Glasgow's Pay Arrangements

A Garage Engineer was not a highly skilled or highly graded  post before the WPBR which can be seen from the fact that the job attracted an annual salary of £14,073.36 - before the City Council's new pay arrangements came into operation in 2007.

Yet a Garage Engineer managed to earn an eye watering bonus of no less than £17,060.00 which along with other enhancements, such as shift allowance, took his total pre-WPBR pay to £31,653.74


Post of Garage Engineer - prior to the WPBR

Pre-WPBR Grade - EO 1

Pre-WPBR Contracted Pay - £14,073.36

Bonus Pay - £17,060.00


Total Pay - £31,653.74 (including other enhancements such as shift allowance)

Now that was £12,000 a year more than a highly qualified Child Development Officer was paid prior to the introduction of the WPBR.

Yet the City Council and the local trade unions agreed to exclude lots of former APT&C jobs from receiving compensation for these enormous and unjustifiable pay differences between traditional male and female jobs. 

To follow - the salaries of some of the key claimant jobs so that everyone understands the size of the 'pay gap' and the extent to which women workers were denied equal pay for work of equal value in Glasgow for years and years and years.

The City Council, of course, gave a commitment (the EDC) to male workers that their bonus earnings would be 'looked after' under the WPBR and this point that was picked up by Lady Norris in the Court of Session decision which judged Glasgow's pay arrangements to be 'unfit for purpose'. 

  

Coming Clean in Glasgow (20/09/17)

In the days ahead I plan to publish details about the pay of Glasgow City Council's 'comparator' and 'claimant' jobs - both before and after the introduction of the WPBR in 2007.

The purpose of this exercise is to highlight just how much less women were paid than their male colleagues - even when the women were on the same grade, a higher grade or palpably doing work of 'equal value' to the men.

To add insult to injury, the huge pay differences continued after the WPBR was introduced and when you look at things in the cold light of day, it's impossible to conclude anything other than the 'books were cooked' in favour of the male jobs.  

How else could Gravediggers, Gardeners and other male dominated jobs be capable of earning more than their women colleagues, both before and after Glasgow's new WPBR pay arrangements came into operation? 

As one of the judges, Lady Norris, put the point at the Court of Session hearing, the council clearly “looked after” the men well beyond the protection period. 

In which case, everyone needs to know precisely how the men were helped and what affect this had on their pay. 

Because Glasgow's women workers were clearly entitled to the same 'help' as the men and what happened to the men is the baseline for any settlement discussions.

Post of Gravedigger - prior to the WPBR

Pre-WPBR Grade - MW 4

Pre-WPBR Contracted Pay - £10,938.53

Bonus Pay - £8,503.80


Total Pay - £20,594.57

Now a Home Carer (MW5) was on a higher grade than a Gravedigger (MW4) before the WPBR was introduced, but the female dominated job was paid much less - and that is the historical basis of people's equal pay claims.

Men being paid much more than women for doing jobs that evidently carry less skill and responsibility.

Because you can't have a female dominated job that is fairly evaluated under an 'objective' job evaluation scheme (JES) and then pay the woman's job much less than a male dominated job which has been given a lower score and grade. 

But that is exactly what happened when Glasgow brought in its new WPBR/EDC pay scheme in 2007 and, of course, the big differences in pay between male and female jobs continue to this day.

  

Glasgow - Readers' Comments

Readers of the blog site have had some harsh words for the trade unions during the fight for equal pay, but none more so than in Glasgow where local union leaders:

1. Agreed to the introduction of the WPBR pay scheme back in 2006/07
2. Rejected the advice of the national trade unions to use an approved job evaluation scheme (JES) - and instead allowed an external consultant to develop an in-house Glasgow scheme which the Court of Session has judged as 'not for for purpose
3. Excluded thousands of employees with perfectly valid equal pay claims - Clerical Staff, School Janitors, Special Needs Drivers - from the 2005 financial compensation scheme
4. Agreed with senior council officials to 'cap' the financial compensation scheme at just £9,000
5. Agreed with senior council officials to exclude overtime working from the compensation scheme

Little wonder then that so many people are really unhappy about the role the unions have played over the years - including this reader.

Again mark a show of utter incompetence by the unions, it begs the question "do we the workers" actually need to be in any Union? 

Well if you've followed A4ES over the last 10 years and been part of and witnessed the fight for equal pay then you'll no the short answer is No! 

