Auditor asked to make a Public Interest Report on Davani pay-off

The Cara Davani issue just won't go and the news that she now runs a 'boutique hotel' in Suffolk LINK isn't going to exactly endear her to those who have been seeking out the truth about her £157k pay-off.

Now Councillor John Warren, leader of Brent Conservative Group, has asked Brent Council's Auditor, KPMG, to make a Public Interest Report under Section 24  of the Local Audit and Accountability Act 2014.

Dear Mr. Johnstone, 

I seek your consideration of a public interest report in respect of the Accounts of the L.B.of Brent for 2015/2016...........

1. I am on the electoral register in the Brondesbury Park  Ward in HBP4.

2.” Why you are objecting and facts on which you rely.”

I am objecting that you have not issued a report on what I shall refer to as the “ Rosemarie Clarke saga .”.......and put forward the following....

(a) L.B.Brent has suffered a significant financial loss due to mismanagement,incompetence,and decision - making at the highest level that fail totally to pass ANY test of “ reasonableness.”
(b) The cumulative cost of this saga totals in excess of £1 m. for 2014/2015 and 2015/2016.
(c) There is considerable interest in this saga from Brent residents.
(d) As admitted by L.B. of Brent, here has been considerable reputational damage to the Council as a result of this saga.

3. “ Details of any matter you think the external auditor should make a public interest report about .”.......

(a) The saga as referred to above with specific reference to .....

•          did the personal relationship between Christine Gilbert ,former Chief Executive ,and Cara Davani have any effect on the decision - making  in this saga?
•          did the fact that  the two afore-  mentioned individuals had previously worked together at both Ofsted and L.B. of Tower Hamlets play any part in the decision - making in this saga?
•          was it ,in  any way possible, “ reasonable “ for Ms Gilbert NOT to  initiate a disciplinary process against M/ s Davani in the light of the brutal judgement and comments by the Judge in the  Employment Tribunal case  at Watford - 3302741/2013?
•          did “ unreasonable “ decision - making in this saga mean that Brent Council should never have been placed in the position of having to agree an exit payment to M/ s Davani of £157,610 - as per 2015/16 accounts?
•          was it a proper use of public monies for L.B.of Brent to pay the costs/ damages awarded personally - as a defendant- against M/ Davani?

4. “ What you would like the external auditor to do ?”

I should like you to issue a public interest report on the reasonableness or otherwise of the decision - making in the “ Rosemarie Clarke saga. “..... because of the significant cost in money terms, Council reputational damage  and Brent  staff- relations ....
•          was it reasonable to take disciplinary action in the first place against Ms Clarke?
•          was it reasonable to appeal the Tribunal verdict in the light of the Judge’ s comment that “ Brent had no reasonable prospect of success ?”
•          was it reasonable not to take disciplinary action against Ms Davani in the light of the Tribunal judgement?
•          was it reasonable for Brent to pay all Ms Davani ‘ legal costs and damages personally awarded against her?
•          was it reasonable for Brent to make the exit payment of £157,610 to Ms Davani?

As is required by law the request has also been submitted to Brent Council's Chief Finance Officer, Conrad Hall.

If anyone else wishes to make a request it must be written in a proper form to the Auditor by August 11th. Here is some guidance from  Philip Grant submitted earlier today as a blog comment:

if you are on the voters list for Brent, you have a right, if you wish, to object to the expenditure of £157,610 by Brent Council, BUT ONLY if you submit your objection in a proper form by Thursday 11 August.

If you do want to do this, it can be done by email to the auditor at KPMG: philip.johnstone@kpmg.co.uk , and a copy must also be sent to Brent Council's Chief Finance Officer: conrad.hall@brent.gov.uk .

Your email would need to say that it is about the accounts of the London Borough of Brent for 2015/16, and that you are objecting under Section 27 of the Local Audit and Accountability Act 2014.

