Agenda and minutes

An apology for absence was received from Councillor Sands.

To approve the record of the meeting of the Employment Matters Committee held on 3 July 2025.

To note the record of the meeting of the Joint Consultative Committee held on 3 July 2025.

The record of the meeting held on 3 July 2025 was agreed and signed by the Chairperson as correct. 

The record of the Joint Consultative Committee held on 3 July 2025 was noted by the Committee.

The Chairperson will announce any late items which do not appear on the main agenda but which they have agreed should be considered by reason of special circumstances to be specified in the report.

 There were none.

Members are invited to disclose any Disclosable Pecuniary Interests or Other Significant Interests in accordance with the Member Code of Conduct. Guidance on this is set out in agenda item 4.

Disclosable pecuniary interests (DPI)

There were none.

Other significant Interests (OSI)

There were none.

Other Interests

Councillor Cook disclosed that she was a member of the NAHT trade union.

Councillor Hamilton disclosed that she was a member of the NEU trade union.

Councillor Mark Prenter disclosed that he was a member of the ASLEF trade union.

Councillor Peake disclosed that he was a Member of Unison.

The report presents the findings of the 2025 Staff Survey.

Discussion:

The Chief Organisational Officer introduced the report outlining the results of the recent staff survey. The survey was completed by 55.5% of staff which was slightly lower than last year and showed significant improvements in a number of areas such as improved communication between management and staff and pay and reward. However, there was also a number of areas where further action was required.

The following issues were discussed:

Staff retention – The Committee discussed staff retention and the Chief Organisational Culture Officer was asked for her thoughts as to why 10% of staff wanted to leave the Council in the short term. The Chief Organisational Culture Officer stated that the results had improved compared to previous surveys, with an additional 7% of staff reporting a desire to work for the Council for the long term. With regard to the 10% that intended to leave the Council in the next year, part of this figure could be explained by those planning retirement which reflected the aging workforce within the Council. The figures also showed some staff wanted to leave to seek carer progression. Officers would investigate how the Council could provide additional opportunities to staff in response to the survey results.

It was asked how the Council compared to other comparable authorities and local public sector organisations. The Chief Organisational Culture Officer undertook to discuss with external partners if they would be willing to share their results and provide additional information outside of the meeting.

Bullying – concern was raised by Members in relation to the results of the survey relating to bullying, discrimination and harassment. A Member asked if officers were concerned given a significant proportion of staff that completed the survey were managers and this may have affected results and the views of staff who had not completed the survey had not been heard.

Improving response rates – a Member noted that a significant proportion of those completing the survey were managers, she asked whether this would affect results and how the Council could improve response rate across divisions. The Chief Organisational Culture Officer stated that there had been some anecdotal feedback which suggested that some staff wanted to engage in different ways such as group discussions or shorter surveys. It was the intention of the Council to undertake the principal staff survey every two years in future and compliment this with shorter focused surveys on particular issues. The Chief Organisational Culture Officer acknowledged that the bullying, discrimination and harassment results remained similar to previous survey which was disappointing. She did not believe that the results were misleading due to the cohort that had completed the survey, however, further investigation into the data was required.

She added that she was concerned that the results showed a reluctance to report issues by some staff, 20% of staff reported not knowing how to report issues despite additional work undertaken by officers to promote the survey and 55% of staff that reported issues were dissatisfied with the outcome. Results were  ...  view the full minutes text for item 268.

The Equality Act 2010 (Specific Duties and Public Authorities) Regulations 2017 requires all employers with more than 250 employees to report annually on their Gender Pay Gap. This report provides to the Committee sight of the Council’s results for this reporting year ahead of publication on the Council’s public website by 31 March 2026 and on the Government dedicated Gender pay gap reporting website.  The Council does not have a specific duty to publish data on an ethnicity or disability pay gap, but this data is also provided in this report.

Discussion:

The Head of Employee Relations introduced the report which highlighted the gender pay gap which the Council was required to publish by 31 March and also reported the ethnicity and disability pay gap. The gender pay gap fell from the previous year and stood at 8.1% at March 2025, this was below the national average of 13.1%. Medway ranked 7th of the 14 local authorities.

The ethnicity pay gap showed that ethnic minorities had a higher average pay in comparison to white employees which reflected the higher proportion of ethnic minorities in senior posts and the disability pay gap was -0.1, meaning that staff members with a disability earned slightly more than those without.

