Protests ahead of tonight's vote on Wolverhampton Council chief's bumper pay rise

Tonight's meeting of the council will be asked to approve a recommendation that Wolverhampton Council chief executive Tim Johnson's pay should increase from its current band of £167,143-£185,000 to £190,000-£210,000.

Campaign group the Taxpayers' Alliance and opposition councillors said they would be staging a demonstration outside the civic centre ahead of the meeting.

Councillor Simon Bennett, leader of the opposition Conservative group, has spoken out against the proposed rise.

He has written to leader of the ruling Labour group, Councillor Stephen Simkins, asking for his group to give councillors  a free vote on the matter.

In a letter to the council leader, Councillor Bennett wrote: "Due to the sensitive nature of this topic, the Conservative group will be given a free vote on the item, as I do not wish to make the item political.

"A rise in salary of over £30,000 at a time where the council is having to make savings and redundancies elsewhere is something which I believe needs to be left to each individual councillor to make up their own mind on whether it’s the right thing for our city at this time. 

"As a result, I am writing to you to request that you do the same for the Labour group councillors. Let’s take this beyond political rhetoric and let each individual councillor come to a decision without pressure or influence."

The vote comes just hours after Wolverhampton Council announced plans for a 4.99 per cent rise in the council tax, and a cuts package totalling £32.5 million over two years, which will potentially see the 'rationalisation' of leisure centres, the closure of public toilets, and the end of the city's Shopmobility service for the disabled. 

Some parking fees have also doubled from  £4.60 to £9. 

Read more:  Wolverhampton the latest council to introduce swingeing cuts as financial storm clouds gather

Read more:  Pools at risk as Wolverhampton Council announces £32.5 million worth of cuts 

The authority commissioned a 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."  

But Councillor Bennett said it was wrong to be awarding such a large pay rise at a time when the council was making major cuts.

"At a time when the council has got to save £3 million, and is already making extensive cutbacks, to all areas, including taking away tea and coffee machines, it's completely wrong that the chief executive, who is already on a very good salary, to be getting a pay rise of another £30,000 a year.

"Council services are stripped back to the bone, and a pay rise on this level to a senior officer of the council is entirely inappropriate, independent review or not."

Mr Pattison's report also said that it was increasingly important to have a chief executive with expertise in social care and economic growth as the council faced challenges in these areas.

"Even if the current chief executive were to leave, it is critical that the effort and focus on economic growth and social care and health is continued in order to achieve your vision," he wrote.

"Experience across all these areas is not yet common amongst senior officers, and our research shows that salaries for senior experts in economic growth and social care are rising rapidly, especially with competition from new bodies such as integrated care boards and combined authorities.

"This option is intended to give enough flexibility in the pay band so that there is no need to review the pay range in the short to medium term."