You need to say that you are an elector in Brent, give your full postal address, and (if you know them) the name of the Ward in the borough and the constituency (e.g. Brent North, Brent Central or Hampstead & Kilburn) in which you are registered to vote.

You must say what you believe is wrong about the accounts and why you believe they are wrong. If it is the £157k payment, you should say that you are objecting to the compensation for loss of office payment of £157,610 to Brent's former Human Resources Director, shown at Note 30 (Senior Employees' Remuneration) in the accounts, and that you think it is wrong to include this amount in the accounts because it was not a proper payment for the Council to make.

In support of your objection, you need to explain why you think the £157k should not have been paid, and provide what evidence you can. Based on your comment, you could say that Cara Davani should already have been sacked for gross misconduct after the Tribunal findings against her (Note: these were NOT for racial discrimination, but for victimising Rosemarie Clarke and for wrongly having her suspended for misconduct just because Rosemarie had complained about being bullied and harassed by her); that she should not have been given a compensation payment for leaving (or at most only a small one, quoting the normal redundancy rates from your comment); and that the £157k payment shows she was being treated more favourably than she should have been because she was a crony of Christine Gilbert.

You don't need to provide much evidence, as you can also say that you are aware that there has been another objection about the leaving payment to Cara Davani, and that you would like any evidence provided in any other objections to be used in support of your objection as well.

At the end of your objection email, you would need to ask the auditor to investigate the payment you have objected to, and either:

1) ask the Court to declare the payment unlawful, under Section 28, if he thinks there is a strong enough case for this; or,

2) make a public interest report, under Section 24, giving his views on the payment and asking Brent Council to take action to remedy it.

Is this the beginning of the end of Brent Council's Human Resources scandal?

Brent Council has announced the appointment of a new Director of Human Resources. This is the post currently held on an interim basis by Mildred Phillips, who took over when Cara Davani left the Council. Presumably Phillips will now revert to her previous deputy role.

David Veale is expected to take up the post in July. He is currently the Assistant Director of Human Resources and Organisational Development in Ealing, a post he has held for 4 years.

Mildred Phillips was notable by her absence at the recent Scrutiny Committee where Michael Pavey  protested that the report on progress on his HR Review, that she had written, had not been submitted to him for approval prior to publication.

Pavey remarked at Scrutiny that the report felt like 'a ceremonial closing of the Pavey Review' he went on to say, 'as the actions are ticked off, I have a lingering concern that we will lose the imperative which launched this [review] process in the first place.

It will be David Veale's job to ensure that imperative is not lost and that the battle for racial equality and an end to bullying and harassment becomes a top priority in practical terms for Brent Council.

Veales has had experience of a dysfunctional HR department at Ealing where this was said about the department LINK:

In 2006 an Audit Commission report painted a gloomy picture of the HR function at Ealing Council. The troubled department was failing to provide a good HR service to the organisation and bringing little added value.

The team was feeling demotivated, overworked and unproductive following an intense period of restructuring. With so much on their plates, team members had lost sight of the big picture. A series of rapid changes in leadership, with five HR directors in almost as many years, had also lowered morale. The structure of the senior HR team meant that the five key senior leaders, each responsible for a vital HR function, worked in isolation.

To improve the service, the senior HR team needed to be re-energised and prepared for further change. Recognising this, Hilary Jeanes, the interim HR director at the time, appointed Paul Fairhurst and some of his colleagues from the Institute for Employment Studies to conduct a bespoke strengths-focused coaching scheme for the HR leadership team. The aim was to support the senior leaders through this difficult time, rebuild their confidence and help develop them as managers and inspirational leaders.

A six month coaching programme was instigated with some sessions off-site, away from the frontline:

David Veale working Ealing HR consultancy at the time said in his evaluation of the programme:

The programme gave me a clear understanding of my strengths and the activities I enjoy doing at work, as well as those I find more challenging. It helped me step back from difficult situations and view them more objectively. I feel much more confident, and as a team we are less stressed, less reactive and more focused on outcomes.

