Agenda item

Purpose:       To consider the following Notices of Motion.

 

Councillor Aaron Shotton

 

Flintshire County Council notes:

·         The UK Government has set out plans in its Trade Union Bill that specifically impact on Local Authorities and our relationships with our employees and trade unions.

·         The UK Government intends to grant ministers the power to cut so - called "facilities time" in the public sector. This is paid time-off, mutually agreed between employers and unions, for union reps to represent their members and negotiate with their employer.

·         The UK Government also proposes to prohibit public sector employers assisting unions to collect their membership subscriptions through payroll (check-off) – even though this is used for a variety of other staff benefits such as cycle-to-work schemes and childcare vouchers, and even though unions often meet the costs of this.

Flintshire County Council believes:

·         All workers should have the right to belong to, and be active in, an effective trade union.

·         Trade unions play an essential role in ensuring good industrial relations.

·         The facilitation of trade union representatives to carry out their roles and duties, and the collection of union dues by “check-off” are useful tools in ensuring good industrial relations.

Flintshire County Council resolves:

Immediately to support the Union’s efforts to move members onto direct debit subscriptions, through:

·         Allowing union officials access to workers.

·         Allowing additional facility time to Union representatives to visit their members to achieve this aim.

·         Allows the distribution of union material through our email, intranet, payslips, internal mail and other communication systems.

 

Councillor Tim Newhouse

 

Council notes the provisions of the Local Government Act 1972 section 85 and resolves that attendance by a member at a meeting of any committee or sub-committee of the Council as defined in section 85 (2) of the Act requires the attendance to be as a member of the committee, sub-committee or as appropriate or a substitute for a member. The fact of being a County Councillor and in attendance at such a meeting as an observer is not interpreted as attending as a member for this purpose, and that this is established as a convention in place of that approved by the Constitution Committee on 27 January.

(a)       That the Notice of Motion on Trade Unions be supported; and

 

(b)       That the Notice of Motion on Member attendance at meetings be rejected.

(i) The following Notice of Motion was received from Councillor Aaron Shotton

 

“Flintshire County Council notes:

 

·           The UK Government has set out plans in its Trade Union Bill that specifically impact on Local Authorities and our relationships with our employees and trade unions.

·           The UK Government intends to grant ministers the power to cut so - called "facilities time" in the public sector. This is paid time-off, mutually agreed between employers and unions, for union reps to represent their members and negotiate with their employer.

·           The UK Government also proposes to prohibit public sector employers assisting unions to collect their membership subscriptions through payroll (check-off) - even though this is used for a variety of other staff benefits such as cycle-to-work schemes and childcare vouchers, and even though unions often meet the costs of this.

 

Flintshire County Council believes:

 

·           All workers should have the right to belong to, and be active in, an effective trade union.

·           Trade unions play an essential role in ensuring good industrial relations.

·           The facilitation of trade union representatives to carry out their roles and duties, and the collection of union dues by “check-off” are useful tools in ensuring good industrial relations.

Flintshire County Council resolves: Immediately to support the Union’s efforts to move members onto direct debit subscriptions, through:

 

·           Allowing union officials access to workers.

·           Allowing additional facility time to Union representatives to visit their members to achieve this aim.

·           Allows the distribution of union material through our email, intranet, payslips, internal mail and other communication systems.”

 

Councillor Shotton spoke about increasing opposition to the UK Government’s proposed Trade Union Bill and described this as a threat to democracy across the country, paying tribute to the campaigning efforts of Unite, Unison Cymru and Welsh TUC amongst others.  He explained that his Motion sought to address this by allowing Trade Union colleagues to continue to operate in a free and fair manner in organising and recruiting Trade Union members.  He cited the significant work undertaken with Trade Unions on implementing the Single Status Agreement, adding that that it was in the interests of the employer to recognise the benefits of allowing Trade Unions to recruit and access members, and to enable employees to express their views.  The Motion was seconded by Councillor Bernie Attridge.

 

In support of the Motion, Councillors David Healey, Ian Dunbar and Paul Shotton highlighted the importance of having a mechanism for negotiation on industrial relations as recognised in the local steel industry, the negative impact of the Trade Union bill on local authorities and the need to protect good working conditions and relationships with Trade Unions for the benefit of local government workers.