So my advice to the workforce today is don't waste ur money propping up these outdated delusional organizations that are not fit for purpose as they have proved over n over again!

L


  

Glasgow - Equal Pay Update (13/09/17)

Now here's an interesting document - one that might interest senior officials in Glasgow City Council, or at least those who claim to have little, if any, knowledge of the Council's controversial EDC pay scheme which gave a long-term guarantee on future earnings to male employees in bonus earning jobs.

According to this document Glasgow City Council established a high powered Joint Steering Group to oversee the operation of the EDC scheme which kept minutes of its meetings (as you would expect) and included representatives from every part of the Council: elected councillors, the chief executive's department, service departments and all of the trade unions (including Unison and GMB) were involved.

Mike Kirby from Unison was present at this particular meeting and Mike is now the union's regional secretary in Scotland.

So maybe Mike can help jog the City Council's memory about what deals were done to upgrade hundreds of male Gardener and Gravedigger jobs - while leaving all the female dominated jobs still stuck firmly at the bottom of the Council's pay ladder.  

Does anyone in Glasgow really believe that senior officials of the City Council can't find this information - maybe they are just not looking hard enough or could it be that they are looking in the wrong places?

  

EMPLOYEE DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENT STEERING GROUP

NOTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 5 SEPTEMBER 2007

in Café George, Parish Hall

ATTENDEES:
Elma Murray	Chair	Carol Ball	UNISON
Glenda McKendrick	Chief Executive Dept	Mike Kirby	UNISON
L Norwood/W Stewart	DaCS	John Murdoch	UNISON
David Halliday	APAX	Eddie Sneider	GMB
Martin Doran	GMB

Apologies were received from Councillor McKeown, Mary Brown (UCATT) and Janice Irvine.

E Murray opened the meeting in Councillor McKeown’s absence.

1. Notes of Previous Meeting and Matters Arising

1.1 The Note of the previous meeting was accepted.

1.2 Confirmation was asked for regarding point 1.3, Training for TU representatives, which Councillor McKeown was to raise with N Aird.  E Murray advised that she would clarify action on this item and advise the group.

Action:  Clarify with Councillor McKeown E Murray

1.3 Clarification was asked for regarding point 1.4, consistency of information being issued to staff when invited to attend Review proceedings.  E Murray advised that she would ask I Drummond to raise at the next Governance Board meeting and issue a response to the group prior to the next meeting.

Action:  Raise with I Drummond E Murray

2. PDP Paperwork - L Norwood/W Stewart, DaCS

L Norwood advised the group of how the PDP process is conducted within DaCS and W Stewart explained all aspects of the paperwork which has been developed in line with the corporate approach.

C Ball expressed some concern at the lack of preparation time which would be given to staff prior to a PDP meeting.  She also pointed out that the DaCS paperwork has 4 levels of competency compared to the corporate 3 levels and asked if these points could be considered.

3. Council Wide Progress

E Murray explained the new format of the reports and the following points were discussed:

3.1 Based on the figures reported, the group asked for clarification of the actions being proposed. E Murray advised of the commitment given by the CMT that staff facing protection should have received a PDP before the end of this year.  Details of development options and service reform for individuals are to be looked at with Services.

Concerns were expressed regarding the timescale, particularly within Education, as the PDP rollout is still taking place.

3.2 The issue of Review results taking as long as 6 weeks to be issued was raised.

Action:  Raise with I Drummond E Murray

3.3 An issue was raised regarding 3 Parking Staff who lost their Review and have had no further contact from management.  There was also a point made that within LES a restructure of Senior Management based on salary has taken place although some of those involved are awaiting Reviews.

Action:  Clarify with R Booth E Murray

3.4 The group asked why the BS and CA Reviews have been postponed until November.  E Murray advised that this is due to the previous reviews taking longer and to allow Services to begin these job families at the same time.  C Ball expressed concern at this as Education is ready to proceed with reviews for these families.

300 reviews have already taken place for 7,000 staff, including group reviews.

1,600 reviews have still to be heard for 3,000 staff, a large number of which are individual reviews.

3.5 The group asked if the number of Reviews that have taken place could be updated for the next meeting.

Action: E Murray

3.6 The group asked if it is the intention for ongoing reviews to be heard by job family.  E Murray advised that this is necessary to maintain the integrity of the WP&BR.  A point was made that within Education someone had been advised at their Review that a review of the job was required.

