Glasgow MSPs and MPs
I wrote yesterday about the importance of the next couple of months in the fight for equal pay in Glasgow City Council because we ought to know two things well before Christmas:
- Is a proper settlement process finally underway and is there a clear timetable and road map in place for resolving all the outstanding equal pay claims?
- Has Glasgow City Council abandoned the idea of pursuing an appeal to the UK Supreme Court?
Now if you ask me, Glasgow MSPs and MPs should be getting right behind their local constituents on these issues which means speaking up sharing their views.
For example in the local Glasgow press, on social media and their own Facebook pages or Twitter accounts.
No one is asking or expecting MSPs and MPs to attack the City Council, not least because its leaders say they are full committed to a negotiated settlement.
But there are clearly forces at work who would love to continue the long-running legal battle in the courts and to the UK Supreme Court, if they had their way.
So it's potentially crucial that Glasgow's MSPs and MPs speak up and explain where they stand - and here's a handy list of their contact email addresses.
If I hear from any MSPs and MPs directly, I'll share what they have to say on the blog site.
Glasgow's MSPs and MPs (08/09/17)
If you ask me, Glasgow MSPs and MPs have not been very vocal or visible in standing up for the rights of their local constituents in the fight for equal pay over the past 10 years, but let's hope things are about to change for the better.
So here is a list of the MSPs and MPs whose constituencies lie within the boundaries of Glasgow City Council - engaging with local politicians and asking them where they stand will help to bring the fight for equal pay to a speedy and successful conclusion.
Here's a handy link names all of the various Glasgow constituencies for easy reference: https://www.glasgow.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=17759
I contacted all of these MSPs and MPs yesterday, so they are all up to speed on the latest developments and since the local elections in May 2017 Labour has, of course, lost political control of Glasgow City Council to the SNP.
The MSPs are all the same, but there are two changes in the MP list with David Linden replacing Natalie McGarry in Glasgow East and Paul Sweeney replacing Anne McLaughlin in Glasgow North East.
Contact details for Glasgow councillors can be found via the following link to the City Council's web site: https://www.glasgow.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=17565
Glasgow MSPs (Scottish Parliament)
Glasgow MPs (Westminster Parliament)
David.Linden.mp@parliament.uk
Paul.Sweeney.mp@parliament.uk
Carol.Monaghan.mp@parliament.uk
Glasgow - Breaking News!
Here's a letter I sent earlier today to the leader of Glasgow City Council, Cllr Susan Aitken.
We are now at a critical point in the fight for equal pay with Glasgow City Council because the new SNP led administration, while promising a new approach, has yet to deliver on its commitment to 'openness and transparency' as far as the WPBR pay scheme is concerned.
Dear Councillor Aitken
Glasgow's Secret Pay Arrangements
I enclose for your information a copy of the City Council's response to my latest FoI request regarding the operation of the Employee Development Commitment (EDC) scheme which, as you know, guaranteed the future earnings of former bonus earning jobs.
As you know, I believe the provision of this information is the key to resolving Glasgow's outstanding equal pay issues. As Lady Norris said at the Court of Session hearing the council clearly “looked after” the men well beyond the protection period, which means it is crucial to know precisely how they were helped and what affect this had on their pay. The view of A4ES is that the women were entitled to the same help as the men. What happened to the men is the baseline for future settlement discussions.
I understood the SNP Group to be committed to a new approach to resolving the outstanding equal pay issues in Glasgow, but whatever is happening behind the scenes, I have to tell you this is not having a noticeable effect on the behaviour of the Council's senior officials.
If senior officials in Scotland's largest council can't or won't get their act together, maybe the solution in Glasgow is to bring in the Accounts Commission to uncover what has really been going on for the past 10 years.
Kind regards
Mark Irvine
Equal Pay - 'Decade Long Failure' (07/09/17)
The Herald's Tom Gordon reports on a special investigation by the Accounts Commission which concludes that a 'decade long failure of leadership by local and central government' is responsible for the continuing debacle over equal pay.
Glasgow City Council, Scotland's largest, has been fighting a desperate battle against equal pay for the past ten years and its pay arrangements are still shrouded in secrecy - as opposed to being 'open, honest and transparent'.
