More Dead Sheep?
The state of Scottish local government is laid bare in this article from the BBC's web site which sounds to me like a dialogue of the deaf.
The public spending watchdog (Audit Scotland) warns that Scottish councils need to find new ways of saving money other than by simply cutting staff numbers, perhaps by working in collaboration with neighbouring councils to share services, for example.
In other words by eliminating the need for three different payroll services which would allow council resources to be redeployed elsewhere such as care of the elderly.
But we have been here before of course and the concept of shared services has failed miserably - virtually nothing has happened when the policy is left for individual councils to implement on a voluntary basis, as I've said in previous posts to the blog site.
So we are left in the ridiculous position of Scotland's public spending watchdog politely telling councils to 'get their finger out' - while the President of COSLA (the self-styled 'voice' of Scottish local government says that Audit Scotland doesn't know what it is talking about.
Council staff cuts not sustainable, warns Audit Scotland
By Jamie McIvor
BBC Scotland local government correspondent
Councils are warned that an ageing population is just one factor which will reduce the scope for staff cuts
Councils must do more than simply cut staff to find savings, according to a report from the public spending watchdog.
Audit Scotland says councils still need to make substantial savings and will find it increasingly hard to find ways of balancing their books.
It argues cutting staff to save money is not sustainable long-term.
Local government organisation Cosla condemned the report as "bland".
Audit Scotland's report for the Accounts Commission on an overview of local government in 2014 said that so far, savings have been made mainly by cutting staff numbers - but this measure is not sustainable in the longer term.
The report said: "Councils, as with other parts of the public sector, have always faced difficult choices in allocating limited money, staff and other assets such as buildings across competing priorities.
"However, against a backdrop of savings and staff reductions to date, these decisions are increasingly difficult."
Councils must do more than simply cut staff to find savings, according to a report from the public spending watchdog.
Audit Scotland says councils still need to make substantial savings and will find it increasingly hard to find ways of balancing their books.
It argues cutting staff to save money is not sustainable long-term.
Local government organisation Cosla condemned the report as "bland".
Audit Scotland's report for the Accounts Commission on an overview of local government in 2014 said that so far, savings have been made mainly by cutting staff numbers - but this measure is not sustainable in the longer term.
The report said: "Councils, as with other parts of the public sector, have always faced difficult choices in allocating limited money, staff and other assets such as buildings across competing priorities.
"However, against a backdrop of savings and staff reductions to date, these decisions are increasingly difficult."
Council chambers
Scotland's 32 councils collectively spent almost £21bn in 2013.
The report also also highlighted the need for "strong political and managerial leadership".
The report identified "heightened tensions" in some council chambers which is "leading to strained working relationships".
Problems were identified at Argyll and Bute, Falkirk and Aberdeen.
The report argues such tensions threaten effective leadership, and the council's ability to do business effectively and achieve best value for services.
The number of staff working for councils has fell from a full time equivalent figure of 228,300 in 2009, to 204,500 in 2013. Very few staff have been made compulsorily redundant.
Staff costs run to at least £6 billion a year.
Scotland's 32 councils collectively spent almost £21bn in 2013.
The report also also highlighted the need for "strong political and managerial leadership".
The report identified "heightened tensions" in some council chambers which is "leading to strained working relationships".
Problems were identified at Argyll and Bute, Falkirk and Aberdeen.
The report argues such tensions threaten effective leadership, and the council's ability to do business effectively and achieve best value for services.
The number of staff working for councils has fell from a full time equivalent figure of 228,300 in 2009, to 204,500 in 2013. Very few staff have been made compulsorily redundant.
Staff costs run to at least £6 billion a year.
Radical change
Some sceptics have argued some proposals for radical change in local government in recent years have simply fizzled out.
For example, a scheme which would have seen councils in the west of Scotland work more closely together fizzled out as did a proposal to let a private company take over bin collections in Edinburgh.
But there are examples of change too. East Ayrshire and South Ayrshire councils are about to launch a single service to maintain their roads - the first time this has happened.
Accounts Commission chair Douglas Sinclair said: "Finances remain tight and councils anticipate further budget reductions. To date they have balanced budgets mainly by reducing staff numbers, but this alone is not sustainable in the longer term.
"Increasing numbers of older people, who typically need more public services - notably health and social care, as well as the public's rising expectations of service quality are among a range of factors contributing to increased demands on services.
"Councillors need to have an open mind on how they organise the services they provide. That means looking afresh at what people need, how it can be delivered and who can best deliver it."
Some sceptics have argued some proposals for radical change in local government in recent years have simply fizzled out.
For example, a scheme which would have seen councils in the west of Scotland work more closely together fizzled out as did a proposal to let a private company take over bin collections in Edinburgh.
But there are examples of change too. East Ayrshire and South Ayrshire councils are about to launch a single service to maintain their roads - the first time this has happened.
Accounts Commission chair Douglas Sinclair said: "Finances remain tight and councils anticipate further budget reductions. To date they have balanced budgets mainly by reducing staff numbers, but this alone is not sustainable in the longer term.
"Increasing numbers of older people, who typically need more public services - notably health and social care, as well as the public's rising expectations of service quality are among a range of factors contributing to increased demands on services.
