POSITIONAL STATEMENT

REGIONAL FIRE CONTROL CENTRES

1. INTRODUCTION

This positional statement fully recognises that the projecttoregionalise fire controls will directly affect our members. However, we have to acknowledge the fact that Central Government is presently fully committed to the realisationof the FiReControl project. Therefore,we as an Association, see no other rational alternative than to work towards the protection of the pay and conditions of service of our members.

Various working parties and collaborations exist to deal with the matter of fire control reorganisation. However, none of these groups has issued full notice, or indicated how these changes will be undertaken. Whilst it is essential for such groups to exist, it is also essential that the outcome of their deliberations,are indicated to the people who will be effected.

To date it appears that many RMB’s have no plan, or if they do have a plan, It is not being relayed to the fire control workforce.

The apparent exceptions to this rule are:

East of England Regional Management Board

East Midlands Regional Management Board

West Midlands Regional Management Board

The lack of local communication regarding the transition to regional control rooms has led to a situation where many of our control staff members consider that their employers do not have their best interests at heart.

This has led to thedisillusionment with the regionalisation process,which has become widespread. However, this Association will continue to make every effort to ensure that any proposed change to the present structure of fire controlsis not detrimental to theconditions of service/pay/pensions of our members.

Many of our Fire Control members have questions to ask about their future employment prospects.However, their questions will only be fully answeredwhenall the Regional ManagementBoards enter into a process of open an honest consultation.

The subject of FiReControl and FireLink is a complex area, and to attempt to cover all the facets of this project in one document would make the text too lengthy to assimilate. However, as a ‘broad-brush’ indicator, please find listed below some of the strings that have evolved to deal with this subject:

  • HR Working Group: a strategic level group comprising an HR representative from each region, CFOA, national employers’ org, LG Employers, and national team, and chaired by the LG Employers. This group looks at the guidance that needs to be provided to the regions and FRAs, and reaches a consensus on the best practice on which the employers can make their decisions.
  • HR Implementation Group: this is a new, tactical level group which will probably involve a core of HR practitioners from each region, plus other people as necessary, to support each other in identifying and doing the work necessary to carry through the transfer. The membership of this group will probably fluctuate, with ‘wave one’ regions having a greater initial stake in it than those who are later in the roll-out order.
  • CFOA Senior Operations Group, which comprisesof Regional Project Directors. This group review all aspects of the project from an operational viewpoint.
  • Finance Working Group, which comprises of finance representatives from all regions and the LG Employers. This group reviews the project from a financial perspective.
  • Legal Working Group, which comprises of legal representatives from all regions and the LG employers. This group reviews the project from a legal perspective.
  • Control Project Sounding Board: comprising other stakeholder groups including representative bodies. This group reviews theproject from their perspectives.

However, for the purpose of this Positional Statement we will focus in on the important elements, and questions, that will affect our members:

  • What will happen to me?
  • Will my conditions worsen?
  • Is my current FRS responsible for my continued employment?

To try and answer these questions in part we have drawn upon three documents:

  • Fire and Rescue Service Circular 63/07
  • The Transfer of an Undertaking Regulations 2006 (TUPE)
  • The Questions and Answers from the CLG FiReControl Employers Seminars.

Please note: Any document referred to in this Positional Statement is available in full in the Documents section of our Regional Fire Control Website Page .

2.FOA Expectations

The Association’sexpectations are:

  • The Association is kept informed of the nature and style of any transfers into the RCC’s from existing Fire Controls.
  • That where the Fire Officers’ Association has members working in the RCC’s their freedom of association is recognised, and consideration is given to allowing them recognition for collective bargaining purposes.
  • We expect that during the build up and transition to RCC’s all Fire Control Staff are kept informed and fully engaged by their employer.
  • We require that any staff who are unable to transfer into the new RCC, for whatever reason, are given immediate feedback regarding the terms of any package of relocation or remuneration available to them.
  • We require that any staff who are considered to be an overprovision by RCC company, for whatever reason, will be able to return to their present employer, and into a post created to receive them, or, are given immediate feedback regarding the terms of any package of remuneration available to them.
  • We expect that all our members who employed by the RCC company are employed on their present pay, conditions of service and current pension scheme.

Furthermore, branches should adopt as a base line, the following guidance with regard to TUPE Transfers:

  • Union recognition – The FOAbranches will be seeking to get a commitment that the new employer will recognisethe Associationallow it to negotiate for its members.
  • Staff Protection Agreements – these will seek an undertaking that the new employer will not worsen the pay, terms and conditions of transferred employees. Ideally, such guarantees will last for the full life of the contract. It is important that such agreements apply equally to any subsequent transfers.
  • Pensions-plus - Branches will want to secure deals that provide safeguards regarding future pension entitlements for transferred employees. In local government the best deal will involve the new employer gaining Admitted Body Status to the Local Government Pension Scheme.

Elsewhere in the public sector, the Cabinet Office statement of practice on staff transfers makes clear that staff transferring should receive at least a broadly comparable pension arrangement. Ideally, there will be identical arrangements for new starters.

  • No two-tier workforce – The Association should seek to prevent a situation where new starters are employed on worse terms and conditions than the transferred employees. This will ensure better rights all round, and avoid the situation where two people doing the same job are paid different rates of pay. If this can be achieved, the employer will have less reason to seek to attack the terms and conditions of transferred employees.