4. Careers Scotland Progress

E Murray spoke to the report.

4.1 A point was made that the low take up of the Careers Scotland services may be due to staff perception that the service is to assist them in finding a job outwith the Council.

4.2 E Sneider asked for a demonstration of the mapping tool.  G McKendrick invited him to attend the next Process Workshop scheduled for 20 September.

5. Schedule of meetings 

The following dates have been scheduled:

12 December 2007

 5 March 2008

 5 June 2008

All at 2.30 pm in Café George.

 

Glasgow - Equal Pay News (12/09/17)

A kind reader from Glasgow has drawn an email from Unite to my attention in which the union apparently says some rather silly things about the Birmingham bin men's dispute.

If anyone can forward this Unite email on to me I'd be much obliged, because I'm a great believer in setting the record straight - especially when it comes to the role of the trade unions and the long fight for equal pay.

Hi Mark 

Just to check have you heard about the email doing the rounds from Unite to Scottish members asking to support the Birmingham bin men? Apparently it's because A4E and Stefan Cross have caused them to lose wages. Uttter tosh me and the work mates haven't laughed so much in a long time. Union haven't lifted a finger to help our drivers (special needs) yet they've got the gall to circulate this to members.

M


Hi M

Yes, what a lot of old baloney - because it was the trade unions who looked after the interests of just a small section of the council workforce while ignoring all of the female dominated jobs and non-bonus earning jobs done by men, including special needs drivers and school janitors.

Complete hypocrites if you ask me and they should be ashamed of their behaviour - because that's not what trade unionism is about.

Regards

Mark

  

Glasgow and Equal Pay

Here's a leaflet from A4ES which will be appearing in the Glasgow press in the days ahead.

The text of the leaflet highlights the fact that because the Council's job evaluation scheme (JES) and WPBR pay arrangements are 'unfit for purpose' - existing employees who have not already registered an equal pay claim can do so now.

Also, anyone who has left the City Council's employment within the past 5 years is now able to register a claim.

And everyone who has been with A4ES from the very beginning will see their claims go back 10 years, ie. all the way back to 2007 when the WPBR pay scheme was first introduced.

The City Council's ALEOs are covered by this decision including: Glasgow Life, Glasgow Housing, City Parking (Glasgow) LLP, Cordia (Service) LLP, City Building (Glasgow) LLP, Glasgow Marketing Bureau Limited, ACCESS LLP, Community Safety Glasgow, Jobs & Business Glasgow and City Property (Glasgow) LLP.  

 

Coming Clean in Glasgow

Lots of readers have raised the issue of equal pay the new Leader of Glasgow City Council, Cllr Susan Aitken, and have asked me what I think of the response they've received which is reproduced below for easy reference. 

Well it's fine as far as it goes, but the real problem is that it doesn't go very far at all.

Because the response doesn't deal with, or explain how the Council plans to tackle the main issues involved in this long running dispute.

So while the commitment to resolving all the outstanding claims is welcome, as is the recognition that victims of discriminatory pay policies should receive what is due to them, we are still no further forward in terms of the Council explaining how various male groups of workers were 'looked after' under the WPBR and EDC pay scheme.

Senior officials of the Council seem to be saying that they can't answer this question, perhaps because they don't have the resources of lack the resolve to dig deep into Glasgow's pay records.

Which is why I've suggested bringing in the public spending watchdog, Audit Scotland and the Accounts Commission to give this task a real sense of urgency.

And while there are complex issues to resolve there has not been a single, high-level meeting between the real decision makers at the City Council and Action 4 Equality Scotland (A4ES) which represents over 80% of all the Glasgow claimants.

In short, serious preliminary discussions never mind actual negotiations have still to get off the ground and that is not a complex issue - all it requires is to bring the key players from the City Council and A4ES together to discuss the way forward.  


Dear

Thank you for your correspondence enquiring as to the latest position regarding equal pay.

The outcome of recent cases before the Court of Session has not altered our commitment to resolving all equal pay claims and ensuring all those women who were victims of discriminatory pay policies receive what is due to them.

I share your frustration that for the past decade successive Glasgow City Council administrations have failed to resolve these issues. As I stated last week any remaining legal proceedings will only be for the purposes of providing clarity and not to delay or put barriers in the way of reaching a settlement. Council officers have been instructed to begin talks to agree a terms of reference for negotiations with all parties, unions and other legal representatives. This is a new approach for any administration in Glasgow.