 

Whilst Councillor Alison Halford praised the work of Trade Unions, she felt unable to make a decision until information was shared on facilities time allocated to Trade Union representatives to fulfil their roles, including that on Single Status, as this was not currently made available.  She also felt it was important to seek the views of Group Leaders and therefore asked for the item to be deferred.  Councillor Mike Peers voiced his support for Trade Unions but also welcomed a deferment of the item pending further information to assist the debate.

 

Councillor Arnold Woolley agreed with Councillor Halford’s view that details of the associated costs should be shared.  In response to a comment on wording in the final paragraph of the Notice of Motion, the Chief Executive explained that this was intended to apply to all recognised Trade Unions.

 

In supporting the Motion, Councillors Peter Curtis and Dennis Hutchinson highlighted the involvement of Trade Unions in helping to resolve problems at an early stage and stressed that the Motion did not seek anything new but to continue with the current arrangements.  Councillors Chris Bithell and Kevin Jones both referred to the potential negative impacts from the proposed Bill and welcomed continued appropriate levels of support for Trade Union colleagues to enable them to support the employer and employees.

 

Councillor Clive Carver agreed with Councillor Halford’s comments for clarity on the costs involved in facilities time and seconded the proposal to defer the item.

 

The Chief Officer (Governance) provided guidance on procedural rules, stating that the item could be adjourned rather than deferred, however the Chairman would need to decide whether or not the item had been sufficiently debated without the information requested.  The Chairman agreed to the Chief Executive’s suggestion to allow other Members the opportunity to speak whilst officers considered the request for information.

 

Councillor Attridge requested a recorded vote on the substantive issue.

 

Councillors Carol Ellis and Alex Aldridge spoke in support of the Motion, commenting on the involvement by Trade Unions in empowering and supporting employees and the need to continue with the current arrangements.

 

Although Councillor Robin Guest agreed with the principle of the Motion, he felt that more detail should have been shared on the financial implications for the Council.

 

The Chief Executive reminded Members of the Council’s legal obligations as the employer and gave a brief overview of the recognised Trade Unions currently working with the Council, adding that arrangements in Flintshire were consistent with other councils.  In response to the comments made, he advised that the distribution of Trade Union materials incurred no cost to the Council and that Trade Unions paid for their own separate communications.  The long-standing arrangement for the collection of monthly subscriptions from Trade Union members through the Council’s payroll was facilitated by a charge recovered from Trade Unions.  In respect of facilities time, it was noted that Unison (the largest Trade Union working with the Council) had 2.8 FTE (full-time equivalent) employees paid to carry out their duties, at no significant cost to the Council; information on the other Trade Unions could be provided if requested.  The facilities agreement included the core capacity required by Trade Unions, however this was proportionate to the activity being undertaken.  It was difficult to quantify the full cost of recognised work by the Trade Unions due to the range of activities over and above the core agreement, for example from assisting a Union member put at risk through to a greater level of input above the core capacity level, on the Single Status Agreement.  In moving forward, there was a need to agree on an appropriate facilities agreement which should incur less costs through major activities.  The Chief Executive referred to the stance taken by the Welsh Local Government Association (WLGA) in supporting a continuation of the current arrangements and the implications for the Council if the Bill were to be implemented.

 

The Chairman stated that the matter had been thoroughly debated and gave Councillor Aaron Shotton the right of reply before moving to the vote.  In responding, Councillor Shotton stated his respect for the positions taken.

 

Councillor Halford repeated her request for a deferral based on the outstanding information she had requested.

 

Following his earlier comments, Councillor Peers stated that Notices of Motion submitted to the Council should include all the necessary supporting information.  Having previously supported an adjournment, he indicated his support for the substantive Motion in light of the information provided by the Chief Executive.

 

In conclusion, Councillor Aaron Shotton urged Members to support the Motion to protect the value of good Trade Union relationships, pointing out the implications of the Bill in restricting engagement between Unions and their respective members.

 

The Chairman indicated to proceed to the recorded vote based on the adequacy of the debate and information given by the Chief Executive.  The requisite number of Members indicated their support for the recorded vote.  On being put to the vote, the Notice of Motion was carried.

