News

Evidence emerged last week that social workers are facing salary cuts as local authorities struggle to meet the cost of implementing the single status agreement (SSA).

Hull and Dorset councils are in dispute with public sector union Unison following job evaluations that have seen some social workers left £4,000 worse off because of the method of assessment that has been used (news, page 16, 15 July).

It is unlikely they are the only local authorities to be encountering problems. The SSA was signed by Unison, the Transport and General Workers Union and GMB together with the National Joint Council for Local Authorities in 1997 to ensure a fairer deal for thousands of low-paid workers.


They agreed the introduction of a single pay spine, a standard working week of 37 hours or less, equal status for part-time workers, and grading reviews based on equal pay. But implementation has been frustratingly slow and, seven years on, only 30 per cent of councils have reviewed their pay and grading, between 25 and 30 per cent are in the process, and at least 40 per cent have yet to start work on it.

Undoubtedly, the financial cost is the "single biggest barrier" to implementing the single status agreement, says Unison national officer Fiona Westwood. The union has been pushing for additional financial help for councils from central government without success.

Deputy prime minister John Prescott (above) has yet to make any commitment and, with an April 2007 deadline councils will be forced to start work on the SSA using money raised from council tax or service cuts.

Extra pressure has also emerged in the shape of several no-win, no-fee solicitors who are helping low paid staff to take their employers to industrial tribunal for back pay. Last year a case was successfully fought - Preston v Wolverhampton Healthcare Trust - involving discrimination against part-time employees, which now means workers can claim six years' back pay instead of two.

To head off the threat of huge payouts, Redcar and Cleveland Council has been offering ex-gratia "hurt feelings" payments of up to £6,000 to 2,600 staff, totalling £3.2m. But it still has 140 people who are seeking legal action. It has has met the £1.8m cost of single status by increasing council tax by 4 per cent. The council claims it would have only needed to raise it 1.5 per cent but for this.


Others may have to follow suit if they want to avoid a deluge of employment tribunals. A spokesperson for the Employers' Organisation local government services team says: "No-win, no-fee solicitors are costing councils millions in back pay. We are saying you might as well bite the bullet rather than wait for one of those to come knocking at the door."

Westwood argues that the Preston case has set a legal precedent which encourages councils to think about the implications of the ruling when they are claiming they do not have the resources to implement the SSA.

But without additional funding we may see increasingly desperate councils resorting to similar methods employed in Hull, where the National Joint Council job evaluation process, which measures the complexity and emotional demand of a job, was not used.

Although councils are advised by the Employers' Organisation to use the National Joint Council process for evaluating jobs, the organisation also says any alternative system will do if it has the same basic principles.

Westwood says: "I would not expect any social worker to be downgraded if their job was evaluated using the NJC code. If they have been, then something has gone wrong."

With the EO powerless to dictate local arrangements, wrangles between unions and employers seem likely to continue as pressure increases on councils to find the cash to implement the SSA.