Agenda item

At this juncture all officers affected by the proposals contained within the following item of business left the meeting in accordance with Standing Order 25.

DECLARATIONS OF INTERESTS

Prior to the consideration of the following item of business, a number of members declared interests as follows:-

Depute Provost Dunbar and Councillors Dean, Fletcher, McCaig and John West declared interests as members of the Appeals Committee, left the meeting and took no part in the Council’s deliberations thereon. Councillor Cormack declared an interest as Convener of the Appeals Committee, left the meeting and took no part in the Council’s deliberations thereon.

A number of members declared interests and chose not to withdraw from the meeting, namely Councillor Crockett (as a member of the Appeals Committee and Unite); Councillor Farquharson (as a member of the Appeals Committee); Councillor Graham (as a member of Unite); Councillors Ironside, Kevin Stewart and Yuill (as members of Unison); and Councillor Kiddie (as a retired member of Unison).

With reference to Article 11 of the minute of its meeting of 30^th June 2010, the Council had before it a report by the Director of Corporate Governance which outlined the progress that had been made in discussions with trade unions on the payment of increments and how these were to be funded during 2010/11.

The report advised that negotiations had been led by the Director of Corporate Governance and a number of options had been considered. Following discussions, a preferred option had been developed and the trade unions had agreed to consult their members on the proposal, with the consultation concluding on 3^rd September 2010. The detail of the proposal was provided in Appendix A to the report. The report explained that the proposal sought to apply spare spinal column points on the COSLA pay spine that were not currently used in the Council’s pay and grading structure. If approved, this would result in a 1.5% incremental increase for all employees who would have expected to receive an increment on 1^st April 2010.

The report stated that the cost of the proposal was £1.6million, including employer on-costs. In order for the proposal to be agreed, savings to the same value would need to be achieved from employment costs, and the following areas had been identified where it was believed these were achievable:-

If it did not prove possible to reach collective agreement with all or any of the recognised trade unions, the report proposed that due to the abnormal financial pressures facing the Council, the increment that was due to be paid to relevant staff employed under the SJC for Local Government Employees from 1^st April 2010, be deferred until 1^st April 2011.

The report added that if collective agreement were reached and the increment proposal adopted, this would take account of arrangements for 2010/11. However, further discussions would be necessary to determine (1) the increment arrangements for future years; and (2) the future of local terms and conditions of service. The outcome of these discussions would be reported to the Finance and Resources Committee for decision at the earliest opportunity.

The report recommended:-

that the Council -

(a)               note the progress of discussions and ongoing negotiations with trade unions;

(b)               given the abnormal financial pressures facing the Council, approve the alternative increment proposal detailed in Appendix A to the report, payable with effect from 1^st April 2010, subject to collective agreement being reached with the recognised trade unions;

(c)               should it not be possible to reach collective agreement on the alternative increment proposal, given the abnormal financial pressures facing the Council, agree that the increment that was due to be paid to relevant staff employed under the SJC for Local Government Employees from 1^st April 2010, be deferred until 1^st April 2011; and

(d)               authorise officers to enter into further discussions with trade unions with a view to reviewing employment costs, including conditions of service, for all employment groups.

Councillor Kevin Stewart moved, seconded by Councillor John Stewart:-

            That the Council approve the recommendations contained within the report.

Councillor Crockett moved as an amendment, seconded by Councillor Graham:-

(1)           That the Council recognise that Aberdeen City Council has a loyal and dedicated workforce and agrees to honour its contractual agreement with employees to pay the salary increment as it has done in each preceding year, with costs arising to be met from reserves; and

(2)           That officers enter into further discussions with trade unions with a view to reviewing employment costs, including conditions of service, for all employment groups.

On a division, there voted:-

For the motion   (24)  -  Lord Provost Peter Stephen; and Councillors Boulton, Clark, Corall, Cormie, Donnelly, Farquharson, Greig, Kiddie, Leslie, McDonald, Malone, May, Noble, Penny, Reynolds, Robertson, Jennifer Stewart, John Stewart, Kevin Stewart, Wendy Stuart, Kirsty West, Wisely and Yuill.

For the amendment  (11)  -  Councillors Adam, Allan, Cassie, Collie, Cooney, Crockett, Graham, Hunter, Ironside, Laing and Young.

Absent from the division  (6)  -  Depute Provost Dunbar; and Councillors Cormack, Dean, Fletcher, McCaig and John West.

The Council resolved:-

to adopt the motion.

In terms of Standing Order 15(6), Councillors Adam, Allan, Cassie, Collie, Cooney, Crockett, Graham, Hunter, Ironside, Laing and Young intimated their dissent against the foregoing decision.