 

For the proposal:

Councillors: Alex Aldridge, Bernie Attridge, Glyn Banks, Haydn Bateman, Marion Bateman, Chris Bithell, Helen Brown, Derek Butler, David Cox, Paul Cunningham, Peter Curtis, Ron Davies, Alan Diskin, Glenys Diskin, Rosetta Dolphin, Ian Dunbar, Brian Dunn, Carol Ellis, David Evans, Veronica Gay, Robin Guest, Ron Hampson, George Hardcastle, David Healey, Cindy Hinds, Ray Hughes, Dennis Hutchinson, Joe Johnson, Rita Johnson, Christine Jones, Kevin Jones, Richard Jones, Colin Legg, Phil Lightfoot, Brian Lloyd, Richard Lloyd, Mike Lowe, Dave Mackie, Nancy Matthews, Hilary McGuill, Billy Mullin, Tim Newhouse, Sara Parker, Mike Peers, Vicky Perfect, Neville Phillips, Mike Reece, Gareth Roberts, Ian Roberts, David Roney, Tony Sharps, Aaron Shotton, Paul Shotton, Ian Smith, Carolyn Thomas, Sharon Williams, David Wisinger and Arnold Woolley

 

Abstentions:

Councillors: Clive Carver, Adele Davies-Cooke, Jim Falshaw, Alison Halford, Nigel Steele-Mortimer and Owen Thomas

 

Prior to the start of the next item, Councillor Sharon Williams left the room and returned following the debate.

 

(ii) The following Notice of Motion was received from Councillor Tim Newhouse

 

“Council notes the provisions of the Local Government Act 1972 section 85 and resolves that attendance by a member at a meeting of any committee or sub-committee of the Council as defined in section 85 (2) of the Act requires the attendance to be as a member of the committee, sub-committee or as appropriate or a substitute for a member. The fact of being a County Councillor and in attendance at such a meeting as an observer is not interpreted as attending as a member for this purpose, and that this is established as a convention in place of that approved by the Constitution Committee on 27 January.”

 

In support of his Motion, Councillor Newhouse asked Members to consider whether they felt it appropriate for Flintshire to be the only council in the UK where Members were entitled to their allowance if they attended two meetings per year, for a matter of minutes.

 

Prior to the debate, the Chairman asked that Members refrain from making comments that were personal to other Members, as this was a sensitive, constitutional issue that would set a convention for all Members and not any one individual.

 

In opposing the Motion, Councillor Aaron Shotton clarified that there had been no changes to the Council’s Constitution or the Local Government Act 1972 Act.  He expressed concern that the Motion sought to overturn the democratic decision taken by the Constitution Committee some weeks earlier, pointing out that Section B of the Act referred to Members attending meetings of external bodies to represent their local authority.  He referred to the detailed debate on this matter by the Constitution Committee resulting in agreement to support the Monitoring Officer’s recommendation to interpret wording in the Act as including meetings where Members attended as observers, noting the common practice for Chairs to allow those individuals to participate if they wished.

 

Councillor Chris Bithell referred to the pilot of remote attendance which had been undertaken in recognition of Members’ various commitments and felt that the Act had not been updated to take account of such commitments in changing times.  He pointed out that a high proportion of Members’ work took place outside committees including attending informal meetings on a regular basis which, although not recorded, were important elements of the role.  Councillor Peter Curtis also spoke against the Motion, pointing out that the role of an elected Member involved more than attending meetings.

 

As Chairman of the Constitution Committee, Councillor Robin Guest pointed out that recommendations to the Committee could be overturned at Council by Members exercising their right to vote.  He explained that there was no issue on timing as this was the first available Council meeting following the decision by the Constitution Committee where a number of strong views had been heard.  In response to comments made, he agreed that there was an issue with interpretation of the legislation but pointed out that there had been previous opportunity to make changes to the legislation, which applied to all councils.  He felt it was not a challenge to attend a meeting within six months to avoid disqualification.

 

In seconding the Motion, Councillor Peers referred to Section 85 (2a) of the Act on the requirement for Executive Members’ attendance which demonstrated that the legislation had been updated.  He spoke about the expectation for Members to participate at meetings, as opposed to just observing, adding that that there was a statutory provision for the Council to consider the reasons for a Member’s non-attendance before the expiry of six months.