 The case study concluded:

Lessons learned:

• Ignoring weaknesses turns them into problems. Focus on your strengths, and make sure you know the strengths of those around you.
• Overworked, exhausted staff need thinking space, but a re-energised team can have the determination to tackle bigger challenges ahead with enthusiasm.
• Change is a constant, but preparing people for it, rather than inflicting it upon them, is well worth the investment. 

It is to be hoped that these lessons and others learned in the interim will contribute to a change of culture at Brent HR.

Meanwhile the 'Guinness' model of Brent Council management (white on top and black below) has been changed to some extent by the appointment of BAME candidates. Althea Loderick succeeds Stephen Hughes as Strategic Director of Resources and Amar Dave takes over from Lorraine Langham as Director for Regeneration and Environment.

New Brent HR Director must ensure equalities are upheld as more job losses loom

Yesterday was the deadline for applications to be the Director of Brent Council Human Relations. The post was of course extremely controversial when held by Cara Davani with the Employment Tribunal judgment finding that the Council racially discriminated against against a member of staff,  victimised her and constructivelyly dismissed her. LINK

Cara Davani later left the Council's employment and attempts to find out the amount of her pay off were unsuccessful.

The new Director will be managing further reductions in Council  staffing  which will have equality implications as this extract from the budget report  LINK shows:
 

.        8.8.  Driving Organisational Efficiency is proposed to save £4.8m. Transformation of the design and delivery of Early Help will streamline Early Help, focusing on a one family, one worker approach to help build resilience and independence, saving £0.9m. Reviewing staff structures and spans of control across Community Services will save £2.3m. Reviewing support service costs: HR, legal, IT, business support and finance for greater efficiency will save £1m. Other savings totalling £0.6m are shown in Appendix D(iii). Service user and staff consultation will of course be essential to shape the detailed plans of how to achieve these savings, but the current expectation is that they will not impact significantly on the delivery of front-line services. 


.        8.9.  Many of the proposals will have an impact on staff, especially where the majority of the saving proposals are made up of staffing costs. Given the scale of staffing reductions, there is potential for these proposals to have a significant impact on the workforce, particularly in Community Services and Resources. The majority of the workforce is from ethnic minority groups (broadly reflecting the ethnic profile of the Borough); there are also some services that due to their nature consist of predominantly female or male members of staff, and it is important that changes are not disproportionate in terms of their impact. Brent’s Managing Change Policy and Procedure provides a framework to be followed during times of organisational change to minimise the risk of a negative impact on any equality groups. The Managing Change Policy requires that staffing changes undergo EA to ensure that the restructure process is conducted in a fair, transparent and non-discriminatory manner. 


This is the advertisement on PM Jobs for the HR post:

--> HR Director

LB Brent • to £122k

Right now, there’s no more exciting place to be than Brent. Recent years have seen an unprecedented transformation in what we do, how we do it, and even (with the completion of our remarkable new Civic Centre) where it’s done. This sustained infusion of energy and collaboration has resulted in a singularly ambitious strategic vision, making Brent Just Better: Better Locally, a Better Place, and Better Lives. With strong growth projections for the borough over the years to come, our resource position is stronger than most; and we believe there’s the potential to do more here than at any other council.

Our ambition for the HR service is similarly stretching, and we’re determined that the department will play an increasingly important part in the success of the whole organisation. The role covers the full operational and strategic gamut, and there will be some absorbingly complex issues (such as delivery models and structures) on your desk from day one. We’re open-minded about the options, and are committed to thinking differently – but sound evidence, a full business case, and total alignment with our strategic objectives must underpin everything you do.

Candidates will have been consistently outstanding in their career to date, with excellent practical and conceptual abilities, and a strong grasp of the complexities inherent in our operating environment. You should be intellectually strong, with good communication skills and the ability to forge positive working relationships with everyone from elected members to trade unions; a particular strength in communicating and embedding strategic HR priorities will be a definite advantage. Issues such as traded and shared services, culture change, leadership development and workforce planning will all come into sharp focus over the next 12-18 months, and applicants should be able to bring a demonstrable understanding of these and many other aspects.

