Agenda and draft minutes

To receive Apologies for Absence from Committee members. 

Councillor Anna Bradnam sent apologies.

In Councillor Bradnam’s absence, it was proposed, seconded and agreed by affirmation that Councillor William Jackson-Wood be appointed Vice-Chair of the meeting.

There were no declarations of interest.

To authorise the Chair to sign, as a correct record, the minutes of the meeting held on 7 November 2024.

The Employment & Staffing Committee authorised the Chair to sign, as a correct record, the minutes of the meeting held on 7 November 2024.

If you would like to ask a question or make a statement, then please refer to the Document called Public Speaking Scheme (Physical Meetings)

and contact Democratic Services by no later than 11.59pm three clear working days before the meeting.

Elizabeth McWilliams will ask the following question:

“Whilst pleased to see that in the 2024 Pay Policy Statement, the Council will ‘have regard to the Living Wage Foundation hourly rate when it agrees annual pay awards’, I remain disappointed that it has ruled out accreditation to the Living Wage Foundation.

Accreditation gives employees a guarantee that they will continue to be paid a fair minimum wage each year. Furthermore, those paid by external contractors to work on Council projects are also guaranteed a living wage – something not currently the case (and it should be noted that 70% of children in poverty live in working households). Accreditation then not only benefits Council employees, but also has a positive ripple effect on the community. Since Cambridge City Council accredited in 2014, more than 40 local employers have done so as a direct result and as a key part of its Anti-Poverty Strategy. Research in 2018 showed that if a quarter of low-paid workers moved up to the real Living Wage across the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority area, the local economy across this area would grow by £15m*.

I have lobbied this Council to accredit previously and two things have led me to believe South Cambs does not understand the cost and/or process involved. Firstly, a Councillor at the time quoted the cost of accreditation to me which was incorrect by a factor of 10, not reflecting the Local Authority discount (£480 as opposed to £4,800); and secondly, a member of the HR team told me that ‘the requirement for us to police the wage rates of our suppliers and their subcontractors […] brings with it costs above the accreditation fee’. However, on accreditation, phased implementation (where the Local Authority is supported by the Foundation) means that the Living Wage is rolled out across third party contracts over time, as the contracts come up for renewal. This does not sound difficult or time-consuming for officers to manage when considered with the benefits of doing so.

Please could the Council let me know how much research has been done into the costs and process of accreditation prior to rejecting it, for example but not limited to: engaging directly with the Living Wage Foundation; downloading and reading the Living Wage Foundation toolkit for local authorities; discussing the management of third-party contracts with other local authorities who are accredited such as Cambridge City Council and/or the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority?”

[* Hunter P, The local Living Wage dividend: An analysis of the impact of the Living Wage on ten city regions, London: The Smith Institute (2018), http://www.smith-institute.org.uk and search Living Wage]

Elizabeth McWilliams asked the following question:

“Whilst pleased to see that in the 2024 Pay Policy Statement, the Council will ‘have regard to the Living Wage Foundation hourly rate when it agrees annual pay awards’, I remain disappointed that it has ruled out accreditation to the Living Wage Foundation.

Accreditation gives employees a guarantee that they will continue to be paid a fair minimum wage each year. Furthermore, those paid by external contractors to work on Council projects are also guaranteed a living wage – something not currently the case (and it should be noted that 70% of children in poverty live in working households). Accreditation then not only benefits Council employees, but also has a positive ripple effect on the community. Since Cambridge City Council accredited in 2014, more than 40 local employers have done so as a direct result and as a key part of its Anti-Poverty Strategy. Research in 2018 showed that if a quarter of low-paid workers moved up to the real Living Wage across the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority area, the local economy across this area would grow by £15 million.

I have lobbied this Council to accredit previously, and two things have led me to believe South Cambs does not understand the cost and/or process involved. Firstly, a Councillor at the time quoted the cost of accreditation to me which was incorrect by a factor of 10, not reflecting the Local Authority discount (£480 as opposed to £4,800); and secondly, a member of the HR team told me that ‘the requirement for us to police the wage rates of our suppliers and their subcontractors […] brings with it costs above the accreditation fee’. However, on accreditation, phased implementation (where the Local Authority is supported by the Foundation) means that the Living Wage is rolled out across third party contracts over time, as the contracts come up for renewal. This does not sound difficult or time-consuming for officers to manage when considered with the benefits of doing so.

Please could the Council let me know how much research has been done into the costs and process of accreditation prior to rejecting it, for example but not limited to: engaging directly with the Living Wage Foundation; downloading and reading the Living Wage Foundation toolkit for local authorities; discussing the management of third-party contracts with other local authorities who are accredited such as Cambridge City Council and/or the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority?”

The Chair replied

“Thank you for your question.

The Council has already committed to paying our employees at least the real living wage (RLW) as part of our agreement with the unions. So, where an employee would normally fall to be paid less than the real living wage – as can be the case with a small number of pay points on the Grade 1 salary scale – they are paid the real living wage instead.

As part of the pay agreement with the Unions for 2024/25, the Council committed to undertake a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

The Employment & Staffing Committee considered a report outlining the Council’s well-established apprenticeship programme.

The Committee noted the apparent beneficial role played by apprenticeships in helping the Council to recruit new employees but encouraged officers to work with other Councils and continue to develop a dialogue with education providers and, where necessary, to increase those providers’ understanding of South Cambridgeshire District Council’s expectations.

It was clarified that there were Council employees undertaking training courses but who could not be referred to as apprentices because they were outside the remit of the Apprenticeship Levy. It was further clarified that apprentices were not subject to a financial claw-back provision.

The Committee asked officers to explore options for offering more apprenticeships to those members of staff who were not “desk based.”

The Chair said that South Cambridgeshire District Council should celebrate the variety of apprenticeships it offered and its position in the top quartile of Councils in terms of such training opportunities.

The Employment & Staffing Committee supported the continuation of the apprenticeships programme at South Cambridgeshire District Council.

The Employment & Staffing Committee received and noted a report monitoring absence levels, supporting the People team's approach to wellbeing, and reviewing recruitment and staff turnover.

With reference to Chart 6 (Sick days per Full Time Equivalents - Shared Waste), officers agreed to analyse the data to identify any adverse impact directly attributable to the introduction of the Four-Day Week. Officers also agreed to reflect in future reports the correlation between the types of post advertised and the number of job applications received. The Head of Transformation and People advised Committee members that care was needed not to identify individuals.

It was important not to compare South Cambridgeshire District Council with Authorities with different structures, such as outsourced refuse collection services.

The Employment & Staffing Committee received and noted the updated Pay Policy Statement as required by the Localism Act 2011.