"Councillors need to have an open mind on how they organise the services they provide. That means looking afresh at what people need, how it can be delivered and who can best deliver it."
'Obvious and bland'
He added: "The Commission has expressed its consistent view that it is unacceptable if political tensions become so extreme that they compromise a council's ability to ensure effective leadership, demonstrate good governance and, as a result, weaken the public's trust and confidence in the integrity of the council and its councillors to conduct public business."
Cosla President Councillor David O'Neill hit out at the report, saying it was stating the obvious and extremely bland.
Mr O'Neill said: "Two examples that really annoy me and fall into the category of stating the obvious. Firstly, that Councils need to look at innovative ways of saving money, we have been doing that for years and do we really need to be told that from them.
"Secondly, and the one that takes the biscuit is, that when times are tough and cuts have to be made Political coalitions in Councils become more difficult. I can also assure them that we do have an open mind as to how we organise services.
"I would also tell the Accounts Commission that Councils engagement with the public they are elected to serve has never been greater and I find it more than a little galling to be pulled up by them on this when they were one of the few public sector organisations who refused to come and give evidence to the Commission I chair on strengthening Local Democracy - which smacks to me of do as we say, not as we do."
The revolt against COSLA seems to be gathering steam as yet another council gives notice of its intention to quit Scotland's local government talking shop.
Reading between the lines of this article from the BBC web site both South Lanarkshire and Glasgow (Scotland's largest council) seem likely to follow the lead of Inverclyde, Aberdeen, Renfrewshire and Dumfries & Galloway councils.
I suppose it's the Scottish local government equivalent of the famous scene from Life of Brian where one of the character's asks "What have the Romans ever done for us?"
Except that COSLA seems unable to persuade its critics (mainly Labour councils it seems) that the organisation has done very much at all.
Inverclyde Council announces Cosla departure
By Jamie McIvor
BBC Scotland local government correspondent
Here's an interesting report from BBC's web site about the huge costs of voluntary redundancy and early retirement in Scotland's public services.
The cost over the past two years is estimated at £550 million - an incredible 40% of which has been spent on just 1,200 staff which, according to my arithmetic, means that 1,200 people shared £220 million - or an average 'golden goodbye' payment of £183,333.33.
A very tidy sum of money on top of an already high salary of course and meanwhile the remaining 12,800 staff shared a balance of £310 million - which produces a much lower average payment of £24,218.75.
So from these figures you can see how 'final salary' calculations skew such payments towards the higher paid staff within the public services - when, in fact, a much fairer system would be to use 'career average earnings.
Which would mean that what people get out of the system is based on what they've paid in over their working careers - instead of some of them walking away with enormous and often 'tax free' public handouts.
Now that would seem much more sensible - yet the trade unions continue to support final salary schemes even though it means that lower paid staff continue to subsidise the pension pots of their managers and bosses.
How crazy is that?
And remember that even when Audit Scotland finds good reason to criticise the behaviour of some of these public bodies - including local councils - its criticisms are simply ignored.
As I've said before being attacked by Audit Scotland - in the words of Labour's Denis Healey - is like being savaged by a dead sheep.
Call for 'value for money' Scottish public sector pay-offs
The public sector workforce in Scotland has reduced by 40,000 since 2009
About 14,000 public sector employees have taken voluntary redundancy or early retirement in the past two years in Scotland at a cost of about £550m.
According to Audit Scotland, 40% of the pay-off fund was shared by just 1,200 high earners in the sector, including government, NHS, police and fire.
The spending watchdog said there was evidence that these early departure schemes had led to savings.
However, it called for greater scrutiny to ensure they offered value for money.
The report, Managing early departures from the Scottish public sector, said most bodies dealt with the system well, but there were major differences in the monitoring and transparency of costs.
The Scottish government said its policy of no compulsory redundancy and pay restraint was working.
Since 2009, 40,000 people left the sector, the report said.
Early departures accounted for about half, with the rest retiring due to age or ill health, or moving to other jobs.
'Paying the price'
In response to the report, Unison said job cuts were devastating local communities and should be reversed to help the economy grow.
The union's Scottish secretary, Mike Kirby, said: "While the Audit Scotland report makes some positive noises about the way public bodies manage workforce change, the reality is that our precious public services are paying the price of austerity economics."
Labour MSP Ken Macintosh claimed the government was spending 10-times as much "pushing" people out of work than it was on finding people jobs.
He said: "Earlier this year Labour uncovered the hundreds of millions that were being spent on public sector severance schemes including compulsory redundancies despite promises from the SNP that they would not be used here.
"Our research found that more than 1,200 people were forced out of their job at a cost of £7.5m. This report from Audit Scotland reveals that the picture is even worse."
Scottish Conservative MSP Murdo Fraser said the efficiency savings were necessary, but he said it was vital that public sector pay-offs were not too generous.
He said: "Of course contracts have to be adhered to, but the public do wonder if these savings are being undermined by organisations throwing too much at golden goodbyes."
Silence whistleblowers
The figures for the years 2010/11 and 2011/12 came amid concerns that generous early release packages were being used to silence whistleblowers, reward executives and sweeten job offers.
