Their unions recently secured an agreement from Policy & Resources to speed up an investigation into pay parity – equal pay for work of equal value – which they have previously claimed would reveal ‘a shocking disparity’ and an independent report advised could cost millions or even tens of millions of pounds a year to put right.
But it has now emerged that the senior committee believes the accelerated investigation will effectively call the unions’ bluff and show that nurses and other health workers on ‘Agenda for Change’ contracts are better paid than they have claimed compared to other roles.
Some other deputies have criticised P&R’s stance on pay parity and the senior committee defended itself over the weekend in email exchanges seen by the Guernsey Press.
‘The approach for this work is placing much of the burden on unions to prove that pay disparity exists,’ said P&R vice-president Gavin St Pier.
‘The outcome of this work is not a foregone conclusion. Indeed, the committee’s starting position is that pay disparity does not exist to the extent being alleged.
‘However, the committee is mindful that until the issue is properly reviewed and determined, it will continue to be weaponised in pay talks, could become the basis of future industrial disputes, and risks potential industrial action. It is for this reason that the committee directed the work on this review be expedited.’
Three years ago, a previous P&R agreed to review pay parity with unions representing health workers as part of a three-year pay deal, but the work was then deferred indefinitely.
A majority of current P&R members signed a Royal College of Nursing pledge in 2020 to eliminate ‘pay inequity’ experienced by nurses, and earlier this year they directed officials to give the project fresh impetus and present their findings and recommendations to the senior committee in June.
That has angered some States members who want to see more emphasis on spending reductions, potentially going beyond an annual 1% real terms cut agreed last autumn, as part of a package of measures P&R will shortly propose to deal with a black hole in public finances projected to reach £100m. a year.
In the email exchanges seen by the Guernsey Press, Scrutiny president Andy Sloan, former treasury lead Mark Helyar, and Deputy Haley Camp, who will bid to join P&R in an election at tomorrow’s States meeting, were among those who expressed concerns about the timing and potential impact of the pay parity investigation.
Deputy Helyar said the States should not ‘give an inch to the unions’ on pay parity and Deputy Sloan called on P&R to publish more information because ‘the public is still entitled to understand the possible scale of exposure before major tax decisions are made’.
Deputy St Pier told colleagues that the committee was not considering pay parity across the entire public sector – which independent consultants said some years ago could cost up to £50m. a year – but was looking at the narrower issue of claims by nurses and ancillary professions that they have fallen behind other pay groups.
‘The outcome of the review may or may not show that there is a pay disparity,’ he said.
‘Even if one does exist, this does not automatically mean fundamental public sector pay reform is necessary. The States as employer will have the benefit of time to fully consider its position and weigh up any potential risks from both a cost and industrial relations perspective.
‘P&R, as employer, is obviously keen if it can to reach agreement with all employee groups, but in this instance the committee has not yet during this term discussed, agreed or authorised any offers or settlements in respect of this narrower issue.’
Deputy Helyar later said he was reassured by Deputy St Pier’s reply, but Deputy Sloan said his financial and political concerns had not been fully addressed.