 

Councillor Clive Carver concurred, saying that the minimum attendance should be achieved and involve the respective Member signing in and taking part in the debate.  He pointed out that the second resolution of the Constitution Committee was that the Council confirm the authority of the Monitoring Officer to decide whether a Member had complied with the six month rule and proposed the following amendment to be added to the Notice of Motion: “For the avoidance of any doubt, this new convention shall be used to determine the recent case which was referred to at the Constitution Committee on 27 January 2016.”  This amendment was seconded by Councillor Nigel Steele-Mortimer.

 

The Chief Officer (Governance) advised that Councillor Newhouse could alter his Motion accordingly or put the amendment to the vote before the substantive Motion.  Councillor Newhouse declined to adopt the amendment as part of his Motion.  Following comments, the Chief Executive clarified that the outcome of the vote would apply to all Members including the case originally referred to.

 

Following procedural guidance from the Chief Officer (Governance), Councillor Carver indicated his willingness to withdraw the amendment as the original Motion would have the same effect.  The Chief Officer confirmed that this was the case.

 

Speaking in support of the substantive Motion, Councillor Rosetta Dolphin alluded to the work of Town and Community Councillors and said there was an expectation for Council Members to attend the requisite number of meetings.  Her request for a recorded vote was duly supported by the necessary number of Members.

 

Councillor Alison Halford spoke about the integrity of Members in representing their constituents.  Councillors Richard Jones and Neville Phillips felt that this was a moral issue as Members were unable to represent their constituents by observing meetings.  Councillor Hilary McGuill agreed that there was a moral issue and a need to clarify the meaning of the legislation.

 

The Chief Officer (Governance) clarified that the six month rule was contained in legislation and not the Council’s Constitution.  The aim was not to change the Constitution but to give Members the opportunity to comment on this sensitive issue arising from a gap in the caselaw and provide guidance for him to carry out his functions.  For reference, he read out extracts from Section 85 of the Act relating to the six month rule and provision for Council to excuse non-attendance by a Member in advance of the end of that period.  This also included provision for the six month rule to apply to Members of sub-committees, joint boards, working groups etc or Members representing outside bodies, however the examples given at the Constitution Committee had indicated the need for clarity on a ‘voting member’.

 

Following queries raised by Members, the Chief Officer explained that his recommendation to the Constitution Committee was to seek confirmation on the proposed stance.  The Chief Executive clarified that the matter had been referred to the Constitution Committee due to the lack of case law on applying the six month rule.

 

The Chairman allowed other Members the opportunity to speak before moving to the vote.

 

Councillor Arnold Woolley urged Members to consider the legal and moral aspects of the issue, along with the public perception on the decision made.  Councillor Steele-Mortimer felt that interpretation of the six month rule had always been clear.

 

In concluding, Councillor Tim Newhouse repeated his opening statement and urged Members to support his Motion.

 

On being put to the vote, the Notice of Motion was lost.

 

For the proposal:

Councillors: Clive Carver, Adele Davies-Cooke, Rosetta Dolphin, Brian Dunn, Jim Falshaw, Veronica Gay, Robin Guest, Alison Halford, Dennis Hutchinson, Ray Hughes, Rita Johnson, Richard Jones, Phil Lightfoot, Brian Lloyd, Dave Mackie, Nancy Matthews, Hilary McGuill, Tim Newhouse, Sara Parker, Mike Peers, Neville Phillips, Gareth Roberts, David Roney, Nigel Steele-Mortimer, Owen Thomas and Arnold Woolley

 

Against the proposal:

Councillors: Alex Aldridge, Bernie Attridge, Glyn Banks, Haydn Bateman, Marion Bateman, Chris Bithell, Helen Brown, Derek Butler, David Cox, Paul Cunningham, Peter Curtis, Ron Davies, Alan Diskin, Glenys Diskin, Ian Dunbar, Carol Ellis, David Evans, Ron Hampson, George Hardcastle, David Healey, Cindy Hinds, Joe Johnson, Christine Jones, Kevin Jones, Richard Lloyd, Mike Lowe, Billy Mullin, Vicky Perfect, Mike Reece, Ian Roberts, Tony Sharps, Aaron Shotton, Paul Shotton, Ian Smith, Carolyn Thomas and David Wisinger

 

RESOLVED:

 

(a)       That the Notice of Motion on Trade Unions be supported; and

 

(b)       That the Notice of Motion on Member attendance at meetings be rejected.

 

Following the item, the Chairman announced a short adjournment in the meeting.