A salute to Philip Grant for his work on the Davani case

Nan Tewari, who first raised the issue of the behaviour of Brent Council Human Resources on this blog LINK wrote the following comment on the post below about Brent Council settling the Rosemarie Clarke case 'out of court'. I think her comment deserves more prominence.

What stands out in this sorry saga is the power of one individual's tenacious struggle to expose the truth and how that struggle carried out in the public domain, i.e. Wembley Matters, bolstered its effects to ensure a massive degree of success.

Philip Grant's relentless pursuit of matters of fact in this case, together with Martin Francis shining a light on that pursuit, has had the powerful effect of seeing off Cara Davani, Andrew Potts and Christine Gilbert.

After stringing out the Chief Exective 'interim' role for 3 years, Brent Council and Gilbert would have been quite comfortable for her to throw her hat into the ring for the permanent position and for her to have been appointed based on her sterling record of failure to follow basic procedures and nurturing conflicts of interest.

Andrew Potts, business and personal partner of Davani, emerged as a beneficiary of the legal department restructure that had been conducted by Davani and signed (nodded?) off by Gilbert.

Davani herself was secure enough to work on adding such unlikely strings to her bow as taking on responsibility for equality and diversity as well as wanting the acclaim of a Business in the Community award to trumpet the Council's equality achievements as a means of countering the public disgrace at the Watford Tribunal and the public disrepute she brought the council into, for blatant race discrimination.

And Philip's efforts have also exposed for all to see (the video of the council meeting would probably warrant an 18 certificate in the scheme of these things!!) the underlying ill manners and discourtesy of Cllr Butt and Cllr Dr Helen Carr BA (Hons); M Phil (Oxon); Cert TEFL; Dip; DPil who appear singularly unable to understand the balanced deportment required of public figures.

So at a time when it appears that we the public are powerless against those in power, Philip Grant has led the way in showing that we can put the frighteners on public institutions whatever they may choose to admit or however much they may attempt to conceal.

Philip, we salute you.

Tell YOUR Brent councillor what you think about a possible “pay off” to Cara Davani

-->

 Guest post by Philip Grant

As regular “Wembley Matters” readers will know, I have been active in seeking to get the Council to ensure that Brent’s Director of HR faces the consequences of her actions in the Rosemarie Clarke Employment Tribunal case, since the Tribunal judgment was published more than nine months ago. Many of you commented on two blogs posted last week about the announcement that Ms Davani is to leave the Council at the end of June. One of the biggest concerns is that she may be receiving a “pay off” from Brent in return for (finally!) leaving, which might also include Brent “picking up the bill” for any damages and costs awarded against Ms Davani personally in the Rosemarie Clarke case (in which she and Brent are separately named respondents).

I had hoped to get some publicity for our concerns about any such “pay off” through a letter to the editor of the “Brent & Kilburn Times”, but there is no letters page in this week’s (18 June) edition. Worse still, the newspaper has also not included its online article about Ms Davani’s departure in the printed version. Instead, the space that it might have occupied carries a photograph of a smiling Cllr Muhammed Butt, alongside a story about a letter he has written to the Tory Party chairman, complaining about the embarrassment which the feuding rival Conservative groups are causing to Brent.

However, I have raised the issue of possible financial malpractice (as a result of conflicts of interest) in connection with any possible financial arrangements arising from Ms Davani leaving the Council, with the Head of Brent’s Audit and Investigation team. I will “copy and paste” below (for reasons explained in its final paragraph) the text of the covering email which I sent on Wednesday evening with my report and supporting evidence. 

