A meeting of the Staff Liaison Committee was held on Tuesday 31 May 2005 at 12:30pm in the Senate Chamber, Northcote House.

Transcription

1 STAFF LIAISON COMMITTEE A meeting of the Staff Liaison Committee was held on Tuesday 31 May 2005 at 12:30pm in the Senate Chamber, Northcote House. PRESENT Vice Chancellor, Professor S Smith (Chair) Registrar & Secretary, Mr D J Allan Director of Personnel & Staff Development, Mr S J C Cooper Head of School of Education & Lifelong Learning, Professor W Richardson Director of Finance, Mr K R Blanshard Personnel Policies Manager, Mr A P Johnson Mr A Teed (Amicus) Mr B Wood (Amicus) Mr N Brooks (AUT) Mr B Pearson (AUT) Mrs C Hebbard (Unison) Mr A Holcombe (Unison) Mr T Tancock (TGWU) APOLOGIES Senior Deputy Vice Chancellor, Professor R J P Kain Deputy Vice Chancellor, Professor P Webley Mr M Choules (TGWU ) Minutes The minutes of the meeting held on 14 February 2005 (SLC/05/04) were CONFIRMED. Matters arising Minute Outstanding Agenda Items Mr Teed advised the Committee that the Trade Union side still wished to discuss discretionary increments and replacement of the Car Park Working Party. The Director of Personnel & Staff Development commented that the first issue would be covered by discussions relating to the Framework Agreement. Mr Teed proposed that trade union representation on the former Car Park Working Party should be replaced by trade union representation on the Sustainability Committee. The Registrar & Secretary advised that this request would be considered as part of the annual review of Committee membership. Minute Framework Agreement At the request of the EAUT, the Committee agreed to insert the words and Memorandum of Understanding immediately after the words Framework Agreement, in the final sentence of minute Mr Pearson reminded the Committee that the Revised Model Statute was not part of the Framework Agreement. Minute Heating of Buildings after Christmas Closure The Registrar & Secretary advised the Committee that he had discussed this issue with the Director of Buildings & Estate. Over the Christmas closure period, the University aimed to keep its energy costs to a minimum while also ensuring that buildings were ready for use at the end of the holiday period. This involved judgements about temperatures which were difficult to get right on every occasion. Buildings & Estate Services were reviewing practices with a view to improving the situation for next year. Minute University of Exeter Retirement Benefits Scheme The Committee noted that this meeting had been delayed while adjustments were made to the funding of the Scheme in relation to early retirements under the recent restructuring exercise. The University had agreed to pay an additional, single contribution of 760,000 to 1

2 cover the implications of the changed membership following restructuring. The Committee agreed that the most appropriate time for a meeting of the informal pensions group would be in the autumn, after the end of year accounts for the Scheme had been published. Minute Procedures for Promotion to Senior Lecturer The EAUT argued that the procedures for promotion to Senior Lecturer were detailed in Appendix C of the terms and conditions of employment and therefore the changes made by the University should have been discussed and agreed by the Joint Negotiating Committee. They explained that they were not opposed to the substance of the change but they were concerned about the process in which the change had been introduced A formal meeting of the Joint Negotiating Committee was required to formally approve these changes. In response, the Director of Personnel & Staff Development expressed the view that while the Joint Negotiating Committee would need to agree any changes to the criteria for promotion, changes to the procedures of University Committees were not within the scope of terms and conditions or the Joint Negotiating Committee. The Committee noted that the Director of Personnel & Staff Development and the EAUT would be meeting on 10 June. It was agreed that this matter would be discussed at that meeting with a view to the parties resolving the issue Vice Chancellor s Report The Vice Chancellor reported that Phase II of the Combined Universities in Cornwall had been approved with a 52M grant from the Government. All the partners had agreed to reduce their funding from the original submission: the University s reduction of 10% would be met from building capital. Phase II provided for 700FTE students. The Vice Chancellor advised the Committee that 139 staff would be leaving the University (of which 76 are academic/63 support and 91 are 50 or over/48 under 50) as a consequence of the restructuring exercise. A further 9 had been redeployed. The Vice Chancellor thanked the trade unions for their cooperation in achieving these reductions through voluntary means. The University valued the partnership approach which had led to this outcome and hoped to be able to build on this in the future. The Vice Chancellor explained that the cost of restructuring ( 4.7M severance costs plus payment of 760,000 into the Retirement Benefits Scheme) and the underlying deficit of 4.8M would lead to an expected deficit of 10.2M in 2004/5. As a consequence of the restructuring, the University would be saving 5.4M in salary costs in 2005/6, which meant that the underlying deficit can be cleared. However, with the HEFCE settlement being 1.8M higher than expected, the University had also agreed to invest 1.7M in new appointments. (A further 1.5M of proposed new appointments had not been approved; these posts would be released in the future as income grew.) It was planned for the academic sector to break even in 2005/6 with the exception of the School of Geography, Archaeology and Earth Resources and the School of Biosciences, which would be supported from the Strategic Development Fund by 1.3M. From 2006/7, all Schools would be expected to earn a surplus of 3% to 4% for reinvestment. In Music, 12 out of 120 students had agreed to move to another University; staff had agreed to stay on to teach out the current programmes. In Chemistry, out of 136 students, 28 had agreed to transfer to other Exeter programmes and 71 to other Universities; all of these would receive a compensatory payment from the University. 16 current first year students and 17 second years had indicated their intention to finish their current degree at Exeter and 8 staff had been retained to teach out these programmes. Some of these staff had subsequently decided to leave and consequently further discussions would take place with these 33 students. 2