We are legally, politically and morally required to ensure our decisions on equal pay are fully informed. While we inherited this unresolved issue we did not inherit any groundwork to make that decision, let alone any contingency plans should the council, as it has, lose the Court of Session case. In the weeks ahead we hope to establish a range and cost for any settlement and bring the various parties round the table.

Please be under no illusion, identifying and settling valid claims will be difficult, time-consuming and expensive. The numbers of cases involved and the complexity of the Council's pay and grading arrangements are such that it will take many months of analysis, comparison and negotiation before the principles of a settlement are finalised. Your union or legal representative is duty bound to provide you with realistic timescales.

However, we will not shirk from our responsibility to our workforce and seek excuses to hide behind. Our home carers and other women workers have waited long enough for a Council administration in Glasgow to demonstrate leadership on equal pay.

I would hope that in the near future the Council, your union or your legal representatives will be in a position to update you on how negotiations are progressing.

Councillor Susan Aitken

  

The Fight for Equal Pay in Glasgow

Lots of readers have been in touch to ask what support they can expect from local and national politicians over the fight for equal pay in Glasgow City Council.  

Well it's like any other issue, if you ask me, and while MSPs, MPs and Government Ministers cannot instruct or tell independent bodies what to do, they have every right to comment on their performance and conduct.

Which they do of course, regularly and often, when it suits their purpose or political outlook. 

So there is nothing to stop Glasgow politicians or the First Minister from speaking out on Glasgow's inability to explain the workings of its own WPBR pay scheme, for example.

Just look at their Twitter feeds and you will see that they do so day and daily, on an wide range of issues.

In fact that would be an effective way of getting this point across - I'll share on the blog site some Tweets from Glasgow politicians in which they don't hold back from calling a spade a spade.

  

First Minister and Equal Pay (20/09/17)

A number of Home Carers have ben in touch to suggest launching a petition to help persuade Glasgow City Council to get its finger out over equal pay.

If you ask me, the current crop of senior officials are in this up to their necks and they have an obvious vested interest in dragging things out for years on end - by which time they will have all left the Council and/or retired on their final salary pensions.

So I've drafted some words below which people can use to build support amongst the City Council workforce and wider public.

In my view, the behaviour of Glasgow City Council is a national disgrace and it's high time that the Council's pay arrangements were brought out into the open

Nicola Sturgeon rightly condemned this 'foot-dragging' behaviour by Scottish councils back in 2016 and now she has the opportunity to do something about it in her own back yard.

The key point of the petition is that if Glasgow's officials are being deliberately awkward or if they are claiming not to have sufficient resources to 'come clean' over the City Council's pay arrangements, then the Scottish Government can send in some outside help.

No doubt this would help to concentrate minds and get to the bottom of things and explain just how the male jobs were 'looked after' by council managers and the trade unions once the WPBR/EDC pay scheme was introduced in 2007.      

Nicola Sturgeon's contact details are:

Email
FirstMinister@gov.scot
Nicola.Sturgeon.msp@scottish.parliament.uk

Twitter
@NicolaSturgeon 

Readers of the blog site can also help by spreading the word by 'Sharing', 'Liking' and 'Retweeting' this post on Facebook and Twitter - and by raising these issues directly with local councillors, MSPs and MPs.

Remember - many hands make light work and so the more people who get involved the sooner this business will al be over.

  

Glasgow and Equal Pay

"We, the undersigned, call upon Nicola Sturgeon to use her authority and influence as a Glasgow MSP and First Minister to bring about a speedy resolution to Glasgow City Council's outstanding equal pay cases.

"We note that the Court of Session, Scotland's highest civil court, recently judged Glasgow's WPBR pay arrangements introduced in 2007 to be unfit for purpose with Lady Norris (one of the judges) commenting that the City Council 'looked after' the interests of the men.

"We also note that while there is clear evidence of preferential treatment being given to male dominated jobs, council officials seem unwilling or unable to 'come clean' and explain the details of these secret pay deals and what effect they had on the pay of Gardeners, Gravediggers, Refuse Workers and so on.

"We call upon the First Minister to help ensure that Glasgow City Council's pay arrangements are fair, open, honest and transparent going forward - based on the principle of equal pay for work of equal value.