The Audit Scotland report referred to high profile public sectors pay-offs, including a former chief executive of West Dunbartonshire Council, who was hired for five years but given a pension for nearly nine years' service.
It also raised concerns about retired staff returning to posts, and pointed to the case of Strathclyde Fire and Rescue chief fire officer Brian Sweeney.
The report flagged up moves by Dumfries and Galloway Council to place restrictions on the future recruitment of individuals who have accepted any form of early departure.
Te spending watchdog said organisations should ensure that their packages did not cost more in the long run, did not deprive the organisation of vital staff, and did not unfairly deprive staff of their employment rights.
A Scottish government spokesman said voluntary exit schemes delivered significant savings with costs recouped within two years.
"As the Audit Scotland report highlights, many public bodies have decided to run voluntary exit schemes as one way of reducing costs - at a time when UK government has cut the Scottish budget by almost 9% in real terms over four years.
"Our policy of no compulsory redundancy and pay restraint, particularly for higher earners, means we can provide staff with employment security at an economically challenging time, while delivering the savings necessary to live within the tight financial settlement we have received from Westminster."
He added: "The Commission has expressed its consistent view that it is unacceptable if political tensions become so extreme that they compromise a council's ability to ensure effective leadership, demonstrate good governance and, as a result, weaken the public's trust and confidence in the integrity of the council and its councillors to conduct public business."
Cosla President Councillor David O'Neill hit out at the report, saying it was stating the obvious and extremely bland.
Mr O'Neill said: "Two examples that really annoy me and fall into the category of stating the obvious. Firstly, that Councils need to look at innovative ways of saving money, we have been doing that for years and do we really need to be told that from them.
"Secondly, and the one that takes the biscuit is, that when times are tough and cuts have to be made Political coalitions in Councils become more difficult. I can also assure them that we do have an open mind as to how we organise services.
"I would also tell the Accounts Commission that Councils engagement with the public they are elected to serve has never been greater and I find it more than a little galling to be pulled up by them on this when they were one of the few public sector organisations who refused to come and give evidence to the Commission I chair on strengthening Local Democracy - which smacks to me of do as we say, not as we do."
What Have They Done For Us?
The revolt against COSLA seems to be gathering steam as yet another council gives notice of its intention to quit Scotland's local government talking shop.
Reading between the lines of this article from the BBC web site both South Lanarkshire and Glasgow (Scotland's largest council) seem likely to follow the lead of Inverclyde, Aberdeen, Renfrewshire and Dumfries & Galloway councils.
I suppose it's the Scottish local government equivalent of the famous scene from Life of Brian where one of the character's asks "What have the Romans ever done for us?"
Except that COSLA seems unable to persuade its critics (mainly Labour councils it seems) that the organisation has done very much at all.
Inverclyde Council announces Cosla departure
By Jamie McIvor
BBC Scotland local government correspondent
Inverclyde has become the latest council to say it intends to leave Cosla
Another council - Inverclyde - has confirmed it plans to leave the body representing Scottish local government.
Three other councils have already warned they may go. At least two more are expected to consider leaving shortly.
At the root of the rupture in Cosla is a row over the way government cash is allocated to councils.
This has brought simmering tensions about power within the organisation to the boil.
The Inverclyde decision was made as part of the council's budget announcement.
The council will give the Edinburgh-based organisation which represents Scottish councils notice to terminate membership from 1 April, 2015.
Another council - Inverclyde - has confirmed it plans to leave the body representing Scottish local government.
Three other councils have already warned they may go. At least two more are expected to consider leaving shortly.
At the root of the rupture in Cosla is a row over the way government cash is allocated to councils.
This has brought simmering tensions about power within the organisation to the boil.
The Inverclyde decision was made as part of the council's budget announcement.
The council will give the Edinburgh-based organisation which represents Scottish councils notice to terminate membership from 1 April, 2015.
Cosla review
Council leader Stephen McCabe said: "The constitutional review which was approved by Cosla is due to report in June 2014.
"If this results in a significant transfer of power from the leader's group to the convention, this would seriously reduce the influence of this council and lead us to question the value to Inverclyde of our continuing membership of Cosla.
"Therefore we are giving Cosla the statutory notice of our intention to leave the organisation."
But Mr McCabe said the council had left the door open to withdraw its notice to quit.
He added: "Depending on the outcome of the Cosla review, we reserve the right to withdraw our notice to terminate our membership."
Council leader Stephen McCabe said: "The constitutional review which was approved by Cosla is due to report in June 2014.
"If this results in a significant transfer of power from the leader's group to the convention, this would seriously reduce the influence of this council and lead us to question the value to Inverclyde of our continuing membership of Cosla.
"Therefore we are giving Cosla the statutory notice of our intention to leave the organisation."
But Mr McCabe said the council had left the door open to withdraw its notice to quit.
He added: "Depending on the outcome of the Cosla review, we reserve the right to withdraw our notice to terminate our membership."
Proactive stance
Because of the way power lies at Cosla - which currently represents the collective interests of all 32 councils - it can be difficult to reach agreement on controversial party political matters.
Some Labour councils want to see Cosla take a more proactive stance against government policies which they believe are harming their interest.
Labour leads 16 Scottish councils but the way power lies at Cosla is much more subtly divided.