3 The Vice Chancellor commented on recently published league tables which showed Exeter dropping its position. He advised the Committee that most of the data was based on data from 2002/3 or earlier, when the University s performance on many indicators had been low. This data confirmed why it had been necessary for the University to undertake restructuring. The Vice Chancellor re-affirmed the University s commitment to work with in partnership trade unions to implement the Framework Agreement, although he commented that working in partnership did not mean that both sides would always agree. He explained that, over the next two years, salary costs were expected to increase by approximately 10.5% before any account is taken of regrading costs as a consequence of introducing a new grading structure. The 10.5% is comprised of: o an annual increase in of 2% as a consequence of incremental drift (2 x 2% = 4%) o UCEA s offer of 5% cost of living increase over 2 years o 1.5% cost of assimilation to the new 51 point pay spine With annual salary costs of 62M, this would lead to an increased cost of 6.5M. The University s budget for 2006/7 was based on the cost of implementing the Framework Agreement i.e. the cost of assimilation plus any regrading costs to be no more than 3%. If the JNCHES pay settlement was higher than 5%, this would limit the University s ability to afford possible changes to pay and conditions. Additionally, the University had to be mindful of funding for the Retirement Benefits Scheme, which was currently at 16% and could rise further. The full increase in funding from RDS monies was only 2.4M, which was only 3.9% of the University s pay bill. Some of this had already been committed to infrastructure, increases in remuneration for academic staff and an additional day s leave for support staff. In summary, the Vice Chancellor advised the Committee that the University could not afford any additional cost pressures over the next two years and that issues of affordability had to be considered as part of negotiating the implementation of the Framework Agreement. The Director of Personnel & Staff Development advised that Committee that harmonisation costs including possibly reducing the working week for manual and craft staff and increased holiday entitlement for support staff would cost the University between 4% and 6%, although these would not lead to real increases in pay for employees Information and Consultation of Employees Regulations The Committee considered a report of the Director of Personnel & Staff Development (SLC/05/05) on the Information and Consultation of Employees Regulations The Committee agreed that the University and the trade union side should reach a pre-existing agreement which builds on the current arrangements for information and consultation through the termly Staff Liaison Committee. To this end, in advance of the next meeting of this Committee, when a pre-existing agreement would be signed, both sides would submit any proposals for amendments which they consider are necessary to meet the requirements of the Regulations. Mr Teed reminded the Committee that there was also provision for staff representation on Council. He also expressed the view that communications in Schools needed to be improved. Commenting on the low proportion of employees who are members of trade unions, the EAUT asked for the cooperation of the University in recruiting new members. In response, the Director of Personnel & Staff Development commented that revised induction arrangements would enable staff to be advised of the opportunity to join a trade union and how they could join. 3

4 05.12 Contribution Based Reward The Committee considered a report of the Director of Personnel & Staff Development (SLC/05/06) on revisions to the Contribution Based Reward (CBR) scheme. The Committee noted that the following amendments and clarifications to the proposals: o The first payments under the new arrangements will be made in autumn 2006 (paragraph 1); o Subject to the University meeting its financial targets, the University will normally release a CBR budget of up to 2% of the salaries of eligible staff (paragraph 3); o Unsatisfactory performance must be evidenced by recorded meetings (paragraph 5); o Where an employee had a CBR award withheld because of a disciplinary warning, which was withdrawn after a successful appeal, then the payment would be reinstated (paragraph 5); o The reference to School Managers in paragraph 10 includes the head of administration in Schools which do not have a School Manager. The trade union side expressed their concern that names would be published and advised that they would take their own legal advice on whether the publication of names would be a breach of the Data Protection Act. The Vice Chancellor advised the Committee that, while it would prefer to publish the names of staff who received an award, it had to take account of the advice it had received and take note of the fact that 40% of recipients requested that their name not be published. The trade union side requested that the Director of Personnel & Staff Development circulate a full copy of the revised scheme to enable them to consult further with union members. The Director of Personnel & Staff Development reminded the Committee that CBR was not a negotiated (contractual) benefit and that the University was planning to advise staff of the new arrangements before the end of the current University year. The Committee noted that detailed work on how the scheme would operate in Buildings & Estate Services and Hospitality Services was still required. It was agreed that the draft text of the announcement would be sent to the trade union side to allow the opportunity to comment Disability Policy The Committee received a report of the Director of Personnel & Staff Development (SLC/05/07) on the Disability Policy Statement which had been approved by the Council of the University following discussion in the Disability Equality Group and the Equal Opportunity Group Payment of Staff Expenses The Committee received a report of the Director of Personnel & Staff Development (SLC/05/08) confirming that, from August 2005, staff expenses would be paid with employees salaries Learning Partnership Group The Committee received a report of the Director of Personnel & Staff Development (SLC/05/09) on the meetings of the Learning Partnership Group on 1 February and 18 April Framework Agreement The Committee considered reports from the Joint Campus Trade Unions (SLC/05/11) and the Director of Personnel & Staff Development (SLC/05/12) on the Framework Agreement. The Director of Personnel & Staff Development responded to the points made in the report from the Joint Campus Trade Unions: 4

5 (1) He confirmed the University s commitment to a partnership approach, which was understood as effective negotiation with trade union representatives. He reminded the Committee that trade union representatives would be fully involved in the scoring of roles under HERA and that they would receive training. (2) The University noted the trade union side s request for a 35 hour week and the Director of Personnel & Staff Development reminded the Committee of the comments which had been earlier in the meeting about affordability. The University had already signalled its intention to consider harmonisation of annual leave. (3) Information on how RDS monies had been spent had already reported to the Committee earlier in this meeting and it had been noted that the increased funding would not cover the increased costs of implementing the Framework Agreement. (4) The Director of Personnel & Staff Development reminded the Committee that it had been agreed previously that the HERA Steering Group would be reconvened when further detailed work on benchmarking and job matching had been progressed by the working groups. (5) The University agreed that the working groups would be meeting more frequently in the future. (6) The University s position for reasons of affordability which had already been explained was that the grading structure could not be agreed until benchmarking had been completed. The University was concerned that a grading structure should be agreed which was not affordable. The Director of Personnel & Staff Development explained that only three members of the 94 Group were further advanced than Exeter. In response to a question from the trade union side, he confirmed that the University would look at models agreed by other Universities, although their circumstances and objectives may not be the same as Exeter s. (7) The Director of Personnel & Staff Development advised the Committee that the University could not agree to the unions national position of one full-time person and reminded that Committee that the 40,000 which had been proposed in October 2004 came from RDS monies. The University noted that the trade unions would submit claims by each trade union up to 10,000, for cover to recompense some of the time for trade union representatives and the University undertook to review these arrangement in the light of experience. (8) The University was planning a programme of communication and the Director of Personnel & Staff Development invited the trade union side to participate in a joint newsletter to be circulated before the end of the current term. (9) The Director of Personnel & Staff Development asked the TGWU to notify him of the details of their concerns so that these could be investigated. (The Vice Chancellor left the meeting and Professor Richardson took over the Chair.) The Committee discussed a number of issues raised in the report of the Director of Personnel & Staff Development. A joint newsletter would be prepared giving concise, factual answer to frequently asked questions. It was proposed that the representative roles from School of Physics should be included in the benchmarking exercise. The Committee noted that, in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding, UCEA had invited institutions to submit agreed role profiles for senior administrative, library and computing staff. The Director of Personnel & Staff Development agreed that the University would consider role profiles from the national database, where these were of value. The Committee also discussed the proposals outlined in the report for the working hours of staff with a defined working week to be harmonised at 36.5 hours from August The report requested trade union representatives to endorse this approach. The trade union side indicated that they would not be able to agree to this proposal at this meeting and that further consideration and subsequent negotiation with the University would be necessary. The trade union side confirmed their preference for 'vertical' harmonisation and it was agreed that this matter should be discussed further in the appropriate working group. 5

6 05.17 Interim Arrangement for the Regrading of Support Staff The Committee considered a report of the Director of Personnel & Staff Development (SLC/05/12) proposing interim arrangements for the regrading of support staff in the period prior to the introduction of new grading arrangements on 1 August The trade union side expressed their reservations about the proposal and the Director of Personnel & Staff Development undertook to consider these points Membership of the Committee The Committee noted that this would be the final meeting of the Committee for the Director of Finance, Mr Keith Blanshard, and for Mr Andrew Teed. The Committee thanked them for their contribution to the work of the Committee and the University. 6