To hear questions from councillors of which due notice has been given in relation only to the business for which this extraordinary meeting has been called.
Minutes:
Councillor Keith Witham asked the Leader of the Council, Councillor Julia McShane, the following question:
“In the interests of full openness and transparency, for both Councillors and the public, would the Leader of the Council please advise the Council:
(a) how many job posts in GBC have now been deleted as a result of the GBC/WBC collaboration, and list the job titles?
(b) how much has been spent from GBC funds – of all funds whether from revenue, capital, or reserve funds to enable those jobs to be removed? and as well as a total, can the relevant figure be shown for each job post deleted?
(c) Have phases 1 and 2 of the collaboration now been completed, i.e. the removal of all the senior posts, and joint posts recruited, or if Interims are in post how long will it be to have all joint positions in permanent post?
(d) how soon is it expected to then move to phase 3; or when will it be known how many Officer posts in that phase are intended to be deleted and replaced with shared posts?
(e) Please also list the additional costs of extra support staff for the joint management team?”
The Leader of the Council’s response to the question was as follows:
“I thank Cllr Witham for this opportunity to set out clearly the financial benefits and costs of the partnership with Waverley Borough Council. The councils’ decision to work together in this way, the first such partnership in Surrey, has already brought financial and other benefits to both councils and will assist us in providing sustainable public services in the face of the massive financial challenge caused by rising costs, increasing demand from residents who need our support, and the reduction in government funding.
While Cllr Witham’s questions and this response focus on the financial impact of the partnership, it may be noted that the councils are at this early stage benefitting in other areas, such as the greater pool of expertise, and reduced duplication in policy work, consultation responses and attendance at wider meetings.
(a) How many job posts in GBC have now been deleted as a result of the GBC/WBC collaboration, and list the job titles?
Guildford Borough Council (GBC) and Waverley Borough Council (WBC) both agreed in July 2021 to create a Joint Management Team (JMT). This was in place in October 2022. It comprises: 1 Chief Executive, 3 Strategic Directors and 12 Executive Heads of Service. WBC’s former structure was 1 Chief Executive, 2 Directors and 8 Heads of Service, which were all deleted. GBC’s roles in scope, which were all deleted, were 1 Managing Director, 3 Directors and 10 senior officers as follows:
- Managing Director
- Resources Director
- Service Delivery Director
- Strategic Services Director
- Head of Asset Management
- Head of Community Services
- Head of Culture, Heritage & Leisure Services
- Head of Customer, Case & Parking
- Head of Environment & Regulatory Services
- Head of Housing Services
- Head of Operational & Technical Services
- Head of Place
- Head of Regeneration & Corporate Programmes
- Strategy & Communications Manager
Therefore, 14 roles at GBC and 11 roles at WBC were deleted, and the new JMT of 16 roles was created. Taking account of some additional executive support that has been put in place to support the JMT, the cost to this council of the new structure is currently £421,176 per year less than the old, a saving that will contribute to meeting the severe financial challenges facing our provision of services to local people. We will keep this figure under close review and update annually the data on what the costs of the old teams would have been to ensure that we can report an accurate comparison to councillors in future.
(b) How much has been spent from GBC funds – of all funds whether from revenue, capital, or reserve funds to enable those jobs to be removed? and as well as a total, can the relevant figure be shown for each job post deleted?
The full costs for 2022/23 will be reported at the end of year accounts stage, so the following is provisional and represents the current picture.
The largest costs associated with the transition were redundancy costs associated with the deletion of posts and any staff members that consequently left GBC or WBC. These costs are one-off, in contrast to the savings which recur annually.
Four GBC employees and three WBC employees left as a consequence and the relevant policies were applied. The costs were also shared between the councils on the principles set out in the Inter-Authority Agreement and agreed by the respective Full Council meetings of April 2022. In practice, the costs are higher for GBC to reflect the more generous redundancy policy that applies and the length of service of employees affected.
One of the GBC employees was the former Managing Director. The costs entailed a redundancy payment to the individual, a payment in lieu of part of the notice period and a larger payment to the Surrey local government pension fund in the financial year 2021/22. The redundancy-associated costs were approved by the Full Council meeting on 5 October 2021. The final total cost was £475,448. WBC contributed 50% of the redundancy payment (i.e. £71,554) and so the net cost to GBC was £403,894. This cost was met from the realisation of a capital asset according to the council’s Flexible Use of Capital Receipts Strategy 2021.
The remaining costs (for the financial year 2022/23) do not relate to the jobs but are personal to the individuals who held them. They are, therefore, personal information that should not be listed per person publicly. They can be shared with councillors on a confidential basis on request and have been sent to Cllr Witham. For one individual, the correct approval from Full Council was given on 11 October 2022 because the costs exceeded £95,000. The total cost (redundancy payment to the individual plus any payment to the pension fund if the individual is eligible) of all three GBC employees was £373,133. WBC contributed £76,422. GBC then contributed £65,230 to WBC employee-related costs, and so the net cost to GBC was £361,941.
The GBC one-off costs associated with redundancy were drawn from the Invest-to-Save reserve, which was c. £0.8m at the start of the financial year 2022/23.
In addition, there are some ad hoc costs and savings as a result of legal advice and some temporary expeditious sharing. This further increases 2022/23’s in-year savings and will be reported in the end-of-year finance reports.
(c) Have phases 1 and 2 of the collaboration now been completed, i.e. the removal of all the senior posts, and joint posts recruited, or if Interims are in post how long will it be to have all joint positions in permanent post?
The councils in July 2021 agreed to (i) create a JMT, and (ii) request that the JMT bring forward business cases for further collaboration. The first is complete. The second has started and proposals will be brought forward to the new councils on options. As per the original July 2021 council report, these will include options on services, premises, IT and HR policies.
(d) How soon is it expected to then move to phase 3; or when will it be known how many Officer posts in that phase are intended to be deleted and replaced with shared posts?
As there are no concrete or agreed proposals, this is not known, and will be discussed with the new councillor leaderships after the May 2023 elections. Any proposals that affect employees will require the proper consultations with them and the recognised unions.
(e) Please also list the additional costs of extra support staff for the joint management team?
In the old structure, GBC had 2 full-time equivalent employees providing executive support and WBC had 7. The new structure has 11.5 and is shared between the councils. Therefore, the cost to GBC has increased by £99,027. This is included within the figure in section (a) above to give the overall annual saving to GBC of £421,176 as a result of the creation of the JMT.”
In response to a supplementary question which sought assurance from the Leader that the effectiveness of the senior management team would be evaluated before the Council moved to the next stage of the collaboration project, the Leader confirmed that this would be something for the new administration to take forward.