Clancy guilty of writing cheques he can’t cash!

Ian Cruise
Aug 25, 2017 · 4 min read

When the dispute between Birmingham City Council and refuse staff represented by Unite the Union was suspended (not called off) last Friday, there was a great fanfare about the intervention of the Leader of the Council Cllr John Clancy, who had rode into town — after being mostly absent for most of the 7 week dispute — on his steed and in his shining armour, to personally resolve the dispute. Like many colleagues and residents I was initially pleased the dispute had been suspended for the Council executive and Unite to sit down and thrash out their differences, and for the backlog of rubbish to be cleared from the streets.

We were told in the ACAS statement that sufficient progress had been made in talks to suspend the dispute, with Unite stating they would recommend the five day working week for their members. Cllr Clancy on behalf of the Council committed to retaining the Grade 3 posts originally proposed for removal. All of this would then be incorporated into a report going to the special cabinet meeting on 24th August. It was only when later the same day a “Council Spokesperson” commented the remodelling of the waste service agreed at Cabinet on the 27th June was still the position of the Council, that alarm bells started to ring. They rang even more loudly when Unite openly praised Cllr Clancy for his intervention.

Now as someone who has in the past been involved in industrial disputes, I know a few things about how they are resolved. Firstly the employer will have done their homework on a “resolution position” and if it was affordable before going into arbitrary negotiations. Secondly, their lawyers would be ensuring that any potential agreement is lawful, especially when the employer has been beset by equal pay claims. Thirdly, a trade union will be bloody stubborn and hold out for an acceptable deal for their members, so when they openly praise “the boss”, you know they’ve got a result.

Fast forward 5 days and the publication of the public and private reports for the special cabinet meeting. I firmly expected the agreed proposals between the Leader of the Council and Unite to be incorporated into the cabinet report. To my surprise and that of colleagues across the Council the cabinet report stated the Executive; “endorse progression and implementation of the decisions taken on 27th June 2017 for the reorganisation of the waste management service and the next stages including issuing the redundancy notices to the 106 employees (in 113 posts) currently designated as leading hands”.

The report goes on to say; “build on the discussions between the leader, Unite and ACAS”. Now I may be wrong here but again having been involved in disputes in my days as a Union Official, I know if you are in negotiations to resolve a dispute, the last thing you do as an employer is press ahead with a decision until negotiations are concluded and a resolution reached.

The reasons given for the continuing the implementation of the remodelling of the waste service are listed further into the report, and states the financial consequences the Council will have to meet if they proceed. Firstly, there is the cost of the dispute which has so far totalled £1.07m, predominately from the agencies brought in to clear the backlog. Secondly and for me the most alarming reason is the heightened risk in relation to further equal pay claims. The report states; “in light of the advice given as to the low probability of the Council being able to mount an effective defence to such claims, meeting such liabilities would more than wipe out available headroom in the equal pay contingency, any uncommitted sums for capital investment and all revenue reserves”.

In laymen’s terms, Cllr Clancy’s pledge to retain Grade 3 staff was undeliverable, unaffordable and negligent. Cllr Clancy’s negligence was compounded by the fact that if the deal with Unite was agreed and implemented, the Council would be in danger of setting a budget that is unlawful! All of this raises a questions that Cllr Clancy has yet to, but MUST answer;

  1. Before the meeting at ACAS with Unite, did the Cllr Clancy take advice from the Chief Executive, the Section 151 Officer (financial) or the Director responsible for Waste Management about the affordability and legality of his deal with Unite?
  2. If advice was given and the dangers of agreeing such a deal highlighted, did Cllr Clancy ignore the advice or forget between being given it and meeting Unite at ACAS?
  3. If Cllr Clancy didn’t seek legal and financial advice from relevant Officers of the Council, what authority did he have to make such a deal?
  4. Did Cllr Clancy panic, think solely about the political impact on the Labour Group at the all out elections in May 2018 and cave in to Unite?

Cllr Clancy has this week showed he is clueless on how a local authority budget works, his negligence by willing to risk setting an unlawful budget and his unwillingness to take advice (or remember it) from Officers. By writing a cheque he can’t cash, Cllr Clancy has shown he is unfit to lead Birmingham City Council and should do the decent thing by the people of Birmingham. Resign!

)
Ian Cruise

Written by

Ex-Councillor and Mental Health Champion for Birmingham City Council. Local Government, policy and engagement geek. Recently set up ICC Consultancy.

Welcome to a place where words matter. On Medium, smart voices and original ideas take center stage - with no ads in sight. Watch
Follow all the topics you care about, and we’ll deliver the best stories for you to your homepage and inbox. Explore
Get unlimited access to the best stories on Medium — and support writers while you’re at it. Just $5/month. Upgrade