Web of Deceit (3)
So now we know that only 44 out of 578 LSO 3 posts (7.6% of the total) are paid within South Lanarkshire Council's officially declared pay band for these jobs - which is Spinal Column Points 25 to 28 (£8.77 to £9.17 an hour).
But the UK Supreme Court has also been forced South Lanarkshire Council to release further information in response to my original FOI request - which takes us up to Spinal Column Point 34 and the following range of figures detailed below.
Total number of LSO 3 posts = 578
Total number paid at SCP 25 = 6 (£.8.77 an hour)
Total number paid at SCP 26 = 16 (£8.90 an hour)
Total number paid at SCP 27 = 21 (£9.04 an hour)
Total number paid at SCP 28 = 1 (£9.17 an hour)
Total number paid at SCP 30 = 1 (£9.45 an hour)
Total number paid at SCP 31 = 19 (£9.59 an hour)
Total number paid at SCP 32 = 0 (£9.71 an hour)
Total number paid at SCP 33 = 6 (£9.89 an hour)
Total number paid at SCP 34 = 74 (£10.03 an hour)
Now these figures mean that, so far at least, only 172 LSO 3 posts have been accounted for out of the total of 578 - so it follows that the remaining 406 posts (71.24%) must be paid at well beyond SCP 34 or £10.03 an hour.
My information is that some of these traditional male jobs are paid up to and over Spinal Column Point 50 - SCP 55 being worth £13.70 an hour, for example.
If this turns out to be the case, then with preserved allowances, overtime and such like included - certain individuals are likely to be earning more than qualified teachers and social workers - which would be truly mind boggling.
If this turns out to be the case, then with preserved allowances, overtime and such like included - certain individuals are likely to be earning more than qualified teachers and social workers - which would be truly mind boggling.
I imagine the female dominated workforce within South Lanarkshire Council is very angry at the moment - because this represents, in my view, a complete betrayal of what was intended by the 1999 Single Status (Equal Pay) Agreement.
The last time I remember a pay 'scandal' of this size and scale was back in the pre-1996 days of Monklands District Council - but South Lanarkshire is a much bigger Council, of course, one of the largest in Scotland in fact.
Web of Deceit (2) (12 August 2013)
Equal pay is about fairness and objectivity - paying jobs what they are worth according to a set of objective criteria normally laid down under a process known as Job Evaluation which is used to compare one job - or set of jobs - to another.
For years now South Lanarkshire Council has been trying to keep secret the pay information relating to traditional male council jobs - but the Council has now been forced to admit defeat after losing a landmark FOI case at the UK Supreme Court.
In May 2010 I asked South Lanarkshire to confirm the pay scales of just one set of Council jobs - grade LSO 3 which covers a variety of jobs done by Council refuse workers and gardeners.
But the Council - wrongly and foolishly as it turned out - refused to tell me anything other than the total number of LSO 3 jobs which came to 578 employees - all of whom should have been paid, of course, within the official pay band for that particular grade - which is between Spinal Column Points 25 to 28.
Now I smelled a rat at the Council's attitude and its efforts to keep this information from public view which is why I pursued the matter to the Scottish Information Commissioner (SIC) - and the rest is history, as they say.
So here, finally, is the information that South Lanarkshire Council tried to keep secret for so long.
Total number of LSO 3 posts = 578
Total number of LSO 3 posts paid at SCP 25 = 6 (1.04%)
Total number of LSO 3 posts paid at SCP 26 = 16 (2.77%)
Total number of LSO 3 posts paid at SCP 27 = 21 (3.63%)
Total number of LSO 3 posts paid at SCP 28 = 1 (0.17%)
Total number of LSO 3 posts paid within their officially declared pay band of SCP 25 to 28 = 44 (7.6%).
Which means of course that an incredible 92.4% (534) of the Council's LSO 3 posts are paid at a higher rate than the Council's own (in-house) job evaluation scheme says they should be paid and - unsurprisingly - these are all traditional male Council jobs.
Now I don't know what that sounds like to you - but to me it doesn't remotely resemble equal pay and I imagine it will make many of South Lanarkshire Council's largely female workforce - completely hopping mad.
So the next question is:
"What are the remaining 92.4% of the LSO 3 workforce actually paid?"
To be followed soon thereafter by:
"If this is what's going on in just one small part of South Lanarkshire Council, then what in the name of goodness is happening elsewhere?"