Inverclyde claims possible changes to Cosla's internal structure could weaken their influence within the organisation.
Aberdeen and Renfrewshire have already indicated they will quit.
South Lanarkshire and Glasgow councils are both expected to take a decision on whether they should also leave Cosla soon.
Separately, Dumfries and Galloway Council is also to consider leaving the organisation.
Because of the way power lies at Cosla - which currently represents the collective interests of all 32 councils - it can be difficult to reach agreement on controversial party political matters.
Some Labour councils want to see Cosla take a more proactive stance against government policies which they believe are harming their interest.
Labour leads 16 Scottish councils but the way power lies at Cosla is much more subtly divided.
Inverclyde claims possible changes to Cosla's internal structure could weaken their influence within the organisation.
Aberdeen and Renfrewshire have already indicated they will quit.
South Lanarkshire and Glasgow councils are both expected to take a decision on whether they should also leave Cosla soon.
Separately, Dumfries and Galloway Council is also to consider leaving the organisation.
Local services
Councils need to give a year's notice so any councils which leave will do so in April next year.
Leaving Cosla will make no difference to local services or the level of the council tax.
However, some are concerned it could lead, in time, to the end of national agreements on pay and conditions for council staff.
There have also been warnings that if Cosla is weakened, it could undermine the power of councils across Scotland.
Some claim there has been a process of creeping centralisation in Scotland since devolution and that an organisation representing all the country's councils can act as a barrier to this.
Councils need to give a year's notice so any councils which leave will do so in April next year.
Leaving Cosla will make no difference to local services or the level of the council tax.
However, some are concerned it could lead, in time, to the end of national agreements on pay and conditions for council staff.
There have also been warnings that if Cosla is weakened, it could undermine the power of councils across Scotland.
Some claim there has been a process of creeping centralisation in Scotland since devolution and that an organisation representing all the country's councils can act as a barrier to this.
More Dead Sheep (24 May 2013)
Here's an interesting report from BBC's web site about the huge costs of voluntary redundancy and early retirement in Scotland's public services.
The cost over the past two years is estimated at £550 million - an incredible 40% of which has been spent on just 1,200 staff which, according to my arithmetic, means that 1,200 people shared £220 million - or an average 'golden goodbye' payment of £183,333.33.
A very tidy sum of money on top of an already high salary of course and meanwhile the remaining 12,800 staff shared a balance of £310 million - which produces a much lower average payment of £24,218.75.
So from these figures you can see how 'final salary' calculations skew such payments towards the higher paid staff within the public services - when, in fact, a much fairer system would be to use 'career average earnings.
Which would mean that what people get out of the system is based on what they've paid in over their working careers - instead of some of them walking away with enormous and often 'tax free' public handouts.
Now that would seem much more sensible - yet the trade unions continue to support final salary schemes even though it means that lower paid staff continue to subsidise the pension pots of their managers and bosses.
How crazy is that?
And remember that even when Audit Scotland finds good reason to criticise the behaviour of some of these public bodies - including local councils - its criticisms are simply ignored.
As I've said before being attacked by Audit Scotland - in the words of Labour's Denis Healey - is like being savaged by a dead sheep.
Call for 'value for money' Scottish public sector pay-offs
The public sector workforce in Scotland has reduced by 40,000 since 2009
About 14,000 public sector employees have taken voluntary redundancy or early retirement in the past two years in Scotland at a cost of about £550m.
According to Audit Scotland, 40% of the pay-off fund was shared by just 1,200 high earners in the sector, including government, NHS, police and fire.
The spending watchdog said there was evidence that these early departure schemes had led to savings.
However, it called for greater scrutiny to ensure they offered value for money.
The report, Managing early departures from the Scottish public sector, said most bodies dealt with the system well, but there were major differences in the monitoring and transparency of costs.
The Scottish government said its policy of no compulsory redundancy and pay restraint was working.
Since 2009, 40,000 people left the sector, the report said.
Early departures accounted for about half, with the rest retiring due to age or ill health, or moving to other jobs.
'Paying the price'
In response to the report, Unison said job cuts were devastating local communities and should be reversed to help the economy grow.
The union's Scottish secretary, Mike Kirby, said: "While the Audit Scotland report makes some positive noises about the way public bodies manage workforce change, the reality is that our precious public services are paying the price of austerity economics."
Labour MSP Ken Macintosh claimed the government was spending 10-times as much "pushing" people out of work than it was on finding people jobs.
He said: "Earlier this year Labour uncovered the hundreds of millions that were being spent on public sector severance schemes including compulsory redundancies despite promises from the SNP that they would not be used here.
"Our research found that more than 1,200 people were forced out of their job at a cost of £7.5m. This report from Audit Scotland reveals that the picture is even worse."
Scottish Conservative MSP Murdo Fraser said the efficiency savings were necessary, but he said it was vital that public sector pay-offs were not too generous.
He said: "Of course contracts have to be adhered to, but the public do wonder if these savings are being undermined by organisations throwing too much at golden goodbyes."
Silence whistleblowers
The figures for the years 2010/11 and 2011/12 came amid concerns that generous early release packages were being used to silence whistleblowers, reward executives and sweeten job offers.