The other reason I am writing this “guest blog” is to invite all readers who live in Brent, and who share my concerns, to write to their ward councillors (see the link at the right-hand side of “Wembley Matters” for contact details for local councillors, if you don’t already have them). Tell your councillors (politely but firmly, in your own words, and without abusive language, please) what you think about any possible “pay off” to Cara Davani, and ask them to raise questions about it with senior Council Officers and the Leader of the Council, with a view to ensuring that no such “pay off” is made. You might also wish to copy your email to chief.executive@brent.gov.uk , and to cllr.muhammed.butt@brent.gov.uk , for good measure. Individual messages from local voters, especially if there are a large number of them, can make a difference, so let your councillors know what you think on this matter.

I believe that there is a strong case for Brent not to let Ms Davani’s “friends in high places” give her a leaving gift at the Council’s (that is, our) expense. This is how I set out this belief in the final paragraph of the letter which I hoped would be published this week:

‘It is possible that the total Tribunal awards to Ms Clarke may be in excess of £1 million, quite apart from the Council’s own huge legal costs in fighting the case. The Council will have to pay whatever the Tribunal awards against it as “first respondent”; but funds needed by the Council for providing services (and supporting the jobs of local people who provide them) must not be wasted in making unnecessary and undeserved payments to Ms Davani, or on her behalf. Her actions have already had such a high cost, both financial and reputational, to Brent, quite apart from the harm done to the lives of the victims of her style of managing Human Resources in the borough.’

If you agree, please let the Council, and your councillors, know about it. Thank you.

Philip Grant

Text of my email of 17 June 2015 to the Head of Audit and Investigations (which he has acknowledged receipt of):-

Dear Mr Lane,

Possible Financial Malpractice / Irregularity over leaving arrangements for Director of HR

Following the news last week that Cara Davani, Director of HR and Administration, would be leaving the Council at the end of June, there has been great concern locally about a rumoured “pay off” to her. This concern can be seen in many comments on online blog items, for example

http://wembleymatters.blogspot.co.uk/2015/06/reliable-source-reports-that-cara.html

http://wembleymatters.blogspot.co.uk/2015/06/cara-devani-leaving-brent-council-to.html

and has also been expressed to me privately by several local councillors, who are aware of my interest in the Rosemarie Clarke Employment Tribunal case, which may (finally!) have something to do with Ms Davani’s departure.

Under Brent’s Anti-Fraud and Bribery Policy, your department has a duty to prevent financial malpractice where possible, so that funds are not lost to the Council because of irregularities such as undisclosed conflicts of interest. I believe that any potential payments, or indemnities, which might be given to Ms Davani as part of her leaving arrangements are likely to involve conflicts of interest, and have set out the reasons for this in the attached report and supporting documents.

I would ask that you ensure, as a matter of urgency, that any financial arrangements with Ms Davani, other than the payment of her basic salary up to the end of June 2015, are suspended until the outcome of a proper investigation into the points I have raised.

I will forward a copy of this email to Brent’s Chief Legal Officer, who will need to ensure that certain documents I have referred to are secured, and made available to you, and may also need to take action over some of the points raised in her role as the Council’s Monitoring Officer.

I intend to publish the text of this email, although not any of its attachments, so that its contents are on public record, thereby hopefully ensuring that there is no attempt by anyone in a position of power at the Civic Centre to stop you from freely carrying out the Policy’s stated intention to ‘investigate any allegation that may have a direct, or indirect, impact of the finances for which [the Council is] responsible.’

Please acknowledge safe receipt of this email and its seven attachments. Thank you. Best wishes

Philip Grant.

Brent Council searches for Head Of Equality against background of racial discrimination finding

Kilburn Times September 25th 2014

Brent Council has advertised for a Head of Equality with a closing date of June 15th. and interviews in early July. The new Chief Executive Carolyn Downs' appointment is due to be ratified at the Council meeting on June 26th. The appointment takes place at a time when there has still been no disciplinary or competency procedures over the Employment Tribunal finding that Brent Council and Cara Davani, Head of Brent Human Resources, had racially discriminated against an employee,  victimised her and constructively dismissed her.