The Court of Session recently judged Glasgow's revised pay arrangements and its in-house job evaluation scheme (JES), introduced in 2007 to be 'unfit for purpose' - as a result the number of equal pay claims in Glasgow is growing by the day.
If Scotland's largest council can't or won't get its act together, maybe the solution in Glasgow is to send in the Accounts Commission to uncover what has really been going on for the past 10 years.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15519420.Watchdog_report_exposes_litany_of_failures_behind___1bn_equal_pay_bill/
Watchdog report exposes litany of failures behind £1bn equal pay bill
By Tom Gordon - Scottish Political Editor, The Herald
Glasgow City Chambers
A DECADE long failure of leadership by central and local government has left taxpayers with a bill of more than £1billion for equal pay claims from female council staff, it has emerged.
In a damning study of politicians stalling and ducking responsibilities, the Accounts Commission said around £750m had been spent settling pay claims since 2004.
However a further 27,000 claims are still live, including a recent one from more than 6000 workers in Glasgow which could cost the city £500m, pushing the final bill far higher.
The watchdog blamed “a lack of collective national leadership to overcome challenges and address equal pay issues in a timely way”, with ministers failing to give councils extra funds to help stave off challenges, and authorities in denial about the scale of the problem.
Male-dominated trade unions protecting the higher wages of male workers, often through spurious bonuses, were also a factor.
In order to fix pay anomalies a UK-wide deal, the Single Status Agreement, was established in 1999 to unify pay structures.
Councils were given until 2004 to carry out job evaluations so that women in roles such as caring, cleaning and catering were no longer paid less than men doing equivalent work such as gardening, gravedigging or bin collection.
However only one council met the deadline, and it was not until 2010 that all of Scotland’s councils had single status in place.
Without funds from central government to harmonise pay scales properly, councils failed to make the issue a priority and skimped on deals, sometimes adding to the discrimination by allowing bad practices to continue in order to avoid industrial action.
They also paid 50,000 women £232m in compromise deals to give up claims to back pay.
There were “often of a relatively low value” compared to what they were due.
Partly because many offers were inadequate, and partly because no-win no-fee lawyers became involved, around 70,500 equal pay claims were lodged against councils after 2004.
Of these around 27,000 are outstanding, and new claims are still being brought.
Highlighting the painfully slow progress, the report said: “Thousands of claims currently in the system in Scotland have been live for over a decade.”
The watchdog also complained it had faced “considerable difficulty” due to a lack of good quality data relating to the implementation of equal pay.
It recommended that councils ensure all pay arrangements are fair and transparent.
Commission member Pauline Weetman said: "Equal pay is an incredibly important issue and a legal duty for Scotland's councils to eliminate decades of inequality. However, implementation of equal pay has been a substantial challenge for local government."
The council umbrella body Cosla said it welcomed the report’s recognition that councils had faced “complex judicial processes and huge costs” as they tried to deliver equal pay.
“Councils have endeavoured to settle all legitimate claims as quickly as possible,” it said.
Equal pay campaigner Mark Irvine, who has helped many female workers bring claims against council bosses, said the issue remained a “national disgrace”.
He said: “The report hits the nail on the head. There was an agreement to end discrimination in 1999 and that it’s still happening in 2017 is a terrible indictment of Cosla. Major councils ganged up to prevent low-paid women getting what they were promised 20 years ago.”
The public sector union Unison said the report’s findings were “shocking”.
Scotland regional manager Peter Hunter said: “This study demonstrates the cost of delay and dereliction of duty. If this report compels those remaining councils to resolve outstanding claims... the Accounts Commission will have played a vital role.”
Scottish LibDem leader Willie Rennie added: “This is a complex process but far too many people, mainly women in low paid jobs, are waiting far too long for the money they are due.
"The Scottish Government needs to work with councils to seek a speedier solution.”
“It is time for this legacy of inequality to be resolved.”
Glasgow MSPs and MPs (27/10/17)
I Tweeted my recent post on 'Glasgow, Job Evaluation and Equal Pay' to all MSPs and MPs with constituencies in the Glasgow area, along with the following message:
"If Job Evaluation was a fair and objective in Glasgow City Council, how come all the low paid women's jobs landed on a Snake?"
