Snakes and Ladders
While I'm waiting on South Lanarkshire Council responding to my latest Freedom of Information (FOI) request - I thought I'd share at least some of the the pay details that SLC has been forced to release as a result of of the recent and unanimous decision of the UK Supreme Court.
So far, the Council has confirmed that:
77 LSO posts are paid at SCP 34 - or £10.03 an hour
17 LSO posts are paid at SCP 38 - or £10.66 an hour
35 LSO posts are paid at SCP 40 - or £10.97 an hour
19 LSO posts are paid at SCP 42 - or £11.29 an hour
25 LSO posts are paid at SCP 44 - or £11.63 an hour
8 LSO posts are paid at SCP 46 - or £11.99 an hour
1 LSO post is paid at SCP 56 - or £13.92 an hour
Although in May 2013 SLC introduced new pay arrangements for this particular group of Council workers by imposing longer hours and, therefore, lower rates of pay - in a cynical effort to reduce or minimise the Council's liabilities in respect of future equal pay claims.
I've been in touch with many of the male workers involved who are, understandably, very angry that the Council - a Labour Council - has imposed these huge cuts in their pay and conditions under threat of being sacked and re-engaged on new (lower) terms.
What they cannot understand - and nor can I to be honest - is why their trade unions have not kicked up a great fuss and defended their members interests against this Labour run council - because the 'problem' with Equal Pay is not that male workers have been getting paid too much, but that so many women workers have been paid too little.
For example, the Unite trade union is currently locked in a battle with Ineos the owners of the Grangemouth oil refinery and petrochemical plant - over proposals from the company to cut employees' pay and conditions - yet down the road in Hamilton, East Kilbride and Rutherglen the same thing has been happening without a word of protest from the Council trade unions.
What's the reason for the unions losing their voice - is it because of the political links between the trade unions and South Lanarkshire Council?
I don't know, but I do know that the trade unions in South Lanarkshire owe their members an explanation.
And while they are at it the trade unions and the Council really ought to explain the huge pay differences between these LSO jobs and the jobs done by women workers - carers, cooks, cleaners, classroom assistants, clerical workers, school support staff and nursery nurses.
Because before the 1999 Single Status (Equal Pay) Agreement and before the Council introduced its 'in-house' Job Evaluation Scheme (JES) - the women's jobs were all on the same or in some cases even higher grades than their male colleagues.
But after the Council applied its local JES, the only one of its kind in Scotland of course - the women's jobs all ended up being paid much less than the men.
Now that's what I call a scandal - it's like a twisted and nightmarish game of snakes and ladders in which all the male council jobs manage to land on a ladder - while all the women's jobs land on a snake.
In other words - it's unbelievable.
I've been in touch with many of the male workers involved who are, understandably, very angry that the Council - a Labour Council - has imposed these huge cuts in their pay and conditions under threat of being sacked and re-engaged on new (lower) terms.
What they cannot understand - and nor can I to be honest - is why their trade unions have not kicked up a great fuss and defended their members interests against this Labour run council - because the 'problem' with Equal Pay is not that male workers have been getting paid too much, but that so many women workers have been paid too little.
For example, the Unite trade union is currently locked in a battle with Ineos the owners of the Grangemouth oil refinery and petrochemical plant - over proposals from the company to cut employees' pay and conditions - yet down the road in Hamilton, East Kilbride and Rutherglen the same thing has been happening without a word of protest from the Council trade unions.
What's the reason for the unions losing their voice - is it because of the political links between the trade unions and South Lanarkshire Council?
I don't know, but I do know that the trade unions in South Lanarkshire owe their members an explanation.
And while they are at it the trade unions and the Council really ought to explain the huge pay differences between these LSO jobs and the jobs done by women workers - carers, cooks, cleaners, classroom assistants, clerical workers, school support staff and nursery nurses.
Because before the 1999 Single Status (Equal Pay) Agreement and before the Council introduced its 'in-house' Job Evaluation Scheme (JES) - the women's jobs were all on the same or in some cases even higher grades than their male colleagues.
But after the Council applied its local JES, the only one of its kind in Scotland of course - the women's jobs all ended up being paid much less than the men.
Now that's what I call a scandal - it's like a twisted and nightmarish game of snakes and ladders in which all the male council jobs manage to land on a ladder - while all the women's jobs land on a snake.
In other words - it's unbelievable.
Web of Deceit (4) (15 August 2013)
Now for obvious reasons I won't go into personal details, but the general position is that this simply confirms the validity of many people's claims.
Because how can a woman worker be employed on a pay band of, say, SCP 25 to 28 - if another (male) worker on the same pay band is, in practice but in secret, being paid very much more than the official 'rate for the job'?
So, in that situation where a woman worker in the same pay band as a male worker - say SCP 25 to SCP 28 - was being paid much less than the male worker, the woman worker would have an equal pay claim for the difference in pay between the two jobs.
For example, a woman worker on SCP 27 £9.04 an hour (within the pay band SCP 25 to SCP 28) would be able to compare herself to a male worker in the same pay band (SCP 25 to SCP 28) but who is actually being paid at SCP 52 or £13.11 an hour - the difference in pay being £4.07 per hour.
The normal rules of Job Evaluation say that such differences in pay should be impossible since all jobs are supposed to be treated on a fair and equal basis - with no regard to an individual employee's historical pay or personal circumstances.
In addition, my understanding is that the pay band of Home Care workers was much lower in previous years - much lower than it is now - in which case an equal pay claim would have to look at the difference in pay as it stood then, say, back in 2005 - as well as the pay difference as it stands now.
The curious thing is that before the application of South Lanarkshire's 'in-house' Job Evaluation Scheme these female dominated Home Care jobs were graded as high - if not higher - than the male LSO3 jobs.
Yet somehow after the application of the Council's 'in-house' JES - all of the male jobs appear to be getting paid so very much more - which doesn't sound a bit like 'Equal Pay', if you ask me.
As Lord Nolan once said 'Daylight is the best disinfectant' when it comes to standards in public life - and that's what I'm determined to bring to the murky pay arrangements operated by South Lanarkshire Council - a little daylight combined with a dash or two of public accountability.
Web of Deceit (3) (13 August 2013)
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
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