The job could be a bit of a hot potato.  It will be interesting to see if there are any applications from ex-Ofsted or Tower Hamlets employees.

Meanwhile perhaps Wembley Matters readers would like to nominate somone for the post.

Head of Equality

Ref 14849

Location Brent

Department Corporate and Business Support

Business unit HR and Administration

Salary range: £48,477 - £51,441 p.a. inc.

Creating Opportunities. Improving Lives.

Brent is a tremendously vibrant London borough where the iconic arch of Wembley Stadium dominates the skyline. Spanning both inner and outer London, it is a borough of huge contrasts in terms of its economic, environmental, ethnic and social make up. Brent’s diversity is evident to all who visit our borough and our long history of ethnic and cultural diversity has created a place that is truly unique and valued by those who live and work here.

The council is pursuing a far-reaching transformation agenda that better meets the needs of our community so it is an exciting time to join us.

The Post

Understanding diversity and tackling inequality has never been more important, as the council has to respond creatively and constructively to address the needs of its residents, meet its statutory responsibilities and continue to demonstrate its community leadership. The Equality Team leads the council's work on equality, diversity, cohesion and human rights. As the Head of the Equality Team, you will drive the integration of effective diversity and equality practice into everything the council does as a locality leader, as a provider and commissioner of services and as an employer.

The Person

You will have extensive knowledge of equality, diversity and inclusion good practice and an understanding of the challenges that local government faces today. You will be able to apply this knowledge at a strategic and operational level in order to improve the lives of local communities and strengthen equality, diversity and inclusion in our workforce.

You will have the ability to build effective relationships at all levels to drive the continuous improvement of equality, diversity and inclusion practices in Brent. You will be expected to provide confident and practical leadership to ensure the council meets its legal, business and reputational responsibilities.

If you share our vision and passion for the vital role of equality, diversity and inclusion in local government, we welcome your application.

Closing Date: 15 June 2015 (23:59)
Assessment Date: w/c 29 June 2015
Interviews: w/c 6 July 2015

Additional Information

Brent Council values the diversity of its community and aims to have a workforce that reflects this and therefore encourage applications from all sections of the community.

Applications are particularly welcome from people with a disability as they are under represented across the council.

All organisations and individuals who work with children and young people, or are involved in providing services for them have a duty to safeguard and promote their welfare.

We are committed to safer recruitment and safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children and young people and expect all staff and volunteers to share this commitment.

Before you join Brent Council, you will need to provide your National Insurance (NI) number and undergo a Home Office Standard I.D. check.

Successful applicants may be required to apply for a DBS Disclosure.

Please note CVs will not be considered as part of your application for this position.

More Info...

14849 Candidate Pack.pdf for a

Disabled Applicants.pdf

• Apply for this job
• Email these job details to a friend
• Back to search results

Pavey Review won't lance Brent's boil but points to future improvements

 

The Pavey Review which was published last week has this key sentence:

0. It is important to note that the review was not a review of our HR department. It is about the role each person has to play in making Brent Council the best possible place to work. There are clear recommendations in relation to employment policies and practice, and these require the action of the entire organisation and crucially managers at all levels.
   

This limitation is why Brent Green Party and others called for an independent investigation into Brent Council, not only in the racial discrimination, victimisation and constructive dismissal that an Employment Tribunal found against first respondent Brent Council and second respondent Cara Davani, but into the previous working connections of senior staff. The latest example of the latter is the appointment of Lorraine Langham as Brent's Chief Operating Officer who like Christine Gilbert and Cara Davani previously worked for both Ofsted and Tower Hamlets Council. LINK

In any other organisation disciplinary action would have been taken against a manager found guilty of such conduct. Muhammed Butt, when challenged by members of staff on the issue at Brent Connects said the council had to follow 'due process' and make an Appeal.