I imagine that most local councillors in South Lanarkshire will be completely shocked at this news - as will MSPs and MPs, if they have any sense - because it's much worse and even more blatant that I suspected.
I will have more to say in the days ahead, but in the meantime here are the current rates of pay for Spinal Column Points 25 to 28.
SCP 25 - £8.77 an hour
SCP 26 - £8.90 an hour
SCP 27 - £9.04 an hour
SCP 28 - £9.17 an hour
Here's a previous post to the blog site from September 2010 which contains an FOI Review Request - in plain language an invitation for South Lanarkshire Council to reconsider its barmy decision to refuse my original FOI request from May 2010.
The key point to note is that the officially declared rate of pay for the Council LSO 3 jobs are the four Spinal Column Points 25, 26, 27 and 28 - which means that all 578 LSO 3 jobs should be placed on one of these four SCPs because that's where they were placed after an 'objective' Job Evaluation exercise, so South Lanarkshire says anyway.
Now as regular readers know, a bona fide Job Evaluation exercise is required to treat all jobs equally - on an even-handed basis - and one of the most important principles is that Job Evaluation evaluates the job not the person.
So, tomorrow I shall finally be able to reveal exactly how many of the 578 LSO 3 jobs in South Lanarkshire Council have been placed on Spinal Column Points 25, 26, 27 and 28 - thanks to the support of the independent Scottish Information Commissioner, the Court of Session in Scotland and the UK Supreme Court.
Be prepared for a shock - is all I can say.
South Lanarkshire Council (7 September 2010)
For years now South Lanarkshire Council has been trying to keep secret the pay information relating to traditional male council jobs - but the Council has now been forced to admit defeat after losing a landmark FOI case at the UK Supreme Court.
In May 2010 I asked South Lanarkshire to confirm the pay scales of just one set of Council jobs - grade LSO 3 which covers a variety of jobs done by Council refuse workers and gardeners.
But the Council - wrongly and foolishly as it turned out - refused to tell me anything other than the total number of LSO 3 jobs which came to 578 employees - all of whom should have been paid, of course, within the official pay band for that particular grade - which is between Spinal Column Points 25 to 28.
Now I smelled a rat at the Council's attitude and its efforts to keep this information from public view which is why I pursued the matter to the Scottish Information Commissioner (SIC) - and the rest is history, as they say.
So here, finally, is the information that South Lanarkshire Council tried to keep secret for so long.
Total number of LSO 3 posts = 578
Total number of LSO 3 posts paid at SCP 25 = 6 (1.04%)
Total number of LSO 3 posts paid at SCP 26 = 16 (2.77%)
Total number of LSO 3 posts paid at SCP 27 = 21 (3.63%)
Total number of LSO 3 posts paid at SCP 28 = 1 (0.17%)
Total number of LSO 3 posts paid within their officially declared pay band of SCP 25 to 28 = 44 (7.6%).
Which means of course that an incredible 92.4% (534) of the Council's LSO 3 posts are paid at a higher rate than the Council's own (in-house) job evaluation scheme says they should be paid and - unsurprisingly - these are all traditional male Council jobs.
Now I don't know what that sounds like to you - but to me it doesn't remotely resemble equal pay and I imagine it will make many of South Lanarkshire Council's largely female workforce - completely hopping mad.
So the next question is:
"What are the remaining 92.4% of the LSO 3 workforce actually paid?"
To be followed soon thereafter by:
"If this is what's going on in just one small part of South Lanarkshire Council, then what in the name of goodness is happening elsewhere?"
I imagine that most local councillors in South Lanarkshire will be completely shocked at this news - as will MSPs and MPs, if they have any sense - because it's much worse and even more blatant that I suspected.
I will have more to say in the days ahead, but in the meantime here are the current rates of pay for Spinal Column Points 25 to 28.
SCP 25 - £8.77 an hour
SCP 26 - £8.90 an hour
SCP 27 - £9.04 an hour
SCP 28 - £9.17 an hour
Web of Deceit (11 August 2013)
The key point to note is that the officially declared rate of pay for the Council LSO 3 jobs are the four Spinal Column Points 25, 26, 27 and 28 - which means that all 578 LSO 3 jobs should be placed on one of these four SCPs because that's where they were placed after an 'objective' Job Evaluation exercise, so South Lanarkshire says anyway.
