A Little Clarity over Pay

January 2019: FOI Request:

With regard to the recent proposed strike action, a States spokesperson said: ‘We are disappointed at the unions’ decision to call for limited strike action among civil servants. We will consider the implications for the potential impact on public services, alongside confirming the contingency plans that are in place to minimise those impacts."

This doesn't give much regarding the chain of responsibility for the statement.

1.     Which States members were involved in producing / agreeing this statement for release?

2.     Were the Council of Ministers members all involved/consulted in deciding/agreeing to this statement?

Response

This statement was provided on behalf of the States Employment Board and was approved by the Chair and Vice Chair of the States Employment Board.

Comment

On 10^th January, one month after Tracey Valois resigned as Chair of the States Employment Board, Bailiwick Express noted:

Senior members of the States Employment Board “don’t feel there’s any pressure” to appoint a new leader in the face of escalating civil service strikes and mounting challenges from other public sector workers over pension rates and pay reversals, it has emerged.

In the meantime, the Chief Minister, John Le Fondre, is acting Chair.

The SEB's Vice Chair, Constable Richard Buchanan, said yesterday that he and the Chief Minister are not actively looking to appoint another politician to steer the body responsible for setting States workers' pay, terms and conditions.

Currently, the SEB consists of:

Senator John Le Fondre, Chief Minister

Connétable R.A. Buchanan, Assistant Chief Minister

Deputy S.J. Pinel, Minister for Treasury and Resources

Connétable D.W. Mezbourian of St. Lawrence

Deputy G.J. Truscott of St. Brelade.

The curious wording “provided on behalf of” doesn’t actually clarify a great deal about who drafted the Statement, although all members agreed with it. 

When the States Employment Board is making a statement, I do think it would be more honest for them to take responsibility than to hide behind “a States spokesperson” and “the States said...”, especially as it is likely that not all of the Council of Ministers are in agreement with said policy.

On the matter of transparency, I note:

“The States of Jersey is today publishing a table of civil service pay grades to aid transparency and understanding of the pay rates for civil servants, in light of current industrial action. The table also reveals the number of civil servants in each pay bracket, as well as examples of the kinds of roles, and shows that at each grade the majority of employees are paid at the top of their pay scale.”

For “The States of Jersey” read “The States Employment Board”, and note, by the way, this only covers pay rates for civil servants below £100,000. Of course, those above have been frozen, it is true, but then they are likely to face less pressure from the rising cost of living and rental costs.

In the interests of transparency, I have asked for a similar breakdown to be given for those above £100,000 – and it will be interesting to see, especially as we have just found out that the temporary head of Health is being paid £27,000 per month, which amounts to some £324,000 per annum. No wonder the nurses can’t get an adequate pay rise!

John Le Fondre, defending this, said it was only a temporary position while a new post holder was found and such temporary appointments always cost more. But that appointment was made on 19th June - for 6 months! It has clearly been extended, although the SEB has been surprisingly reticent for how long - another 6 months? Not much transparency there.

Kenny McNeil, of the RCN, said that constantly hearing how highly paid States executives were was the main reason that nurses chose to reject their pay offers:

“We have rejected our pay offer and the situation is that our members keep being told that there is no money but then keep hearing about directors getting huge payouts. ‘We think that if they can pay people that sort of money, then they should also pay well and respect the hard-working staff on the frontline. If they can find that sort of money to pay interim directors, then it shows that the money is there.”

It was understandable that Reform should support the strike action, but heartening to see both Steve Luce and Steve Pallett agree that enough was enough, and the SEB should climb down from its autocratic pedestal and seek some kind of compromise. They both said that there was money, but it needed to be diverted from other matters.

In that regard, remember that just before Christmas, Senator John Le Fondré, has now said he is committed to releasing funding for court appeals for CICRA under the next Medium Term Financial Plan. The Magic Money Tree has some money, it seems, if your face fits.

It’s a pity the same commitment hasn’t been made for the next MTFP to rectify the long term below cost of living pay for civil servants, nurses and teachers, which is certainly far more urgent. Why not come out and make that commitment now?