RUDGE ACCUSES BORE OF “HYPOCRISY AND IRRESPONSIBILITY”

23-11-2007

Alan Rudge, the Cabinet Member responsible for introducing Birmingham Council’s controversial Single Status/Pay and Grading Review has issued a stinging rebuke to the city’s Labour leader Sir Albert Bore. It follows Sir Albert’s call for the whole process to be halted.

To see the original article click here. Here, in full, is Alan Rudge's response.

Sir Albert Bore has plumbed new depths of hypocrisy and irresponsibility in his comments on the Council’s pay and grading review.

Hypocrisy because his administration and those of other Labour leaders consistently ducked the issue of equal pay from 1997 until 2004, when the Progressive Partnership took power.

Perhaps it was too difficult for them, or perhaps they realised in their heart of hearts that to bring the pay structure into the 21st Century would take hard decisions.

Let’s not forget that it was his, and other Labour administrations that gave us the gross examples of pay excess, exposed previously in the press, which have cost the Council Tax payer so dear over the years and exposed the Council to such risk from equal pay claims.

It’s been up to the Progressive Alliance to rise to the challenge of clearing up Labour’s mess.

Far from being a job evaluation scheme imposed by the Council, the scheme used was agreed nationally between Trade Unions and employers. Locally the Trade Unions have consistently refused to entertain any other.

Perhaps Sir Albert has forgotten that it was a Labour administration which agreed with the Trade Unions to use the ‘Council’s computerised job evaluation exercise” - against which he now rants!

So Sir Albert doesn’t think we’ve been honest? I suggest he consider his own stance in that respect.

I stand by the figures that 14% of staff (including current bonus earners) lose, but have their basic pay protected until 2010 when this number reduces to 7%, 41% stay the same and 45% gain.

Perhaps Sir Albert should step outside of the Council House sometimes and see the hundreds of care assistants, cooks and cleaners who, under this Conservative/Liberal administration, have at long last received the recognition they deserve, been given the potential for salary advancement and increased annual leave denied them by the Labour Administration.

Perhaps Sir Albert should also check his facts before accusing others of dishonesty. If he had, he would realise that the Council has invested about £30m extra in its workforce to fund the new structure.

By good management and stewardship of public funds, this has been achieved without cuts in service and with one of the lowest increases in Council Tax anywhere.

A fact which Sir Albert ignores is that the Labour government has totally failed to fund one single penny for local government despite funding a similar pay review exercise in the NHS.

Of course we’ve considered alternative salary structures, as Sir Albert suggests we should have. More grades would, marginally, reduce the number of losers (though 14% compares favourably with the national average of 20% recently quoted on the BBC).

But they wouldn’t have closed the equality gaps successive Labour administrations have been happy to preside over; would not allow us to bring in modern methods of rewarding staff contribution and would cost considerably more.

The trade union alternative option of 10 grades would have cost about £20m extra. But then again, if Labour see a problem, they only have two reactions, do nothing or throw money at it!

So Sir Albert says call a halt. How irresponsible is that? Thousands of staff fail to receive pay increases they are entitled to. The Council is unable to incentivise staff to develop still further cost-effective services.

Some people, who, even Sir Albert admits, “may have been overpaid in the past” remain overpaid. People don’t get equal pay. The Council is again vulnerable to ‘no win, no fee’ lawyers and the potential for uncontrolled costs awarded by Employment Tribunal for absolutely no gain to the taxpayer.

This would also be ignoring the legal imperative brought about the national Single Status Agreement - which committed councils to implementing single status pay and grading reviews to deliver equal pay in local government and was signed up to by both the employers side and trade union side of the National Joint Council for Local Government Services back in 1997.

Thanks for the advice, Sir Albert but I choose to be more responsible.

Do you back Alan Rudge? Or Sir Albert Bore?

Join the Single Status thread on The Stirrer Forum.