Now as regular readers know, a bona fide Job Evaluation exercise is required to treat all jobs equally - on an even-handed basis - and one of the most important principles is that Job Evaluation evaluates the job not the person.
So, tomorrow I shall finally be able to reveal exactly how many of the 578 LSO 3 jobs in South Lanarkshire Council have been placed on Spinal Column Points 25, 26, 27 and 28 - thanks to the support of the independent Scottish Information Commissioner, the Court of Session in Scotland and the UK Supreme Court.
Be prepared for a shock - is all I can say.
South Lanarkshire Council (7 September 2010)
Here's a FOISA review request to South Lanarkshire Council.
If the council fails to give a straight answer - which they've been trying to avoid for more than a year - an appeal will follow to the Scottish Information Commissioner.
As ever, people with nothing to hide - are always prepared to act openly and transparently.
South Lanarkshire Council
FOI Review Request Team
Dear Colleague
South Lanarkshire Council – FOI Review Request – SCP 25
1 I refer to the undated letter from South Lanarkshire Council which I received by e-mail on 1 September 2010. I am asking for a review of the council’s decision on the following grounds.
Abusing the FOISA Process
2 In my view South Lanarkshire Council is deliberately abusing the freedom of information regime laid down by the Scottish Parliament.
3 I originally asked the council for pay information about these posts in May 2009. The council dragged the process out for several months and argued that agreeing to my request would breach data protection principles, but after wasting all this time the council changed its mind and suddenly claimed an exemption on the grounds of cost.
4 When I submitted my request in a different manner in May 2010 to avoid any cost issues, the council suddenly claimed that my request was vexatious – a claim that was patently untrue and designed to waste even more time. To my mind this is a deliberate tactic, a pattern of behaviour that has been repeated over time and one that flies in the face of following statement which appears on the council’s web site:
"Freedom of Information legislation is designed to ensure openness and accountability. This means that wherever possible, we will make the information you request available to you."
Privacy and Data Protection
5 The council is completely wrong to suggest that my request would amount to a breach of data protection principles. The fact is that I am not asking about the personal data of specific individuals, for example the amount of overtime that individuals work, the amount of tax a person pays or for details about any other deductions from salaries, which clearly would fall into the category of personal data.
6 I am simply asking for the numbers of LSO posts to be confirmed at the various spinal column points which were identified in my original FOI request. In my view this information cannot be construed as personal data because it does not belong to an individual employee. The data is simply the specific spinal column point onto which the job is placed on the spinal column following job evaluation.
7 South Lanarkshire Council has already released some of the information relating to my original FOI request by confirming that the total number of LSO 3 posts within the council amounts to 578 individual employees. In the case of post LSO 3 the relevant salary range (according to the council) is SCP 25 to 28, i.e. the four spinal column pay points at SCP 25, 26, 27 and 28.
Identifying Individual Employees
8 The council’s initial response claims that specific individuals could be identified by the release of this information, but conveniently fails to explain the circumstances under which this could happen. In my view the release of this information cannot identify any individual or cause detriment to any individual – by the council explaining further the distribution of these 578 LSO 3 posts.
9 For example, if all 578 jobs are placed on the scale SCP 25 to 28, let’s assume that 150 are placed at SCP 25, 150 are placed at SCP 26, 150 are placed at SCP 27 and 128 at placed are SCP 28.
10 How would agreeing to my request allow individual employees to be identified – any more than the release of the total figure of 578? Unless, of course, lots of jobs are actually placed above SCP 28 in which case there are potentially serious implications for the council, but not for individual employees.
11 Furthermore, the number of posts at each spinal column point does not provide the means to identify anyone by work location or home address, or geographical area. In my view, the council’s argument is completely bogus and is all about concealing the true picture from council employees and the wider public.
Concealment v Public Interest
12 South Lanarkshire Council has previously stated that all of LSO 3 jobs are in the salary range SCP 25 to 28, which means that these four Spinal Column Points should accommodate all 578 jobs.
13 I believe that to be untrue, as do many of council employees who live and in some cases work alongside people doing these traditional male jobs. In my view, the real reason for the refusal of my request is that the council is trying to conceal the evidence of widespread pay discrimination within the South Lanarkshire Council, which the council’s own letter alludes to at Page 3, Paragraph 4: “..a number of these (LSO 3) posts may be overpaid for the work they do..”.