The following issues were discussed

Reasons for progress – Members welcomed the progress made by officers in reducing the gender pay gap, the Head of Employee Relations was asked her opinion on how the progress had been made. The Head of Employee Relations stated that the introduction of Medpay PPP had provided more structure to pay and contributed to the reduction in the pay gap.

The Head of Employee Relations added that the figures also reflected the predominantly female workforce. Further work would be undertaken to review pay quartiles and cross reference with ethnicity and disability pay gaps.

Local Government Reform – in response to a question what impact Local Government Reform would have on the results, the Head of Employee Relations stated that it was too early in the process to know what the impact of Local Government Reform would have on the current pay gaps.

Bonus Pay - The Committee discussed bonus pay gap figures, the Head of Employee Relations explained that the bonus gap related to a small group of staff predominately in Social Worker positions. As such a small change in staffing had a significant impact on the figures.

Decision:

a)     The Committee noted the contents of the report in relation to the Gender Pay Gap, as detailed in Appendix 1 to the report, prior to external publication and to also note the ethnicity and disability pay gap results, as set out in Appendices 3 and 4.

b)     The Democratic Services Officer to share with the Committee the briefing note that had been prepared in relation to bonus pay.

This report outlines the review and amendments to the Council’s current Probationary Policy, which has been updated to include probationary notice periods, allow temporary staff to eschew probation if they become permanent, and provides better guidance on probationary processes and action.

Discussion:

The Head of Employee Relations introduced the report which was intended to provide clarity for managers and employees in particular with regard to if an extension of the probationary period is required, the appeals process and when temporary staff take up permanent roles.

The Head of Employee Relations explained two amendments to the wording were proposed to clarify that temporary staff who had satisfactorily completed six months in role would not be subjected to probationary period upon converting to a permanent role and to clarify that the probationary period for staff was either 6 months or 12 months dependent on the role.

She added that consultation with Trade Unions had taken place, and communications and training strategies were in place to support the implementation of the policy.

The following issues were discussed:

Members welcomed the proposals and a Member commented that it was important to ensure the probationary period gave the right support to staff as part of recruitment and retention. The Head of Employee Relations agreed. She added that it was important that the probationary period was an ongoing process, so both employee and managers should have clear understanding of progress made prior to probationary meetings.

Trade union representatives at the Joint Consultative Committee welcomed the proposals and the slight amendment to the text of the policy.

Decision:

a)              The Committee approved the updated Probationary Policy set out as Appendix A to the report and approve the implementation of the policy across all areas of the organisation.

b)              The Committee supported the provision of adequate communication and training to support the effective uptake of the revised policy.

c)               The change in wording at paragraph 2.2 to clarify the position of staff converting from temporary to permanent contracts was approved.

This report outlines the review and amendments to the Council’s current Flexible Retirement Policy, which provides a full policy and procedure for Flexible Retirement requests, providing clarity around eligibility, implications of flexible retirement, and clarity and smoothness of associated procedures.

Discussion:

The Head of Employee Relations introduced the report, she highlighted that the proposed policy provided significantly more information for staff who may consider flexible retirement. The proposals give transparency and clarity regarding eligibility for flexible retirement to enable staff to make informed decisions and clear procedures.

The Head of Employee Relations added that the new policy would help retain the knowledge of experienced staff and would improve recruitment and retention. Trade Unions had been consulted and briefing sessions for managers would be arranged to support implementation of the policy.

The following issues were discussed:

Flexibility for staff – Members welcomed the policy, it was asked whether a provision could be made for staff to return to full time work in exceptional circumstances once they had taken flexible retirement. The Head of Employee Relations undertook to take advice from the pension provider and legal services whether this was possible.

Equalities, Diversity and Inclusion Statement – in response to a question whether experience of being in care should be referred to specifically in the statement the Head of Employee Relations undertook to check and amend this if care leavers had not been included ahead of publishing the policy.

Decision:

a)              The Committee approved the updated Flexible Retirement Policy as set out as Appendix A to the report and approved the implementation of the policy across all areas of the organisation subject to confirmation of decisions C and D below.

b)              The Committee supported the provision of adequate communication to support the effective uptake of the revised policy, as well as any training requirements.

c)               The Head of Employee Relations to investigate whether an employee who had taken flexible retirement could return to full time work in exceptional circumstances and provide an update to the Committee.

d)              The Head of Employee relations to consider whether the Equality, diversity and inclusion statement should be amended to specifically refer to those people who have had experience of being in care as a characteristic.