Mark Irvine - Blogger, Campaigner, Organiser

As regular readers know, I am distinctly unimpressed at the level of 'openness and transparency' surrounding Glasgow City Council's WPBR pay arrangements. So I have submitted two further FOI requests: one asking for copies of all correspondence regarding the award of the WPBR contract to Hays HR Consulting in 2005/06 a second asking for details of previous positions held in the City Council by its current chief executive (Annemarie O'Donnell) and executive director of corporate affairs (Carole Forrest).  I do know that George Black was Annemarie's immediate predecessor as Glasgow CEO and that Ian Drummond was the City Council's solicitor and corporate affairs director until 2010.      What I don't know is what council positions Annemarie O'Donnell and Carole Forrest held previously and what, if any, responsibility they had for issues relating to equal pay and the Workforce Pay and Benefits Review (WPBR).     Annemarie O'Donnell C

Glasgow is Scotland's largest and best resourced council by a long way, but I am still taken aback at times at the way the city council is managed by very senior and highly paid officials.  For example, in this response to a recent FoI Review Request, Glasgow says it has no proper records of what fees were paid to the external consultants who developed up the Workforce Pay and Benefits Review (WPBR).  Now this was a really major decision on Glasgow's part, arguably the single, most important employment issue facing the Council in its history (back in 2005/06), but as you can see from the Council's response no one can explain what the WPBR actually cost - and apparently all the senior officials who might have been able to help have since left GCC's employment.  I have to say my initial reaction was - 'You couldn't make this up!' I've still to decide whether to appeal this decision to the Scottish Information Commissioner (SIC) although it does seem quite

The local government pension rules changed some years ago to introduce a 'career average' rather than a 'final salary' scheme which is much fairer, if you ask me.  Because the old arrangements benefited the higher earners rather than the 'foot soldiers' who provide front-line council services 365 days of the year.   In effect, low paid and often part-time workers were subsidising the retirement pensions much more highly paid senior council officials.     Robin Hood in Reverse (20/03/16) As the pensions aspect of equal pay begins to heat up in in North Lanarkshire, I thought it might be helpful to publish a few posts from the blog site archive on the subject.  The pensions rules changed recently after a long and pointless strike, but the changes only affect 'new starters' if I remember correctly, so while the system is now generally fairer to the taxpayer, the highest paid public officials still get to retire on hugely favourable terms

Stefan Cross explains the significance of Pensions and Equal Pay and the difference a pensionable settlement can make to equal pay claimants.    

Here's an interesting article from The Sunday Times which delves into the intolerance surrounding the 'transgender' debate as a teacher was cleared of professional misconduct charges after posting a comment  on Facebook. John Wilkes was charged with making “grossly discriminatory (transphobic) statements . . . that were damaging to the mental health of members” and which brought the union into disrepute, of harassing transgender members and of harassing Annette Pryce, LGBT executive member of the NUT, who made the original complaint. What a load of old bollix if you ask me, yet Mr Wilkes' trade union (the NUT) managed to turn the issue into a ridiculous charge of 'professional misconduct' against one of its own members who had every right to say what he said.     https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/teacher-roy-wilkes-wins-fight-over-transphobic-comments-5c0m0g2nd?shareToken=2024823dc4c9d5ca956ef51f7b832a0b Teacher Roy Wilkes wins fight over ‘transpho