Pay review: two involved still employed by States

Monday 04 February 2019

Two staff members involved in carrying out what has been dubbed a “disastrous”, costly and erroneous review of health workers' pay remain in the States' employment despite earlier indications to the contrary, it has emerged.

The pair were involved in implementing a review where 126 health workers’ salaries were wrongly increased by £750,000.

Their continued employment came to light during last week’s States Assembly sitting when Deputy Mike Higgins asked the Vice-Chair of the States Employment Board (SEB), Constable Richard Buchanan, about ‘golden handshakes’ given to civil servants responsible for the failed pay-review.

When the “disastrous” pay-review was first revealed with the publication of an independent report condemning the decision-making that resulted in the regrading of the roles, the States said that “those with primary responsibility for these failings are no longer with the organisation".

The decision to cancel the salary uplifts granted in November 2017 which increased some health workers’ pay packets increase by as much as £11,500 has resulted in 90 of the aggrieved staff members mounting a formal collective complaint with the States which is now underway.

Pictured: 126 health workers will see their 2017 salary increases as a result of the failed pay-review annulled at the beginning of April this year.

No mention was made at this stage of other “responsible” parties who remained employed with the States.

At the time, Deputy Rob Ward expressed concern about the qualifying language of the phrase that those “with primary responsibility” had left, telling Express: “It says that those ‘primarily’ responsible for this issue are no longer with the States – we need to be certain that that’s the case and the word ‘primarily’ concerns me because there are also others that would have been part of this process perhaps that need to really be accountable.” 

However, when Deputy Higgins asked the Constable to “explain the rationale for the payment under compromise agreements to the civil servants who were responsible for the scheme”, it emerged that two members of staff involved with the review are still employed by the States.

The SEB’s Vice-Chairman responded by explaining that one of the civil servants responsible for the scheme had been made redundant, one had left under a compromise agreement and two remain employed with the States of Jersey.

Pictured: The Vice-Chairman of the SEB told the States that two of those involved in the pay-review are still employed by the government.

Constable Buchanan said: “one individual was made redundant… as his job- as the job does not exist anymore. One individual left under a compromise agreement, two have left for personal reasons and two remain employed.

“…The whole thing is most unfortunate and the report makes very poor reading and does nobody any credit,” he added.

It is understood by Express, due to some initials left un-redacted in the publicly available document, that one of the staff members Constable Buchanan is referring to who left “for personal reasons” was former Chief Officer for Health and Community Services Julie Garbutt.

Mrs Garbutt left her role to look after her elderly parents in early June of this year - at around the same time the investigation into the pay review was commissioned by Interim HR support to the department Darren Skinner. 

Pictured: Former Chief Officer for Health and Community Services Julie Garbutt left her post to look after her elderly parents around the time the independent report was commissioned.

When challenged over the two civil servants whom the Constable identified as being “responsible for the scheme” who were in fact still employed by the States, a spokesperson said: “The key and important differentiator is that those people who drove the decision, which was subsequently found by the independent report to be a flawed managerial judgement, no longer work for the States.

“We have considered whether anyone who implemented the decision carried a responsibility for it that should give us cause for concern, and are satisfied that no current States employee bears responsibility for the original grading and pay errors.”

The States are still refusing to disclose which consultants carried out the independent report on the pay review.