IN her message to staff about Glasgow City Council’s proposed cuts to staff working conditions, chief executive Annemarie O’Donnell said the plans were based on making sure there would still be a job for anyone who wants to keep working for the council, and that will be some comfort to some people. But it cannot distract from the fact the changes will mean real pain to many people, some of whom work in vital services for low rates of pay.
The theory the council is working to is that it is better to make cuts round the edges rather than make staff redundant or cut services. They also insist those at the top are facing cuts too, with the top tier of management expect to forego a pay rise, although the lack of a rise on a six-figure salary is not the same as no longer being able to earn overtime on a salary of £14,000.
The measures, which include banning flexi-time, are also just one small part of a much bigger picture of cuts. The changes to conditions are expected to save around £4.5million, but the council faces a financial black hole that is getting on for 30 times that size, and it is similar for other councils across the country. Inevitably, this means cuts to core services.
If councils can make relatively pain-free savings through improving efficiency, that can only be positive, but much of that work has already been done. And we must avoid the trap of thinking that because Glasgow’s proposed cuts are about working conditions, that means less pain – the public sector is the biggest employer in Scotland, and many of the workers are women in low-paid positions, so any change will have profound social consequences.
The savings also raise, once again, the issue of council powers and accountability. One of the reasons councils are making cuts is that they are unable to raise tax because of the council tax freeze imposed on them by the Scottish Government. The proposed cuts to staff working conditions in Glasgow is another demonstration of the fact that an end to the freeze is long overdue.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel