Issue - meetings

[Report of the interim Director for Customers, Transformation and Resources. To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Corporate Resources and Insourcing.]

Update on progress on the implementation of the Shared Digital Service, learning from first twelve months' operation and recommendations on the detailed future implementation and governance for the service. The report will set out implications of those recommendations for the council’s sovereign Digital and ICT services.

Deputation from Gerard McGrath and Kevin Prior.

The deputation outlined experienced issues with the management of Shared digital service and included problems with the communication about the direction of the service with staff, causing a state of confusion. The deputation continued to outline their concerns in relation to the proposals contained in the report, which were as follows:

• There was a short allocated time line on TUPE –and employees were concerned that they would end up working for Camden rather than working for Haringey, which was the borough they chose to work for.

• Welcomed the reduced scope of the shared service but this lacked clarity and needed further work, particularly in terms of posts.

• If the Unions and Management cannot reach a decision on a delegated decision then Unison proposed this decision should be and signed off by Cabinet instead.

• Option of alternatives to TUPE not being considered properly, further options need to be explored - staff faced with TUPE want to leave. One of the proposals is to TUPE 50 members from each borough and if this happened at Haringey there would be no staff left in Haringey as it is the smallest IT service of the three boroughs. This also reflected the proportionality issues that Unison had concerns about.

• There was a worrying lack of control for Haringey if this model was adopted as Camden will dictate the term and conditions and Haringey staff terms and conditions are compromised.

• The proposed model for the shared service may not be the best value option as the costs were divided equally and Haringey are smaller IT unit than other partners.

• The detail of the proposals needs to be considered. If the proposal to TUPE members goes ahead then the members need to understand the deal and whom they will work for. For the record, Unison members wanted to work for Haringey and not Camden.

In response to Cabinet Member questions the deputation responded as follows:

• There had been a form of consultation when the idea for the TUPE plan was launched. Staff have had discussions and attended huddles in response to proposal. There has been a mix of trade union members and non -union members. However the key message was that staff preferred working for Haringey to Camden. There was also concern about the lack of clarity on who stays and who goes.

• In relation to alternatives to TUPE, these were secondments in line with section 113 of the Local Government Act. Members were given an assurance to discuss this option in detail but as the report came to Cabinet it was prudent to formally register representations.

The Cabinet Member for Corporate Resources and Insourcing thanked the deputation and the entire workforce and provided assurance of his continued involvement in this process. These issues had been raised with management and the Cabinet Member wanted to assure the workforce that both management and Cabinet notes and respects the points being raised and want to make sure the workforce was  fully on  ...  view the full minutes text for item 33