3.BACKGROUND MATERIAL AND FURTHER INFORMATION

3.1Extract - Fire and Rescue Service Circular 63/05

Note: In this section the term ‘We’ indicates a statement made by the ODPM. Now the CLG

Item 7.0Over Staffing

7.1 “The plan for providing additional staff during the migration period has yet to be determined”.“We will provide additional funding for overstaffing during the migration period. This will cover, amongst other things, paying and training any newly recruited staff, for sufficient time, to ensure that they are competent prior to their use in controls to provide cover. Overtime payments required to provide cover while staff transferring to the RCC are trained, etc will also be paid for. “

7.2 “If FRAs voluntarily overstaff prior to the migration period they will need to fund the additional costs from their own budgets”.“Through the migration period, we expect to pay for those staff that FRAs believe to be the minimum required to maintain the service during the migration period. The numbers required will be determined in discussion with each FRA before the migration period starts.”

Item 8.0Recruitment and Selection

8.1 “We will fund any direct costs arising from recruitment and selection of staff for the control centres prior to the end of the migration period”.“The RCC Director and senior management team will be recruited early enough in all regions to be able to select, in accordance with HR best practice, which FRA staff are to be transferred to the control centres, if there are more staff able to transfer than available comparable posts. FRAs will be responsible for determining which staff will be redeployed within the FRA/County Council and which are to be offered severance.”

Item 9.0Early Severance Costs

9.1 FRAs should not budget for early severance costs in the period in question.

9.2 We are prepared to support payments which are more generous than the statutory minimum”. “Circumstances will vary from authority to authority and the outcome depends on local negotiations and local circumstances. We would wish to see proposals before we could say what we will refund under new burdens principles. Compensation will be subject to the following provisos:

  • That we can be assured that redundancy represents the best value option in each case and that best efforts have been made to find alternative employment for the affected staff. We would not, for example, expect to pay redundancy where it was reasonable and best value for a member of staff to transfer. More detailed guidance will be issued closer to the time of the transfer.
  • That we will only reimburse the net additional cost to FRAs in respect of each member of staff. The "net additional cost" means the net overall costs of introducing regional control centres over and above those that the FRA would otherwise have incurred.
  • That any additional or optional payment to any member of staff made by an authority, over and above the proposals endorsed by ODPM, will be at the FRA’s own cost.

9.3Changes to the Employment Rights Act (1996) will be required to comply with age discrimination”. Changes will also be needed to the Local Government (Early Termination of Employment) (Discretionary Compensation) (England and Wales) Regulations (2000) for the same reason and the legislation is under review. We will wish to consider any possible implications of the undertaking in this circular when changes are promulgated.

9.4The Employers’ Organisation (EO) circular does not refer to the award of an accredited period (“added years”), the discretionary provision applying to employees aged 50 or over. ODPM will not be compensating authorities for any such payments.

9.5The EO guidance also refers to disturbance and travelling allowances”. Where there is local discretion on mileage allowances, subsistence allowances, rental allowances and legal fees, we are prepared to reimburse costs only on the basis of the lowest rate in each case and where it meets best value.”

The supporting documents to the above text can be located respectively at:

4.THE TRANSFER OF UNDERTAKINGS (EMPLOYMENT PROTECTION) REGULATIONS 2006

‘TUPE OR NOT TUPE?’

As an Association we have received two conflicting views on how the matter of staff transfer will be dealt with.

At recent meetings with the West Midlands RCC Project Board, it has been put forward that all staff will be moved into the new RCC, and then it will be up to the new company to shed any surplus staff.

This opinion was further reinforced by the indicationby the statement from the National Teamthat Employment Rights on TheTransfer of an Undertaking Regulations 2006 (TUPE)doesapply. Furthermore, the Cabinet Office guidelines on transfers in the public sector state that even where TUPE could be considered not to apply to a transfer, public authorities should act as though it does anyway.

The above statement was taken as read by many of the Regional Management Boards. However, this understanding was thrown in confusion whenthe CLG held joint members seminars withthe East Midlands Region and the South West Regionin May 2006, and the North East Region inJune 2006.The answers to the following questions by Elected Members put doubt where there had previously been clarity:

At the May seminar, the East Midlands Elected Members asked if TUPE applied and who would make any redundancies?

The CLG replied;“TUPE does apply. The guidance from the national project is likely to be that FRAs rather than the company should make redundancies as this is expected to be better for staff. Final decisions on this issue are a matter for FRAs.”

The South West Elected Members asked as to who will make staff redundant if that is unavoidable?

The CLG replied;“every effort should be made to avoid redundancy among control room staff. If staff have to be made redundant, DCLG's strong preference would be for this to be done by their existing employers – the FRAs. They will know the staff, and should be better placed to offer them advice on career options and may be able to find them another job if they did not move to the RCC. But the decision is ultimately for the FRAs and the RCCs to reach.

The South West asked as to who will meet the costs of redundancy, re-training, redeployment and relocation that might arise as a result of the introduction of FireControl?

The CLG replied; guidance on this issue can be found on the DCLG web site under FRS Circular 63/2005 Fire Projects Implementation Funding for 06-07 and 07-08.

Important Note:
The FOA does not wish see any redundancies amongst Fire Control staff, and our main aim is to ensure that FRA’s and their principal officers make every effort to relocate their staff without detriment to their pay and conditions.
However, because ‘redundancy’ has been mentioned by the Employers, and the CLG, and because of the confusion that exits regarding the style of the TUPE transfer that will be undertaken. It is imperative that FOA representatives establish who will be responsible for any staff reductions, and the nature and style of those reductions.

FOA Positional StatementPage | 1February 2008