"To that end we also call upon the First Minister to send in Audit Scotland and the Accounts Commission (Scotland's public spending watchdog) to work with the City Council leadership to uncover, as a matter of the highest priority,how the higher paid groups of male workers were 'looked after' when the WPBR/EDC pay scheme was introduced in 2007."  

  

The Fight for Equal Pay (19/04/16)

The Herald reports that Nicola Sturgeon plans to get tough with council bosses who are dragging their feet over equal pay, if she is re-elected in next month's Scottish Parliament elections and returns as First Minister.

Now that's a welcome development if you ask me, because I've been campaigning for months for the Scottish Government to take an active interest in the terrible mess that many Scottish councils have made of their pay arrangements and obligations under the Equality Act 2010.

I can't be the only person to find it ironic that Scotland's First Minister 'in-waiting' delivered her message to the STUC because, as regular readers know, the trade unions have been part of the problem in respect of equal pay with their slavish support for the Labour Party and Labour-run councils, along with their short-sighted focus on protecting the interests of traditional male jobs.

So who knows, maybe Nicola Sturgeon is keeping up with events bias the blog site which is all the more reason to step up the pressure on councils like Glasgow and North Lanarkshire to do the right thing, put an end to this sorry saga and resolve all of their outstanding equal pay claims.

Read the full piece in The Herald via the internet link below.



http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14435796.Nicola_Sturgeon_vows_to_get_tough_with_council_chiefs_over_pay_equality_for_women/

Nicola Sturgeon vows to get tough with council bosses over pay equality for women

Nicola Sturgeon vows to get tough with council chiefs over pay equality for women

By Daniel Sanderson - The Herald

NICOLA Sturgeon will today warn council chiefs that she is ready to hit them with tough new penalties if they continue to drag their feet over wage equality for thousands of female workers.

The First Minister, in an address to the Scottish Trades Union Congress (STUC) in Dundee, is expected to announce that if she is re-elected next month she will explore sanctions that the Scottish Government could impose on town halls if they refuse to honour equal pay obligations.

It is understood that the feasibility of imposing fines on local authorities through their financial settlement will be considered, if they fail to resolve disputes by a deadline of April next year.

North Lanarkshire Update (16/03/16)

Some people say that politicians can't get directly involved in the fight for equal pay in Labour-run North Lanarkshire Council.

But this is nonsense, of course, because there are countless examples of Scottish politicians getting stuck into an issue even when it involves an 'independent corporate entity which is entirely separate from the Scottish Government'.

Take the Farepak scandal, for example. 

Readers may recall that Farepak (a private company) went bust in 2006 leaving thousands of people out of pocket in the run up to Christmas, as their savings went down the drain.  

Yet the fact that Farepak was an 'independent corporate entity' didn't stop politicians of every stripe and political party queuing up to get their tuppence worth in and demanding that something must be done.

Here are a few extracts of the press coverage that Farepak collapse attracted over the years and as is plain for all to see the politicians didn't exactly hold back with their public comments, criticism and calls for action.

What is needed in North Lanarkshire is a 'call to arms' if you ask me, a demand for action inside and outside the Council so that senior figures are held to account for the terrible mess that's been made of the Council's pay arrangements over the years.

SNP urges aid for Farepak crash victims

The Scotsman - 24 December 2014

THE SNP today issued a Christmas Eve appeal to the UK Government for compensation for Farepak families, who are still waiting for reparation four years after the collapse of the Christmas savings club.

Work and Pensions spokeswoman Eilidh Whiteford has written to Business Secretary Vince Cable, asking why 20,000 Scottish customers who lost their money in 2006 are still out of pocket.

She said: "The UK Government bent over backwards to bail out the banks, and is rightly compensating customers of Equitable Life but hasn't found a single penny for the Farepak families.

"It is four years since Farepak collapsed, but that nightmare of Christmas past is still being felt by many low-income families.

"It is simply disgraceful that, years after the company collapsed, customers are still waiting for their money back."


The Daily Record - 16 July 2012

Labour’s Katy Clark, MP for North Ayrshire and Arran, has written to Cable to demand answers over the collapse of the case.

She said: “This decision is yet another kick in the teeth for those who lost out as a result of the Farepak collapse.

“More than five years on, savers have yet to receive a penny of their money back or see those responsible held accountable.”

22 Dec 2008

Glasgow East MP, John Mason, has issued an eve of Christmas appeal calling for the UK Government to bring forward compensation for Farepak families, who are still waiting for reparation two years after the collapse.