14 I believe there is a clear public interest in releasing this pay information because this will demonstrate how South Lanarkshire Council has been using public funds to meet its obligations under the 1999 Single Status (Equal Pay) Agreement. All other councils in Scotland have already done so freely - without any fuss or bother - and without the need for a formal FOISA request.
Kind regards
Mark Irvine
If the council fails to give a straight answer - which they've been trying to avoid for more than a year - an appeal will follow to the Scottish Information Commissioner.
As ever, people with nothing to hide - are always prepared to act openly and transparently.
South Lanarkshire Council
FOI Review Request Team
By e-mail to – foi.reviews@southlanarkshire.gov.uk
Dear Colleague
South Lanarkshire Council – FOI Review Request – SCP 25
1 I refer to the undated letter from South Lanarkshire Council which I received by e-mail on 1 September 2010. I am asking for a review of the council’s decision on the following grounds.
Abusing the FOISA Process
2 In my view South Lanarkshire Council is deliberately abusing the freedom of information regime laid down by the Scottish Parliament.
3 I originally asked the council for pay information about these posts in May 2009. The council dragged the process out for several months and argued that agreeing to my request would breach data protection principles, but after wasting all this time the council changed its mind and suddenly claimed an exemption on the grounds of cost.
4 When I submitted my request in a different manner in May 2010 to avoid any cost issues, the council suddenly claimed that my request was vexatious – a claim that was patently untrue and designed to waste even more time. To my mind this is a deliberate tactic, a pattern of behaviour that has been repeated over time and one that flies in the face of following statement which appears on the council’s web site:
"Freedom of Information legislation is designed to ensure openness and accountability. This means that wherever possible, we will make the information you request available to you."
Privacy and Data Protection
5 The council is completely wrong to suggest that my request would amount to a breach of data protection principles. The fact is that I am not asking about the personal data of specific individuals, for example the amount of overtime that individuals work, the amount of tax a person pays or for details about any other deductions from salaries, which clearly would fall into the category of personal data.
6 I am simply asking for the numbers of LSO posts to be confirmed at the various spinal column points which were identified in my original FOI request. In my view this information cannot be construed as personal data because it does not belong to an individual employee. The data is simply the specific spinal column point onto which the job is placed on the spinal column following job evaluation.
7 South Lanarkshire Council has already released some of the information relating to my original FOI request by confirming that the total number of LSO 3 posts within the council amounts to 578 individual employees. In the case of post LSO 3 the relevant salary range (according to the council) is SCP 25 to 28, i.e. the four spinal column pay points at SCP 25, 26, 27 and 28.
Identifying Individual Employees
8 The council’s initial response claims that specific individuals could be identified by the release of this information, but conveniently fails to explain the circumstances under which this could happen. In my view the release of this information cannot identify any individual or cause detriment to any individual – by the council explaining further the distribution of these 578 LSO 3 posts.
9 For example, if all 578 jobs are placed on the scale SCP 25 to 28, let’s assume that 150 are placed at SCP 25, 150 are placed at SCP 26, 150 are placed at SCP 27 and 128 at placed are SCP 28.
10 How would agreeing to my request allow individual employees to be identified – any more than the release of the total figure of 578? Unless, of course, lots of jobs are actually placed above SCP 28 in which case there are potentially serious implications for the council, but not for individual employees.
11 Furthermore, the number of posts at each spinal column point does not provide the means to identify anyone by work location or home address, or geographical area. In my view, the council’s argument is completely bogus and is all about concealing the true picture from council employees and the wider public.
Concealment v Public Interest
12 South Lanarkshire Council has previously stated that all of LSO 3 jobs are in the salary range SCP 25 to 28, which means that these four Spinal Column Points should accommodate all 578 jobs.
13 I believe that to be untrue, as do many of council employees who live and in some cases work alongside people doing these traditional male jobs. In my view, the real reason for the refusal of my request is that the council is trying to conceal the evidence of widespread pay discrimination within the South Lanarkshire Council, which the council’s own letter alludes to at Page 3, Paragraph 4: “..a number of these (LSO 3) posts may be overpaid for the work they do..”.
14 I believe there is a clear public interest in releasing this pay information because this will demonstrate how South Lanarkshire Council has been using public funds to meet its obligations under the 1999 Single Status (Equal Pay) Agreement. All other councils in Scotland have already done so freely - without any fuss or bother - and without the need for a formal FOISA request.
Kind regards
Mark Irvine