Some Councillors suggested to me that disciplinary action could only take place when the Appeal process had been exhausted. A Judge found that the Council had no grounds for an Appeal but still no action was taken. Two legitimate opportunities to lance the boil missed.

Some have claimed that disciplinary action in itself would amount to victimisation or even a 'witch hunt',  or would be to succomb to political pressure. This is  a red herring. The Council owes a duty of care towards its employees and this includes ensuring that they are treated fairly in their day to day employment regardless of race, gender etc. Brent Council should have confidence that their own disciplinary procedures are robust enough to withstand such pressures.

Now the Council is in the position of having someone in charge of HR who has been found guilty of the above offences but is nevertheless in charge of recruitment and redundancies policies. Long term mprovements in processes and procedures does not address immediate issue.

Michael Pavey has done a thorough job within his limited remit, consulting widely with staff and apparently winning their confidence. One glaring ommission is consulting with the staff who have left the Council and examining any gagging clauses that were imposed. They, after all, are possible victims of poor employment and practice.

However, given the comments I have received on this blog regarding working conditions at Brent Council (many unpublished so as not to reveal identity or due to gagging clauses) as well as emails and telephone calls, soemtimes distraught,  the following comment seems emollient:

This review finds that Brent is generally a happy and inclusive place to work. But there is plenty we can do better.

Although Cllr Pavey recognises that Black and Minority Ethnic (BAME) statistics in Brent are better than some other London local authorities, he says they are far from satisfactory.  What is missing from his report is the connection between those statistics and the operation of the HR department (Proportion of BAME employees in Brent is 62%, Female employees 65%):

Both show higher proportions in the lower grade and I assume that BAME and Female would be higher still at tScale 3 to P2, and lower at the Hay grade.

Im terms of HR practice the reasons for leaving are also important and for both BAME and Females dismissals are higher (second column)

These are perhaps some of the most important recommendations:

-->

Finding: Generally, feedback from staff themselves suggests that practice is good; however, improvements can and should be made to employee management practice to achieve a more collaborative and inclusive culture. 


Engagement with staff suggests inconsistent application of policies and procedures, including as regards flexible working. There has clearly been great progress in implementing good management practice, but the Council should also seek to ensure that internal communication explain expected practice, underpinned by a clear explication of staff and manager competencies and behaviours.

·      At present, there are few reported incidents of bullying and harassment. The Council has an emphasis on informal resolution: according to the LGA this represents good practice. Consideration should be given to ensuring consistency, support and follow up within the informal resolution framework. 


·      The Council lacks a systematic Council-wide approach to learning from HR and legal processes when complaints are raised; whilst this is not uncommon, we have an opportunity to make improvements. In addition, this may give rise to inconsistent management responses. Thus, though HR takes the lead, individual managers are responsible for learning from ETs and grievances, and reviews take place with HR and within departments. Improvements should be made in terms of cross-organisational learning, peer review and Council-wide improvements. 


·      The Code of Conduct does not at present adequately articulate the behaviours and practice expected of managers and staff. Such behaviours should be clearly articulated, communicated and reflected in: 


·      recruitment and selection processes


·      ongoing team and line management

·      
appraisal processes

·      learning development processes and interventions.

Addressing this presents an opportunity to emphasise the significant priority the Council attaches to valuing diversity.

·      Evaluation of practice and understanding of staff experience should be regular and Council-wide. 


·      Internal communications should be strengthened to become a two-way flow of information. It is critical for senior management to be able to communicate values and good practice to the wider workforce. But it is equally important that communications enables the wider workforce to articulate their experiences to senior management. In two staff focus groups, more than half had not seen a copy of their service or team plan and participants suggested that improvements could be made to internal communications, including the ability for greater staff engagement and management visibility, for example through senior managers attending team meetings. This is increasingly important given the scale and pace of change. Managers themselves need to be supported to communicate effectively, but must also play the key role in staff engagement. Given the current and future constraints on funding, it is important that central advice and strategy is complemented by good practice within departments. 


The Full Report can be found  HERE