Every replacement or regrading of a senior official and the creation of new senior roles would require the approval of politicians under proposals being drawn up by Policy & Resources.
The bold move would give committee presidents and their members much greater control over their budgets, but also make them more accountable for expenditure, and could transform the relationship with their officials.
It will be put to the States as an amendment at its budget debate next week by P&R president Lindsay de Sausmarez and vice-president Yvonne Burford.
‘If agreed, this will make committees of the States more accountable for the headcount in their service areas,’ said Deputy de Sausmarez.
‘While the rates of pay are negotiated with unions by P&R, acting as employer, it should be a matter for each committee as to how many people are employed in their service areas, and what roles are required.’
The new powers for committees would apply to every role at senior officer one pay grade or above, the salaries of which start at about £70,000.
There are currently well over 400 staff in the public sector at senior officer one pay grade or above.
‘It is entirely appropriate that the creation of any new roles at SO1 grade or equivalent and higher is approved by the responsible committee, and that similarly the committee signs off on any regrading to that level and recruitment to vacancies at that level, having considered the necessity of retaining such a role,’ said Deputy de Sausmarez.
P&R’s move seems likely to be welcomed by deputies who have grown increasingly frustrated about committees’ impotence over their senior staffing arrangements and pay costs, which form a large part of the budgets for which they are responsible.
The senior committee was understood to be discussing its options for reform in this area when former treasury lead Mark Helyar told the Guernsey Press Politics Podcast recently that he would take a requete to the States if P&R showed no interest in clipping the wings of the civil service, and it has since also been consulting with committee presidents.
The previous States agreed to his proposal to delete staff posts left vacant for at least six months, but it was not carried into effect, and Deputy de Sausmarez believed that the reforms now recommended by P&R would be more wide-ranging and flexible.
‘It is not always the case that just because a vacancy is not filled within six months that it is not needed,’ she said.
‘Neither is it necessarily the case that deleting a role will save the States money. It is sometimes difficult to recruit to certain positions and in the meantime that position can be covered by overtime or commissioning outside resources, both of which can be more expensive than an employee.
‘This amendment provides for pragmatism in such circumstances while instilling a culture that defaults to headcount restraint.’
Should the States agree the proposal next week, P&R would also be directed to create a standardised format for all committees to report publicly on how they use their new controls over senior staff roles.
It was anticipated that they would need to disclose information such as their total number of roles, the number graded at SO1 or higher, vacancy data, and any roles created or deleted within the reporting cycle and anticipated in the next reporting cycle.
Deputy de Sausmarez said P&R would work with other committees on the ‘practical applicability’ of the arrangements before finalising them.
The States’ budget debate starts on Tuesday.