Protests and angry exchanges as Wolverhampton Council chief's pay rise plan approved

The Full Council Meeting at Wolverhampton Civic Centre saw members of the opposition parties and independent councillors speak out against the planned increase for Wolverhampton Council chief executive Tim Johnson's pay, with many citing cuts in services and increases in council tax as part of their opposition.

It also saw a protest outside the Civic Centre by the Conservative councillors and members of the TaxPayers Alliance.

TaxPayers Alliance grassroots development manager Benjamin Elks said the aim of the protest was to raise awareness with councillors about how it was not the right time to be raising the wages of the chief executive.

He said: "At a time when the council have hiked council tax and are looking to make savings in the year, this is not really a priority to be hiking the pay of the chief executive.

"It's not good timing as parking charges have doubled from £4.50 to £9, services are being cut back and they're trying to make £7 million-worth of savings and, yet, seem to want to give a bung to the chief executive.

"Ideally, we'd like to force a change and we'd certainly be open to meeting with the chief executive and council if they'd agree to meet up, but they were presented with options and, oddly, the official report recommended they take the higher increase, so you wonder if you'd get an objective view."

The authority had commissioned the review of executive pay by consultancy firm Penna, which presented three possible options, which would see Mr Johnson's pay rise by 10.7 per cent under the least expensive scenario, to a maximum of 17.9 per cent in the costliest case.

The report by chief operating officer David Pattison recommended that councillors should approve the option which represented the biggest increase to the pay scale.

"This is in order to position the authority, so it reflects the market overall as well as recognises the way the post provides leadership both within the city and beyond," it said.

"It is also the option that best reflects the pay range for chief executive posts across the West Midlands Combined Authority members which, may be where the most attractive opportunities outside Wolverhampton become available for senior roles in future months and years."  

The Council Meeting featured some terse comments from both sides about the planned increase, which was the first of three options and would see the chief executive's pay increased over five increments from £178,152 to £200,000.

The Leader of the Council, Councillor Stephen Simkins, said the council was an employer of choice with a people-centric approach where inclusivity was at the cornerstone of what the council did and a fair pay structure was part of that.

He also said that arguments and comparisons about the pay of a chief executive against the Prime Minister was unfair, saying: "We cannot compare apples with pears and their appropriate pay comparisons which are between politicians and politics and officer against officer.

"This is a way which creates instability and we all need to do our very best because, as I've said, we're all in this together."

Councillor Simkins said that of the three options which had been provided by the independent report, he proposed that Option one should be agreed, stating that that would help make an additional £10,000 in savings.

The ensuing debate saw a number of members of the opposition Conservative Party voice their objections to the proposals.

Bushbury North Councillor Andrew McNeil described the plans as "perverse", saying that they made no sense when there was no obligation to do so and when Council staff and residents were suffering the consequences of cuts.

He said: "Why on earth would we do this, for no reason other than ticking a box, and when this has nothing to do with the chief executive himself.

"There's no performance around the pay element, it's simply someone who is in post and, at a difficult time, receiving £40,000 when others are getting a pittance, when pensioners are not getting their winter fuel allowance and we're facing really high council taxes.

"It just doesn't make sense."

Conservative Leader Councillor Simon Bennett also questioned why the increase was coming in, citing the financial challenges being faced by councils up and down the country.

He also said the council should prioritise spending increases on tax, rather than on salary increases and said the planned salary increase was comparable to the annual salary of many frontline workers.

He said: "These are the people who are actually making tangible differences in our community each day, the ones who keep our streets clean, maintain our public spaces and work directly with residents in need.

"Some of them are left wondering whether they still have jobs in the coming months, while this proposal offers a substantial raise to a single individual, so how can we justify such a significant raise when others on the council payroll are facing salary cuts or job losses."

Councillor Bennett also urged the council to reconsider the raise and asked the Labour group to afford them the same freedom to an open vote.

Newly-elected Reform Party Councillor for Bilston North Anita Stanley asked about a management structure, rather than a pyramid structure, within the council, while Conservative councillor for Merry Hill Wendy Dalton spoke about the comparison between the Prime Minister and Mr Johnson, saying that the Prime Minister worked 24 hours a day, seven days a week and had much more attention on him that the chief executive did.

She said she had no problem with someone getting a pay raise, but questioned the high rate being offered, saying: "When I employ people, they sign a contract and that's their salary, so I wouldn't expect them to say that they've had a review and I need to pay them another £40,000.

"They signed a contract and they accepted a wage and I don't see why we are seeing such a high value pay rise when council workers are only getting a 2.4 per cent rise."

Tettenhall Wightwick Independent Councillor Wendy Thompson said she had spoken to residents about the proposed increase and said the response had been about value for money and not the public wishes.

The debate got more heated, with Councillor Steve Evans, who had seconded the proposal, saying that the quotes about £40,000 increases were incorrect and pointing out that the proposed amount was option one, the lowest of the three.

He also pointed to private sector pay and how the council had a duty to review pay and hadn't done so for the chief executive for nearly six years and said that members of the opposition bench had opposed a number of pay and investment plans over the years.

He said: "Please don't lecture us about care positions as it wasn't that long ago that my good colleague spoke in this very chamber about investing in Wolverhampton at Coopers Lane for our children in care and was opposed by Conservative Councillors.

"The reality is that Labour have always stood for fairness and we're funding this through the deletion of a post, not putting extra financial burdens on our resources."

Other Conservative and Independent Councillors also spoke about the plans, with Independent councillor for Penn Councillor Celia Hibbert decrying the removal of the Shopability scheme and Conservative councillor for Penn Councillor Stephanie Haynes speaking about increasing car parking rates and how the only other council with a higher paid chief executive was "bankrupt" Birmingham Council.

Conservative councillors for Tettenhall Regis Uday Singh and Sohail Khan were the final two to speak, with Councillor Singh questioning the comparison between pay increases between private and public sector, while Councillor Khan said that while he wouldn't begrudge anyone a good wage, he said that it felt wrong to be considering this pay increase when people in the city were struggling.

In response, Councillor Simkins said that the position was one with a regulated market rate and all chief executives were on a pay scale which was market driven.

He also asked the opposite party and councillors to come up with a suitable alternative plan and said that the plan was one which was about performance and the whole organisation delivering, not just one person, and asked whether whether they would prefer to have a council without a chief executive.

The vote which followed for Option One saw the motion carried and will be taken forward to the next cabinet meeting of the council.