The Audit Scotland report referred to high profile public sectors pay-offs, including a former chief executive of West Dunbartonshire Council, who was hired for five years but given a pension for nearly nine years' service.
It also raised concerns about retired staff returning to posts, and pointed to the case of Strathclyde Fire and Rescue chief fire officer Brian Sweeney.
The report flagged up moves by Dumfries and Galloway Council to place restrictions on the future recruitment of individuals who have accepted any form of early departure.
Te spending watchdog said organisations should ensure that their packages did not cost more in the long run, did not deprive the organisation of vital staff, and did not unfairly deprive staff of their employment rights.
A Scottish government spokesman said voluntary exit schemes delivered significant savings with costs recouped within two years.
"As the Audit Scotland report highlights, many public bodies have decided to run voluntary exit schemes as one way of reducing costs - at a time when UK government has cut the Scottish budget by almost 9% in real terms over four years.
"Our policy of no compulsory redundancy and pay restraint, particularly for higher earners, means we can provide staff with employment security at an economically challenging time, while delivering the savings necessary to live within the tight financial settlement we have received from Westminster."
Savaged By Dead Sheep (5 May 2013)
I couldn't resist a word about South Lanarkshire Council - amidst all the recent stories about some of our civic organisations which are very free and cavalier at the way they spend public money.
A day of reckoning is coming for sure and the people responsible will have a lot to answer for - given the way that public funds have been doled out, on some occasions, as if money grows on trees.
But it's also fair to say that right at this moment no one is particularly fearful or wary of Scotland's public spending watchdog, Audit Scotland - whose criticisms, as far as far as I can see, amount to little more than a slap on the wrists.
So, I would get rid of Audit Scotland tomorrow because it's a weak and ineffectual body - and to borrow a phrase from Labour's Denis Healey, being attacked by Scotland's public spending watchdog - is a bit like being savaged by a dead sheep.
Gagging Clauses (15 March 2013)
In recent weeks there has been much comment about the NHS and the practice of senior officials being shown the door - often in controversial circumstances - but with hugely generous exit packages.
More often than not these publicly funded exit packages are accompanied by 'gagging clauses' - which effectively prevent people speaking out about the circumstances surrounding their departure - a practice that is the exact opposite of open and transparent government.
So I thought it would be useful to reproduce a previous post from the blog site on the departure of the former Finance Director - of South Lanarkshire Council.
I think it would be a great public service if senior officials in this situation - like Linda Hardie - came forward to tell their side of the story - because these 'gagging clauses' are offensive to common sense and have no place in any of our public services.
South Lanarkshire Council is up in the UK Supreme Court soon - over its refusal to disclose pay information ordered by the Scottish Information Commissioner - and the Court of Session, Scotland's highest civil court.
I'll have more to say on that subject in the next few days.
Mired in Scandal (6 August 2012)
Well done to the Daily Record for exposing another disgraceful chapter in the life of South Lanarkshire Council.
Here's a story which appeared in the paper last week - and shines a light on the controversial departure of the council's finance chief in April 2011.
To my mind spending £500,000 on a early retirement package for a senior council official - is an obscene waste of public money.
Yet the council fails to offer a proper explanation for its actions and simply brushes aside the criticisms of Scotland's public spending watchdog - Audit Scotland.
If you ask me it's high time the Scottish Government took a long hard look at what's going on inside South Lanarkshire Council - which looks increasingly arrogant and out of control.
Golden goodbye scandal: Council chief pocketed £500k severance package.. after receiving £63k garden leave pay
The Daily Record revealed yesterday the severance package had been paid to finance chief Linda Hardie by Labour-led South Lanarkshire Council.
The council who gave a £500,000 payoff to a boss who “retired” at 50 have been savaged by a financial watchdog for paying her another £63,000 to stay at home.
The Daily Record revealed yesterday the severance package had been paid to finance chief Linda Hardie by Labour-led South Lanarkshire Council.
Hardie’s department lost £100,000 of taxpayers’ money to a fraud scam and made £38million worth of “arithmetical errors” in budget cuts.
Now we can reveal the council have been criticised by the public spending watchdog for allowing Hardie to spend six months on her full £127,000-a-year salary before picking up her massive package.
A report for Audit Scotland says: “There is no documentary evidence to demonstrate value for money for the full pay provided from 18 October, 2010, to 18 April, 2011.”
The report also reveals that Hardie’s deal was approved only by her fellow paid officials, contrary to Audit Scotland’s guidelines, which say elected councillors should be involved in early retirement packages.
That has prompted questions about who exactly is running the council, who are fighting a costly legal battle against their own female staff over equal pay.
Local SNP MSP Christina McKelvie said: “Given that they are dragging their heels over equal pay claims, how could they justify using scarce resources to award such a staggering payoff?
Council leader Eddie McAvoy has some serious questions to answer. Why is it that decisions about early retirement appear to have been left to council management?
Did McAvoy have any knowledge of this golden goodbye and does he think it was appropriate or necessary? The buck stops with the administration, and they now must explain what steps they are taking to avoid such obscene payoffs in future.”
SNP ministers are also demanding answers from the council about the payoff – which saw Hardie receive £106,000 severance plus £427,000 paid into her pension.