Comparing the UK Government’s response to bailing out the banks with Farepak, Mr Mason has written to Gareth Thomas, Minister of State for Trade, Investment and Consumer Affairs, asking why 20,000 Scottish customers – including hundreds of Glaswegians – are still out of pocket two years later.

SNP call for major Farepak probe

BBC News - 17 November 2006


Farepak customers have been fighting to win compensation

The Scottish National Party has called for a criminal investigation into the collapse of the Christmas savings company Farepak.More than 150,000 customers lost an average of £400 each when the company went into administration in October.

Stewart Hosie MP, the SNP's Treasury spokesman has written to the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry. He asked him to consider launching a criminal investigation after the Swindon-based firm collapsed.

Stewart Hosie MP, SNP's Treasury spokesman said: 

"Press reports would indicate that large sums of savers money were salted away to Farepak's parent company EHR and that Farepak continued to request and receive money until very shortly before it folded.

"I hope that the DTI will pursue a criminal investigation."

First Minister and Equal Pay (15/03/16)

A good number of readers took up my suggestion of writing to Scotland's First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, to highlight the scandalous track record or Labour-run North Lanarkshire Council in relation to equal pay. 

Now I have a lot of time for Nicola Sturgeon, but I think it's fair to say that people feel rather underwhelmed at the First Minister's official response from a civil servant on behalf of the Scottish Government.

Here is the 'guts' of what the civil servant had to say:

"Councils are independent corporate entities and entirely separate from the Scottish Government. Their powers are set out in statute and, as long as they act lawfully, it is up to each local authority to manage its day to say business. This includes decisions on pay and conditions of employment of council staff. They are accountable to their own electorates, not the Scottish Government, and Scottish Ministers have no general powers that would enable them to call on a council to account for its actions. I would also add that the GMB is an entirely independent organisation and the Scottish Government has no power to intervene in union matters.

"The Scottish Government is keen to see the resolution of all equal pay claims. That is why in August 2014 the then Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Economic Growth, John Swinney, agreed to a request from COSLA for more flexibility to deal with equal pay claims, by allowing councils additional time to plan for the funding of equal pay payments, and to use capital receipts to fund the cost of claims. However, it is up to any individual council to decide whether to take up this offer.

"You may like to know that in December 2014in the Scottish Parliament, Marco Biagi MSP, the Minister for Local Government and Community Empowerment, said that he thought the delays in settling equal pay disputes was unacceptable, and that he would continue to challenge this. However, as Mr Biagi also said the Scottish Government has no formal power to intervene in this matter."

Now this is typical "Yes Minister' stuff which faces both ways at the same time if you ask me, with a general message of concern and support while emphasising that the Scottish Government has no formal power to intervene over the mess that Scotland's fourth largest council has made of equal pay.

Now as everyone knows, that is a statement of the bleedin' obvious, as they say, because  no one is expecting Nicola Sturgeon or other Scottish Ministers to step in and take over day-to-day responsibility for the running of North Lanarkshire Council. 

But as I pointed out to the First Minister in my own letter dated 28 November 2014 I believe that is is possible for the Scottish Government to investigate North Lanarkshire Council's behaviour under The Equality Act 2010 (Specific Duties) (Scotland) Regulations 2012.

My full letter to the First Minister is reproduced below in the blog post titled 'Food For Thought' dated 17 February 2016 although this extract focuses on the key provision of Clause 11.

"My purpose in raising these matters with you, as First Minister, is to invite the Scottish Government to use its powers under the Equality Act to launch an investigation into North Lanarkshire Council's behaviour. My reading of The Equality Act 2010 (Specific Duties) (Scotland) Regulations 2012 suggests that the Scottish Government can intervene and is able to do so under Clause 11 of the Statutory Instrument which says:

"Duty to consider other matters

"11. In carrying out its duties under these regulations, a listed authority may be required to consider such matters as may be specified from time to time by the Scottish Ministers." 

So if you ask me, Scottish Ministers (whether Nicola Sturgeon or local government minister, Marco Biagi) do have the power to call North Lanarkshire to account, for example, by requiring the to explain how the Council made such a mess of its pay arrangements for the past 10 years and more.   

In other words it's very much a case of 'game on' and the key thing now is to persuade NLC politicians, local and nationally, that the behaviour of North Lanarkshire Council deserves to be placed under and independent scrutiny.