Hart Borough Council Staffing and Appeals Committee Meeting

The minutes of the meeting held on 21 November 2023, including Exempt minutes, were agreed and signed by the Chairman.

Proposed by:  Cllr Crampton; Seconded by:  Cllr Worlock

Unanimously agreed by all those at the November meeting.

Members considered matters arising from the minutes:

·         That there was still work to be done on four out of the five posts highlighted by the Mike Gates review.  The fifth had been reviewed and satisfactorily resolved

·         That the staff organisation chart had not changed since the last iteration presented to the Committee

Members asked that a full report on the outstanding work on the four posts be brought back to the next meeting.

Apologies for absence were received from Cllr Bailey.

Cllr Radley was attending virtually and therefore would not take part in any voting.

There were no declarations of interest made. 

The Chairman announced that: 

·                          The Chief Executive’s objectives had not been available for this meeting and that therefore a further Staffing Committee meeting would be arranged for April 2024 

·                          As discussed under an earlier agenda item, a report formalising actions undertaken on outstanding points from the last meeting would be brought to the April meeting. 

Members were reminded that the Policy document had undergone a significant re-write last year and, as such, no further changes were being recommended.  If agreed, this would be referred to full Council at the April meeting.

Members sought clarification on the salary cost increase being included in the budget for 2024/25.  It was also confirmed that those lines highlighted yellow in Appendix 2 showed posts not in establishment lists.  These included fixed term contracts, backfill staff for insourced contracts and apprenticeships.

Proposed by:  Cllr Butler; Seconded by Cllr Woods

Decision

A.       The Pay Policy 2024/2025, attached as Appendix 1 to the report, was recommended to Council for approval.

B.       The staff numbers and vacancies provided in Appendix 2 to the report were noted.

C.       The Exit interview data provided in Appendix 3 to the report was noted. 

Members received a high level overview of the results of the staff survey run in the late autumn of 2023.

Members heard:

·         There had been a 96% uptake from staff

·         In the majority of cases the scoring rate from 2022 had improved

·         The hybrid working question had shown a dip from 2022 but analysis had shown this was more about inconsistent application from management, which was being reviewed.

·         The two areas that had been flagged up were around workloads and learning and development and work was being undertaken to unpick these results

·         That line management communication now scored highly and that staff felt Hart was a good place to work

·         That there was still a need for further work to be done with staff as to what constituted an informal catch up/1-1/PDR as there seemed to be some confusion

Members questioned:

·         Whether the previous limitations on system use which had stopped some departments from working away from the office, had now been overcome

·         If it was known why learning and development received a lower score than other areas

·         Whether there were discrepancies across the three directorates

·         Whether HR felt they were sufficiently resourced to ensure that there was a better result for the learning and development section in the 2024 survey

Members noted:

·         That all systems were now available wherever a member of staff worked

·         That HR were analysing the learning and development responses, and would look at options and put together an action plan.  Any potential costs would be brought back to Committee for consideration

·         That a record of PDRs completed would be maintained by HR to enusre that everyone had

ADN – data on pdrs/1-1 etc – take Daryl’s point but surprising as have a pdr process which is a corporate policy and everyone has a pdr and reviewed.  So maybe more of an education piece?  Feels a bit counter intuitive.  DP – interesting that managers raise an eyebrow about this – but what is the issue?  Not captured the pdr/mid-term so feel that need to look at the evidence to see what the issue is. 

SF – pdrs as policy hr should record whether taken place so not able to compare what completed against.  Not capture as expected directors to have information but will do that in future.  To ensure being done and to ensure that not misunderstanding.  Know issues about 1-1 last year and being picked up.  Hopefully these are being picked up.  Should be nearer 100% and this is good learning that should tighten up on process.

WMB – coming forward this is reason why this is reason why and feel this comes every year for staffing so come set agenda item.  Pleased that the staff survey from last year chucked up questions and picked up item. 

DP try to keep it simple and try and keep consistent but finding some questions not quite right which will break consistency.  But no radical change but refine them.  Hopefully sign good that so many did it.  WMB feel that reflect of mood and morale.  Results are interesting and useful.

JW – how are results survey being communicated to staff.  DP – team brief monthly and these given them last month and then workshops will be done and look at specific areas.  Try and engage them last year and listened to what said and do  you said we did.  Anonymous.

GB – feedback to staff how appreciate high turnout and information very useful.  DP do that at the end of the month. 

BM – probation starters so maybe a reason for the drop off on that.

noting