McAvoy was abroad on holiday and could not be contacted for comment.
A council spokesman said: “The council followed early retirement approval procedures as detailed in standing orders. The retirement provision was in line with the contract of employment and with general employment law and pension regulations.”
A DINNER LADY'S TALE.
It would take half a century for the average female worker fighting South Lanarkshire Council for equal pay to earn the £500,000 payoff handed to finance chief Linda Hardie.
Hardie took early retirement aged just 50 in April last year but the details of her package have only emerged now.
One dinner lady of 55, who is among those fighting for equal pay, earns £10,000 a year for a 30-hour week – but Hardie will get six times that in pension.
The woman, who did not want to be named, said: “When I saw what she was getting, it made me sick to the pit of my stomach.
"If I worked every day for the rest of my life, I wouldn’t earn the money she has walked away with.
The council have done everything they can to stop us getting a fair deal and just hand over cash like that to someone who made a hash of her job.”
The council are refusing to accept an employment tribunal’s ruling that they must offer the women, including cleaners and dinner ladies, equal pay.
The worker added: “All the money that is being used to fight us is also a waste of taxpayers’ cash because we are not giving up until we win.”
COSLA (8 February 2014)
Two out of Scotland's thirty two local councils (Aberdeen and Dumfries & Galloway) have pulled out of COSLA - the umbrella body and self-styled voice of Scottish local government.
Now this trickle my not turn into a full scale flood, but then again maybe people are finally waking up to what I said about COSLA some time ago.
If you ask me, the Convention (Convention of Scottish Local Authorities) has been weak and useless for many years and has been irrelevant on most of the big issues of the day - Equal Pay is an example that springs quickly to mind.
So, I'm not in the least surprised that councils like Aberdeen and Dumfries &Galloway are beginning to vote with their feet.
Aberdeen City Council to break away from COSLA
Aberdeen City Council are the first in Scotland to vote to break away from Cosla. Picture: Complimentary
By FRANK URQUHART
ABERDEEN City Council has become the first city authority in Scotland to vote to breakaway from the umbrella organisation the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities.
The Labour-led coalition administration voted to split from the Convention late last night at a meeting of the full council where concerns were again raised about the financial settlement the authority receives from the Scottish Government.
The members of the council’s rainbow coalition of Labour, Independent and Tory councillors were joined by the Liberal Democrats in voting for the breakaway move.
Councillor Barney Crockett, the leader of the council, said: “Aberdeen certainly does feel that it is too often Scotland’s forgotten city and in the financial settlement we are regularly at the bottom of the league.”
He explained: “We are under huge pressure from local businesses who feel that we need the infrastructure to support the mushrooming business environment in the city. Last year we got 79 per cent of the Scottish average and, given the kind of pressure that comes on a city, it was completely unacceptable to us.”
Mr Crockett claimed that concerns about the council’s continued membership of COSLA had also been raised because of proposed changes in COSLA’s operations which would “even further diminish our voice there.”
He continued: “We have to give a year’s notice if we do intend leaving so we are putting in our year’s notice. We will see how the changes go in COSLA as to whether we effect the departure. But certainly we feel we need a stronger voice than we seem to be getting at the moment in COSLA.”
He claimed that Aberdeen was also the victim of an “enormous asset stripping operation” by the Scottish Government with the closure of Craiginches Prison and the planned closures of both the fire and police service control centres in the city.
Last month Dumfries and Galloway Council gave notice that it intends to terminate its £110,000-a-year membership of the Convention.
Save Money, Shut COSLA (28 January 2012) 
I've just had a brainwave on the subject of 'pain free' cuts.
Why doesn't Scottish local government do the hard pressed council tax payer a favour - and save money by shutting down COSLA in its present form at least.
The self-styled voice of Scotland's 32 local councils - is a total irrelevance these days.
What with a five year council tax freeze - what is COSLA's purpose and role - because no one seems to be taking its leadership seriously.
No pay bargaining taking place for quite some time - and that's likely to be the case for the foreseeable future.
So what does everyone at COSLA do with their time - other than talk a great fight about COSLA's role in a mythical partnership with the Scottish Government?
I imagine lots of people go to lots of meetings - but do these meetings produce anything besides vast quantities of hot air.
What it all costs is shrouded in mystery - but the big question is - 'How can it possibly be good value for public money?'
Even COSLA's partner body - the Improvement Service (IS) - has failed to make much of an impact.
Because the IS has been unable to persude COSLA's member councils - to do anything really meaningful on the shared services agenda.
The wizard idea is that councils would pool resources on bakroom services - like payroll and IT - in order to make better use of scarce resources.
But the big project based on Glasgow and several neighbouring councils in west and central Scotland - went down like the proverbial lead balloon.
COSLA is nothing like the voice it was in the days of the Scottish Constitutional Convention - when COSLA carried undouted influence - when major figures like Charlie Gray spoke - with real authority and were greatly admired.
But no longer because times have changed - yet COSLA has not moved with the times - these days it's like the local government equivalent of - the Wheeltappers and Shunters Social Club.
Here's a piece I wrote recently - explaining why things have got into such a mess.
