in the Part 2 minutes. |
|
|
Educational Psychology Service
This report sets out a business case to increase the pay band range for Educational Psychologists in accordance with the local discretion available to the People, Performance and Development Committee as part of the national Soulbury Committee agreement on terms and conditions of employment.
Minutes: Declarations of interest:
None
Witnesses:
Ken Akers, Head of HR & OD
Key points raised during the discussions:
The report was introduced by officers. The Committee asked a number of questions which were responded to by the officers present before moving to recommendations.
Actions/ further information to be provided:
The Committee agreed a number of actions which are recorded in the Part 2 minutes.
|
|
|
Pay Policy Exceptions July 2017
The People, Performance and Development Committee acts as the Council’s Remuneration Committee under delegated powers in accordance with the Constitution of the County Council. The purpose of this paper is to highlight decisions taken and recommendations on pay that fall outside the published Pay Policy and amendments to existing Surrey Pay policies. This report includes a range of pay exceptions and staff related decisions that require a decision by the Committee.
Minutes: Declarations of interest:
None
Witnesses:
Ken Akers, Head of HR & OD
Key points raised during the discussions:
The report was introduced by officers. The Committee asked a number of questions which were responded to by the officers present before moving to recommendations.
Actions/ further information to be provided:
The Committee agreed a number of actions which are recorded in the Part 2 minutes.
|
|
|
Publicity of Part 2 Items
To consider whether the item considered under Part 2 of the agenda should be made available to the press and public. Minutes: It was agreed that the information in relation to Part 2 items discussed at this meeting would remain exempt.
|
|
|
DATE OF NEXT MEETING
The next meeting of People, Performance and Development Committee will be on 25 September 2017. Minutes: The Committee noted that its next meeting would be held on 25 September 2017.
|