This Council will receive a report on the 4-day working week trial at the November 2023 meeting and will debate and vote as to whether or not the trial should continue. This report will include the potential consequences of ignoring the national government’s directive to stop the trial, with particular reference to any financial consequences that may occur from ignoring the national government for a second time.
Decision:
Council agreed to refer the following motion to Cabinet:
This Council will receive a report on the 4-day working week trial at the November 2023 meeting and will debate and vote as to whether or not the trial should continue. This report will include the potential consequences of ignoring the national government’s directive to stop the trial, with particular reference to any financial consequences that may occur from ignoring the national government for a second time.
Minutes:
Councillor Heather Williams introduced her motion. She proposed and Councillor Graham Cone seconded that Section 13, paragraph 6a of Standing Orders be suspended. The Deputy Head of Legal explained that if this was agreed, the motion could be voted on at the meeting. The Chair explained that usually a matter for the executive would be taken to Cabinet for a final decision. The proposal was that this be suspended. The Leader expressed her opposition to the proposal, as the motion referred to a matter that was the responsibility of Cabinet.
A vote was taken and were cast as follows:
In favour (8):
Councillors Tom Bygott, Graham Cone, Sue Ellington, Daniel Lentell, Lina Nieto, Bunty Waters, Dr Richard Williams and Heather Williams.
Against (20):
Councillors Michael Atkins, Henry Batchelor, John Batchelor, Paul Bearpark, Anna Bradnam, Ariel Cahn, Dr Martin Cahn, Peter Fane, Bill Handley, Sunita Hansraj, Sally Ann Hart, Geoff Harvey, Dr James Hobro, Peter McDonald, Brian Milnes, Annika Osborne, Peter Sandford, Bridget Smith, Richard Stobart and John Williams.
Abstain (0):
The proposal was defeated.
Councillor Heather Williams asserted that the four-day week affected all residents and in 12 months £3.3m of salaried hours would not be worked. This was such an important matter all residents should have been consulted on and all councillors should be involved in its decision. She stated that the ruling political group had changed its mind on many previous issues, including the introduction of blue bins, the provision of community facilities at Northstowe, a motion on youth engagement and the congestion charge. She suggested that the reputation of the Council was suffering and urged that the administration reverse its decision on the four-day week. She concluded that this was too important a matter to be determined by Cabinet.
Councillor Graham Cone urged members not to be afraid of the motion and agree that all councillors should be involved in this important matter.
The Leader announced that £760,000 had been saved as a result of the four-day week trial, as more permanent staff and fewer agency staff were being employed. Higher calibre staff were now applying for vacancies. The trial also meant that the waste service was not being disrupted by bank holidays and the contact centre was increasing its hours of service. The Leader assured Council that if the administration decided that it wanted to make the four-day week permanent, residents would be consulted and Council would vote on the proposed change.
Councillor James Hobro stated that it was important that the Council remained flexible in a highly competitive jobs market. The four-day week trial was proposed a year ago when the authority was having serious problems with recruitment and was spending £2m a year on agency staff for work that should have been carried out by permanent staff. The four-day week had been tried and tested in the private sector and the results of the trial had been promising, with half the vacant positions filled and services improved. He concluded that he was opposing the motion as the trial should be allowed to continue and the Council should objectively consider all the evidence at the end of this trial.
Councillor Sally Ann Hart explained that another report on the four-day week would be considered at the next meeting of the Employment and Staffing Committee on 9 November 2023. She asserted that it would be wrong to reverse the decision to trial the four-day week for a year, especially as the data reported to the Employment and Staffing Committee indicated that the four-day week was having a positive effect on recruitment. She expressed her pride in being a member of a forward-thinking authority that had decided to trial such an innovative practice.
Councillor Tom Bygott asserted that democratic governance meant taking decisions to the benefit of the people and as the trialling of a four-day week was a major decision affecting our residents it should be taken at Council. To defer the matter to Cabinet was simply undemocratic.
Councillor Brian Milnes lamented the disinformation being perpetrated by external right-wing organisations regarding the four-day week. He explained that the Council was part way through a trial and if the current trends continued it would be shown to be a success. The current Government had invited local authorities to be innovative and that was what this Council was doing.
The Leader proposed that in line with paragraph 14d in the Standing Orders Council should refer this matter to Cabinet. Councillor Brian Milnes seconded this proposal.
Councillor Dr Richard Williams disputed the quoted savings of £700,000, which he asserted included savings that had been realised before the four-day week had been implemented. He suggested that there was more information to be discussed and that it was wrong to curtail the debate.
Councillor Daniel Lentell explained that whilst he supported the trial of the four-day week he opposed the proposal to end the debate as it was undemocratic.
Councillor Heather Williams lamented that not all councillors had been able to contribute to the debate. The Chair explained that there had been only two further speakers and Council had heard from both of them. A vote was taken and were cast as follows:
In favour (19):
Councillors Henry Batchelor, John Batchelor, Paul Bearpark, Anna Bradnam, Ariel Cahn, Dr Martin Cahn, Peter Fane, Bill Handley, Sunita Hansraj, Sally Ann Hart, Geoff Harvey, Dr Tumi Hawkins, Dr James Hobro, Brian Milnes, Annika Osborne, Peter Sandford, Bridget Smith, Richard Stobart and John Williams.
Against (8):
Councillors Tom Bygott, Graham Cone, Sue Ellington, Daniel Lentell, Lina Nieto, Bunty Waters, Dr Richard Williams and Heather Williams.
Abstain (0):
Council agreed to refer the following motion to Cabinet:
This Council will receive a report on the 4-day working week trial at the November 2023 meeting and will debate and vote as to whether or not the trial should continue. This report will include the potential consequences of ignoring the national government’s directive to stop the trial, with particular reference to any financial consequences that may occur from ignoring the national government for a second time.