Deck of Cards (September 23rd 2011)
According to The Herald yesterday the much vaunted plan by councils in the west of Scotland - to 'share services' and make better use of public money - is now officially a dead duck.
Glasgow is the latest council to pull out of the so-called - 'Clyde Valley Review'.
Which promised a new era of co-operation amongst councils - by eliminating duplication and pooling backroom office functions - such as payroll and information technology.
But after months and years of talking - the whole project has collapsed - like a house of cards.
The death knell was finally sounded yesterday - when Glasgow City Council announced that it too was pulling out.
COSLA and its partner body - the Improvement Agency - must be wondering why they have spent so much time and energy pushing an agenda - that nobody seems to support.
More evidence to show that COSLA - simply isn't punching its weight these days.
Councils and Cold Feet (20th September 2011)
Newspaper reports at the weekend suggest that the much vaunted plans for 'sharing' council services - is on its last legs.
Glasgow is the latest council to voice concerns over the 'shared services strategy' - which is designed eliminate duplication and waste - by pooling back-office functions such as payroll and information technology.
Sounds simple enough - but it seems that as soon as councils get anywhere near having to make a decision about how to proceed - they get cold feet.
Which makes the councils involved look ridiculous of course - along with COSLA and the Improvement Service who have both been championing this cause for years.
Unsuccessfully it appears - which makes you wonder why Scottish local government seems unable to work together - in the wider public interest.
Here's something I wrote on the subject earlier this month - prophetically as it turns out.
As far as I can see the individuals councils that make up Scottish local government - are just ignoring COSLA - and seem to be thumbing their noses at the Improvement Sevice.
If this pantomime continues for much longer - the Scottish Government will have to get involved.
Improving Council Services (September 1st 2011)
Here's the 'team' from Scotland's Improvement Service (IS) - an unelected public body set up by COSLA and the Scottish government some years ago.
See post dated 25 August 2011 - 'Interesting Bomb Pattern'
Now the IS aims to help local councils in Scotland improve their services - by adopting best practice and becoming more efficient - and by sharing services in some cases.
In which case I suggest that some of the 39-strong IS team - ought to be hot-footing it down to West Dunbartonshire Council - where shared services seem to be about as popular as the mention of tram cars on Leith Walk.
Because West Dunbartonshire Council has pulled out of a 'shared services' project amongst councils in the Clyde Valley - and now the whole programme appears to be on a 'shoogly peg'.
So maybe with all these specialist people on its staff - the Improvement Service can help get things back on track.
I certainly hope so.
Information about all the Improvement Service staff, including biographies and contact details.
1 Colin Mair, Chief Executive
2 Mark McAteer, Governance & Performance Management - Director
3 Bob Christie, Governance & Performance Management - Outcomes Programme Manager
4 Sarah Gadsden, Governance & Performance Management - PSIF Director
5 Andrew McGuire, Governance & Performance Management - Programme Manager
6 Jane O'Donnell, Governance & Performance Management - PSIF Project Manager
7 Andrew Noble, Government & Performance Management - Project Manager
8 Tallulah Lines, Governance & Performance Management - Project Officer
9 Alison Clyne, Governance & Performance Management - PSIF Project Officer
10 Konrad Zdeb, Governance & Performance Management - Graduate Support Assistant
11 Paul Dowie, Shared Services - Director
12 Bruce Harley, Shared Services - Change Champion
13 Simon Haston, Shared Services - Change Champion
14 Gerda Bartsch, Shared Services - Change Champion
15 Alexandra Ostroumoff-Croucher, Shared Services - Pensions Pathfinder Project Manager
16 Jim Kinney, Customer First - Programme Director
17 Tom McHugh, Customer First - Programme Manager
Why doesn't Scottish local government do the hard pressed council tax payer a favour - and save money by shutting down COSLA in its present form at least.
The self-styled voice of Scotland's 32 local councils - is a total irrelevance these days.
What with a five year council tax freeze - what is COSLA's purpose and role - because no one seems to be taking its leadership seriously.
No pay bargaining taking place for quite some time - and that's likely to be the case for the foreseeable future.
So what does everyone at COSLA do with their time - other than talk a great fight about COSLA's role in a mythical partnership with the Scottish Government?
I imagine lots of people go to lots of meetings - but do these meetings produce anything besides vast quantities of hot air.
What it all costs is shrouded in mystery - but the big question is - 'How can it possibly be good value for public money?'
Even COSLA's partner body - the Improvement Service (IS) - has failed to make much of an impact.
Because the IS has been unable to persude COSLA's member councils - to do anything really meaningful on the shared services agenda.
The wizard idea is that councils would pool resources on bakroom services - like payroll and IT - in order to make better use of scarce resources.
But the big project based on Glasgow and several neighbouring councils in west and central Scotland - went down like the proverbial lead balloon.
COSLA is nothing like the voice it was in the days of the Scottish Constitutional Convention - when COSLA carried undouted influence - when major figures like Charlie Gray spoke - with real authority and were greatly admired.
But no longer because times have changed - yet COSLA has not moved with the times - these days it's like the local government equivalent of - the Wheeltappers and Shunters Social Club.
Here's a piece I wrote recently - explaining why things have got into such a mess.
