Agenda item

Purpose: To propose the adoption of a policy which sets out how the Council will deal with close personal relationships at work which might involve, or be perceived to involve, conflicts of interest.

The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 6) which proposed the adoption of a policy which set out how the Council would deal with close personal relationships at work which might involve, or be perceived to involve, conflicts of interest.

Councillor Quentin Webb queried to whom an employee would disclose a personal relationship and the format for doing so. Jane Milone explained that an officer would need to disclose the information and seek a view from their line manager (or the next tier of management if the relationship was with the line manager). The line manager would seek further advice if necessary.

The policy had been drafted at the request of Corporate Board to ensure clear guidance was in place to help protect employees. Many other local authorities already had a policy in place for reporting relationships both within the organisation and with contractors.

Elements of the draft policy already existed in the Officer Code of Conduct and as part of the Council’s recruitment processes. The policy would bring together the necessary elements into one place, but it was not the intention to significantly change existing arrangements.

In terms of the actual format for disclosing information, it was Robert O’Reilly’s general expectation that, following discussion between the employee and their line manager, it would be put in writing in an e-mail and a note placed on the individual’s HR file.

Councillor Adrian Edwards stated that he was very uncomfortable with the proposals outlined in the report and could not support the recommendation to adopt a policy. He felt the need for a policy was a concern in terms of human rights and was overly bureaucratic when considering that a Code of Conduct was already in place.

Robert O’Reilly agreed this was a sensitive issue, but reiterated that elements of the draft policy were already in existence in other documents and the policy would serve to bring this together in one place as requested by Corporate Board.

Councillor Edwards queried whether this applied to relationships between Councillors and employees of the Council/Council contractors. Robert O’Reilly explained that as Councillors were elected they were not subject to contract rules of procedure. However, Councillors had their own Code of Conduct to adhere to.

Robert O’Reilly acknowledged the concern in relation to human rights, but assured Members that a similar policy was in place in other local authorities and the Council’s draft policy took into account guidance from the Council’s on-line employment law provider (XpertHR). However, if the policy was not approved then current arrangements would continue.

Councillor Andrew Rowles queried whether consideration was needed in relation to an employee’s membership of an external organisation. Jane Milone advised that employees would need to consider how any relationship or membership could be perceived externally in terms of decision making.

Jane Milone advised that trade unions had been consulted and comments were received, but this only led to minor amendments to the draft policy. A suggestion of Unison was to include some guidance as an appendix which could consist of examples of actions to take in certain scenarios by employees and managers. This was something which could be provided.

Councillor Mollie Lock referred to paragraph 1.3 of the covering report and agreed it was important to strike a balance between intrusion into the personal lives of employees and the organisation’s ability to address justified concerns.

Councillor Edwards felt that the integrity of managers and employees should be relied upon, and the need to report a personal relationship should be covered as part of existing policies when necessary.

Robert O’Reilly agreed there was a need for a common sense approach, but restated the view of Corporate Board that there was a need for a formal mechanism to report personal relationships.

Councillor Webb queried whether there was potential to strengthen the Code of Conduct and other processes as opposed to forming a new policy. Jane Milone advised that the Code of Conduct was not owned by HR.

Councillor Peter Argyle advised that he was sympathetic to the views of Councillor Edwards. However, he was not overly concerned at the proposal to adopt the policy which would serve to tidy up current documents/processes. Councillor Lock felt that the existence of a single policy would make referencing easier for employees and managers.

Councillor Rowles expectation was that a degree of common sense would be exerted in terms of recruitment and work with contractors, and these processes could be managed appropriately through the Code of Conduct. He then queried whether there were examples of issues being caused by a close personal relationship. Robert O’Reilly advised that no issues had been formally highlighted, but there was anecdotal evidence of staff members feeling disadvantaged as a result of relationships between colleagues.

Councillor Tony Linden gave his support to the recommendation to adopt a policy.

Councillor Edwards did not support the recommendation. He felt it would be an unnecessary intrusion, it raised concerns of human rights and it was already managed by existing policies.

Councillor Rowles felt there was scope to review the policy if there was agreement to adopt it or reconsider the decision in a year’s time if it was not adopted.

Councillor Edwards proposed to reject the Officer recommendation to adopt the policy. This was seconded by Councillor Rowles with a request that the decision be reviewed and reconsidered in a year’s time. Councillor Edwards accepted this addition to his proposal.

The proposal was lost on the Chairman’s casting vote.

Members then considered approval of the Officer recommendation to adopt the policy and this was approved on the Chairman’s casting vote. Councillor Edwards requested that his vote against the Officer recommendation be recorded.

RESOLVED that the Personal Relationships at Work Policy be approved.