So far, not a single MSP or MP has responded to my Tweet or asked for further information - nor has anyone Liked or Retweeted my post to their followers.
Now this could mean that my Tweet and blog post were just so perfect that there's nothing more to say, but it could also mean that Glasgow's MSPs and MPs are strangely disengaged from the fight for equal pay in their own back yard.
I'm surprised, I have to say, because while it seems pretty clear to me that the SNP MSPs and MPs all support the position being adopted by the SNP-led council we are not out of the woods yet - not by a long chalk.
For example, Glasgow's position is that the City Council is 'seeking leave to appeal' only and that its real intention is to negotiate a settlement of all the outstanding equal pay claims.
In other words, that a 'full blown' appeal to the UK Supreme Court is not going to happen, perhaps for political reasons as well as the practical difficulties of overturning the unanimous judgment of the Court of Session, Scotland's highest civil court.
But if the City Council's decision to 'seek leave to appeal' is based on the advice of senior council officials and external lawyers, what is going to happen when Glasgow reaches the point of deciding whether to take its case to the UK Supreme Court - with or without 'leave' from Scotland's Court of Session?
Now that's something I would expect Glasgow's MSPs and MPs to have an opinion on, especially as they have strong opinions on just about everything else.
So I'm going to publish on the blog site some of what Glasgow's politicians have to say on their Twitter feed because the next couple of months are going to be crucial.
If you ask me, this is an issue on which the thousands of equal pay claimants across the city deserve the vocal support of their MSPs and MPs.
If you ask me, this is an issue on which the thousands of equal pay claimants across the city deserve the vocal support of their MSPs and MPs.
Glasgow, Job Evaluation and Equal Pay (24/10/17)
So for starters here's a post from the blog site archive explaining the importance of a 'rank order of jobs' - a handy and, I would say, essential tool for assessing the 'before' and after effects of any new job evaluation scheme (JES).
Because if a 'rank order of jobs' had been published and shared with the workforce back in 2007 (before and after the WPBR) this would have highlighted the fact that female dominated jobs continued to be all bunched together at the bottom of the pay ladder - at the beginning and end of the job evaluation process.
In other words, it would have been perfectly obvious that something was badly wrong and that the new, supposedly 'improved' JE scheme was not actually tackling the discriminatory elements of the old pay arrangements, since the more favourable treatment of traditional male jobs would have stood out like a sore thumb.
In which case the council's largely female workforce would never have had the wool pulled over its eyes by a WPBR pay scheme which simply 'repackaged' the old pay arrangements by continuing to deliver higher earnings for Gardeners, Gravediggers and Refuse Workers.
But the same thing happened in North Lanarkshire Council, of course, for which there only two possible explanations. Either:
- a 'hidden hand' was at work to deliver a predetermined outcome - OR
- a JE 'miracle' occurred to ensure that all the traditional male jobs landed on a beneficial JE 'ladder' while all the women's jobs landed on a nasty old JE 'snake'
Rank Stupidity (12 July 2012)
Now I would say the answer to that question - is a definite YES.
Because the obvious thing to have done - and anyone could have told you this at the time (back in 2004) - is to construct what is called a 'rank order of jobs'.
Both before and after job evaluation process was carried out - for comparative purposes - which is what equal pay is all about - comparing the actual pay outcomes between male and female jobs.
A 'rank order of jobs' is a basic but vital tool for anyone dealing with a job evaluation scheme (JES) - because it demonstrates very quickly and very vividly what the 'before' and 'after' effect of the JES on people's pay and grading.
If you like it's like one of those fast-track books you see in the shops - except it should be given the title 'Equal Pay for Dummies'.
So given that the whole purpose of the 1999 Single Status (Equal Pay) Agreement in Scotland - was to address the perceived pay inequalities faced by many female dominated jobs.
You would have thought that even the village idiot would have understood the importance of using a 'rank order of jobs' - to assess what was actually going in terms of pay outcomes for the male and female jobs.
Instead we have ridiculous excuses that they didn't compare across the workforce - to see what was happening to different groups of male and female workers.
Or if they did, they didn't like what they saw and decided not to share the information with the workforce - a complete cop out if I've ever heard one.
The point is that if all that happened is that female dominated jobs within the council stayed firmly rooted at the bottom of the pay ladder - then in truth the existing pay hierarchy within the council was being preserved.