Deck of Cards (September 23rd 2011)
According to The Herald yesterday the much vaunted plan by councils in the west of Scotland - to 'share services' and make better use of public money - is now officially a dead duck.
Glasgow is the latest council to pull out of the so-called - 'Clyde Valley Review'.
Which promised a new era of co-operation amongst councils - by eliminating duplication and pooling backroom office functions - such as payroll and information technology.
But after months and years of talking - the whole project has collapsed - like a house of cards.
The death knell was finally sounded yesterday - when Glasgow City Council announced that it too was pulling out.
COSLA and its partner body - the Improvement Agency - must be wondering why they have spent so much time and energy pushing an agenda - that nobody seems to support.
More evidence to show that COSLA - simply isn't punching its weight these days.
Councils and Cold Feet (20th September 2011)
Newspaper reports at the weekend suggest that the much vaunted plans for 'sharing' council services - is on its last legs.
Glasgow is the latest council to voice concerns over the 'shared services strategy' - which is designed eliminate duplication and waste - by pooling back-office functions such as payroll and information technology.
Sounds simple enough - but it seems that as soon as councils get anywhere near having to make a decision about how to proceed - they get cold feet.
Which makes the councils involved look ridiculous of course - along with COSLA and the Improvement Service who have both been championing this cause for years.
Unsuccessfully it appears - which makes you wonder why Scottish local government seems unable to work together - in the wider public interest.
Here's something I wrote on the subject earlier this month - prophetically as it turns out.
As far as I can see the individuals councils that make up Scottish local government - are just ignoring COSLA - and seem to be thumbing their noses at the Improvement Sevice.
If this pantomime continues for much longer - the Scottish Government will have to get involved.
Improving Council Services (September 1st 2011)
Here's the 'team' from Scotland's Improvement Service (IS) - an unelected public body set up by COSLA and the Scottish government some years ago.
See post dated 25 August 2011 - 'Interesting Bomb Pattern'
Now the IS aims to help local councils in Scotland improve their services - by adopting best practice and becoming more efficient - and by sharing services in some cases.
In which case I suggest that some of the 39-strong IS team - ought to be hot-footing it down to West Dunbartonshire Council - where shared services seem to be about as popular as the mention of tram cars on Leith Walk.
Because West Dunbartonshire Council has pulled out of a 'shared services' project amongst councils in the Clyde Valley - and now the whole programme appears to be on a 'shoogly peg'.
So maybe with all these specialist people on its staff - the Improvement Service can help get things back on track.
I certainly hope so.
Information about all the Improvement Service staff, including biographies and contact details.
1 Colin Mair, Chief Executive
2 Mark McAteer, Governance & Performance Management - Director
3 Bob Christie, Governance & Performance Management - Outcomes Programme Manager
4 Sarah Gadsden, Governance & Performance Management - PSIF Director
5 Andrew McGuire, Governance & Performance Management - Programme Manager
6 Jane O'Donnell, Governance & Performance Management - PSIF Project Manager
7 Andrew Noble, Government & Performance Management - Project Manager
8 Tallulah Lines, Governance & Performance Management - Project Officer
9 Alison Clyne, Governance & Performance Management - PSIF Project Officer
10 Konrad Zdeb, Governance & Performance Management - Graduate Support Assistant
11 Paul Dowie, Shared Services - Director
12 Bruce Harley, Shared Services - Change Champion
13 Simon Haston, Shared Services - Change Champion
14 Gerda Bartsch, Shared Services - Change Champion
15 Alexandra Ostroumoff-Croucher, Shared Services - Pensions Pathfinder Project Manager
16 Jim Kinney, Customer First - Programme Director
17 Tom McHugh, Customer First - Programme Manager
18 Martin Brown, Customer First - Head of Customer Relationship Management
19 Sally Buchanan, Customer First - Project Manager
20 Iain McKay, Customer First - Gazetteer Business Development Manager
21 Cameron Walker, Customer First - National Infrastructure Programme Manager
22 Robert Clubb, Customer First - National Infrastructure Programme Manager
23 Fiona Dick, Customer First - Communications and Projects Support Officer
24 Joanna Anderson, Customer First - Project Assistant
25 Karen Williamson, Customer First - Graduate Support Assistant
26 Kate O'Hagan, Organisational Development & Capacity Building - Head
27 Lesley Broadley, Organisational Development & Capacity Building - Senior Project Manager
28 Dot McLaughlin, Organisational Development &Capacity Building - Senior Project Manager
29 Jamie Carver, Organisational Development & Capacity Building - Project Assistant
30 Emma Hay, Planning Development - Programme Manager
31 Ross Pattenden, Organisational Development & Capacity Building - Project Assistant
32 Mike McLean, Knowledge Management - Head
33 Martin MacKinnon, Knowledge Management - Web Development Manager
34 Louise Jenkins, Knowledge Management - Web Content Editor
35 David Friel, Knowledge Management - Reporter
36 Jamie Kirk, Knowledge Management - Graduate Support Assistant
37 Loraine Higgins, Corporate & Business Support - Business Manager
38 Alison Ritchie, Corporate & Business Support - PA & Business Support Assistant
39 Kirsty Markie, Business Support - Graduate Support Assistant
