Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

WORK LIFE - TYING UP THE STAFF

  • Comment
The government is sending mixed messages to councils about how it wants them to act as employers. ...
The government is sending mixed messages to councils about how it wants them to act as employers.

On the one hand, the government wants councils to have an innovative approach to people management, while on the other hand, they bind them with red tape. The latest example of bureaucratic knot-tying is to be found in the innocuous-sounding Local Authorities (Standing Orders) (England) Regulations 2001. Although these regulations came into force in November 2001, their practical impact is only just being realised.

The regulations lay down the procedures to be followed when local government staff are appointed or dismissed. The first principle they set out is that, with a few exceptions, councillors can no longer be involved in the appointment or dismissal of staff below deputy chief officer level, though they can still serve on panels hearing appeals against dismissal.

The main purpose is to prevent councillors influencing who gets a job with the council. But having done that, the regulations then lay down a Byzantine process for the hiring and firing of deputy chief officers and above.

The main thrust of the regulations is that where the matter is being dealt with by a committee, sub-committee or panel, an appointment cannot be offered until the proper officer - presumably the monitoring officer - has notified every executive member of the name of the person to be appointed or dismissed. Any member of the executive can then object and the appointment/dismissal cannot go ahead until the proper officer is happy the objection has no foundation.

In addition, where the head of paid service is being appointed or dismissed, the decision has to be confirmed by a full council meeting. In cases of the dismissal of the chief executive, this process has also to be endorsed by an independent person.

Apart from going against a key principle of good personnel management, that those involved in the appointment or dismissal process should be accountable for their actions, the regulations raise real practical difficulties - especially if a quick decision is needed to stop a potential chief executive looking elsewhere.

Some advice on how this wheeze works in reality would be welcome.

Tim Rothwell

Managing director, GWT Rothwell

  • Comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.

Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.