Yet by the simple task of constructing a 'before and after' rank order of jobs - this would have stood out like a sore thumb - for everyone to see including all the women workers who would have realised that nothing had changed.
So if you ask me, I say the whole affair is a complete disgrace - which is why South Lanarkshire Council and the trade unions have a great deal to answer for in 2012.
Because equal pay is not rocket science and comes down to only two things at the end of the day - political will and common sense.
NLC Update (30/04/15)
Here's what I said on the blog site back in February about equal pay being a peculiar version of the old 'snakes and ladders' board game, except that the women's jobs all seem to have landed on a snake while the men's jobs all enjoyed much better 'luck'
Funny that.
Especially when you consider the fact that this happened in North as well as South Lanarkshire, both large Labour-run councils of course, which are near neighbours sitting on opposite sides of the M74.
I wonder if that's a coincidence or if it helps to explain why Scottish Labour is getting such a terrible kicking in the opinion polls?
Anyway, tomorrow is 1st May and the general election is only a week away, so I plan to publish my very own 'manifesto' in 24 hours which will set out my proposals and for carrying out a further re-evaluation of various council jobs in North Lanarkshire.
As regular readers know, this has to be done because of concessions made previously by North Lanarkshire at the Employment Tribunal to the effect that the gradings and evaluation of various jobs, for example Home Carers, were unsatisfactory and not to be relied upon.
Funny that.
Especially when you consider the fact that this happened in North as well as South Lanarkshire, both large Labour-run councils of course, which are near neighbours sitting on opposite sides of the M74.
I wonder if that's a coincidence or if it helps to explain why Scottish Labour is getting such a terrible kicking in the opinion polls?
Anyway, tomorrow is 1st May and the general election is only a week away, so I plan to publish my very own 'manifesto' in 24 hours which will set out my proposals and for carrying out a further re-evaluation of various council jobs in North Lanarkshire.
As regular readers know, this has to be done because of concessions made previously by North Lanarkshire at the Employment Tribunal to the effect that the gradings and evaluation of various jobs, for example Home Carers, were unsatisfactory and not to be relied upon.
North Lanarkshire Update (12/02/15)
Here's a previous post from the blog site which is about South Lanarkshire Council, but could just as easily been written with North Lanarkshire in mind.
Because the rank order 'test' is the best and easiest way of demonstrating whether a job evaluation exercise (JES) and the new pay arrangements which flow from a JES pass the test of common sense.
Because the rank order 'test' is the best and easiest way of demonstrating whether a job evaluation exercise (JES) and the new pay arrangements which flow from a JES pass the test of common sense.
The point of the exercise is simple: at the end of the JES process and before any new proposals are implemented where do all the various jobs sit in relation to each other?
If all the lower paid women's jobs remain stuck at the bottom of the pay ladder relative to the male jobs, where they were before, then there is clearly a major problem.
Especially since a key aim of Scotland's 1999 Single Status (Equal Pay) Agreement was to end the widespread pay discrimination against predominantly female jobs - home carers and other carers, classroom assistants, catering workers, cleaners and wide variety of clerical roles.
Because there's no way that having identified this rank order test as a key part of the Equality Impact Assessment that the Council was not fully aware of what it was doing in deciding to press ahead with new pay arrangements which favoured traditional male jobs.
So, as I said yesterday, given that this 'before' and 'after' rank order was a key requirement of the Council's Equality Impact Assessment (requested by the unions), then where is the NLC report-back explaining that virtually nothing had changed as far as the Council's traditional male jobs were concerned?
In other words, how did all the women happen to land on a 'snake' when all the men happily found themselves on a 'ladder'.
In other words, how did all the women happen to land on a 'snake' when all the men happily found themselves on a 'ladder'.
Here is the relevant paragraph again from Iris Wylie's letter to Unison (see post dated 9 February 2015) and if you ask me, this could well be the key to unlocking and nailing the whole case.
- identify predominantly male or predominantly female jobs in the existing grading structure and confirm how they move within the new evaluated rank order of jobs i.e. upwards or downwards
Which is one of the reasons I think that going back to the Employment Tribunal is no bad thing because it seems to me that the Council is on a hiding to nothing.
