Paid less by Local Council than agreed via email

Jillanddy

TELLIT01 said:

How would the council have reacted if people had walked out on the day because the rate of pay had been changed?  No Presiding Officer would have meant no polling station.  I think they are being very short sighted in their behaviour.

I agree. But they didn't,  and had they they might have ( probably would have) faced disciplinary procedures - and putting an election at risk could be gross misconduct. These are existing staff who have jobs to protect, and there's plenty more canon fodder where they came from for next year. Bear in mind this is council staff who have faced massive increases in workload alongside substantial job losses over the last decade and more,  whose pay has been massively eroded ...etc., etc..... and collectively the majority won't fight for their livelihoods, their wages,  their jobs or their living standards. So I'm not seeing a  mass revolt over a few quid. Or many councils thinking that they need to care about it. Councils are being shortsighted because they've learned they can be.  Perhaps that's not the OPs employer - but the question still remains as to whether the OP is willing to find out. 

silvercar

This may be true in OPs position working for the council, but there will be plenty of people who take this role who don’t work for the council. They would have no job to protect if they feel short changed. Maybe try and find out if you know of anyone in the same boat who doesn’t work for the council.

Jillanddy

silvercar said:

This may be true in OPs position working for the council, but there will be plenty of people who take this role who don’t work for the council. They would have no job to protect if they feel short changed. Maybe try and find out if you know of anyone in the same boat who doesn’t work for the council.

I can't speak for all councils,  but in my experience that is actually very rare. Councils prefer to use their existing staff,  and the terms - setting aside this specific issue - are very attractive,  with (usually) both decent pay and additional days off as inducements. Because payroll now had to be set up for every "outsider" who takes on such a role,  the effort and time to do that simply isn't worth it to employ and train people for a days work.  So it is likely there are actually very few if any non- council people doing this work

Jude57

silvercar said:

This may be true in OPs position working for the council, but there will be plenty of people who take this role who don’t work for the council. They would have no job to protect if they feel short changed. Maybe try and find out if you know of anyone in the same boat who doesn’t work for the council.

For anyone interested, I know a bit about working in elections.

My experience and that of my ex who, between us worked in local government for over 60 years, was that, at no point were non-council staff ever employed as Presiding Officers but were sometimes employed as Poll Clerks or as tellers on the Count. The Poll Clerks were often the spouse of the Presiding Officers but not always. Count staff were, similarly, usually council staff. On one occasion 'outside' staff were recruited for the Count and fully half of them didn't turn up. There was a massive scramble to find people to rush to the Count venue to count the ballot. I ended up working from 6a.m. until 5.45a.m. without a break being Poll Clerk then working as a teller on the Count. There was never any shortage of in-house volunteers and the same Presiding Officers/Poll Clerks tended to be appointed each time which made sense as they had the experience to ensure everything ran smoothly. You didn't get the same Polling Station each time though, and I never worked in the same one twice.

For most election staff, it's a day out of the office doing something different and, for once, not being abused by the public. It is, though, a very long day with no breaks as the Polling Station must remain open during Polling hours. We used to make a massive picnic and tended to graze through the day, between busy periods. The Presiding Officer must be on the premises at all times but Poll Clerks are technically allowed to leave and return though it's rare in reality.

The reasons for using internal staff are many but as noted above, ease of payroll is one. Basic knowledge of electoral process, ease of delivering training and staff already understanding the importance of confidentiality and the consequences of failing to maintain their impartiality are others. Then there's the background security checks. For most in-house electoral staff it's a quick one hour training session before each election but it would take far longer to recruit and train external staff and the costs would far outweigh the benefits. Frankly, the pay rate is derisory for the responsibility involved and I doubt there'd be a queue of external applicants.

We had everything from terrorist threats (genuinely, we were in a key target area) to Personation (often) to the very common (several times at each election) person asking who they should vote for and elderly, confused, drunk, or blind people asking for help. Of course there's also the couples who try to go in the voting booth together and are affronted when told that's not allowed.

If your local Council is recruiting electoral staff, I'd say give it a go. You'll gain valuable experience and an insight into the general public that might change your opinion of public and civil servants.

Savvy_Sue

Just sending DH (non Council employee) to check he was paid the right amount.

He says the Presiding Officer worked for the NHS, and none of the other 3 clerks were council employees, but the person who came round checking up on them was council employed.

Grumpy_chap

Jackboy said:

I received payment for day yesterday and it is at the lower rate (£46 less for me, £30 less for each of the Poll Clerks). 

Was the £46 / £30 on top of a normal wage for the day? If not, surely, NMW applies.

Jillanddy

Grumpy_chap said:

Jackboy said:

I received payment for day yesterday and it is at the lower rate (£46 less for me, £30 less for each of the Poll Clerks). 

Was the £46 / £30 on top of a normal wage for the day? If not, surely, NMW applies.

The amounts quoted are shortfall - the payment is substantially more, and on top of normal council wages.  In our authority you get normal wages, plus the payment, plus 1.5 days time off in lieu. None of which would induce me to volunteer. Certainly not in order to pay most of it to the tax nan.

mcpitman

Jillanddy said:

Grumpy_chap said:

Jackboy said:

I received payment for day yesterday and it is at the lower rate (£46 less for me, £30 less for each of the Poll Clerks). 

Was the £46 / £30 on top of a normal wage for the day? If not, surely, NMW applies.

The amounts quoted are shortfall - the payment is substantially more, and on top of normal council wages.  In our authority you get normal wages, plus the payment, plus 1.5 days time off in lieu. None of which would induce me to volunteer. Certainly not in order to pay most of it to the tax nan.

Civil service nepotism at it's finest.

Jillanddy

mcpitman said:

Jillanddy said:

Grumpy_chap said:

Jackboy said:

I received payment for day yesterday and it is at the lower rate (£46 less for me, £30 less for each of the Poll Clerks). 

Was the £46 / £30 on top of a normal wage for the day? If not, surely, NMW applies.

The amounts quoted are shortfall - the payment is substantially more, and on top of normal council wages.  In our authority you get normal wages, plus the payment, plus 1.5 days time off in lieu. None of which would induce me to volunteer. Certainly not in order to pay most of it to the tax nan.

Civil service nepotism at it's finest.

Well we aren't civil service.

And if we didn't offer such terms,  nobody would do the work.  Personally I don't give a monkeys whether elections are held or not,  but democracies tend to get antsy about keeping up appearances. So if you can find some other mugs willing to do the work,  I'm all for it.  Fully half of the council staff who "agree" to do it are pressured into it as there are never enough volunteers. And the funds we get to run elections from government, and the pressure to do so within the budget, law and regulations, are frankly not enough to do so the job.  If the law permitted councils to hand the job back to government,  I would bet you'll find many that would do exactly that. 

Try putting the blame where lies. Councils and council staff don't make the rules,  and blame tactics don't get anyone anywhere. But not doing so is MSE at its finest.

Jude57

mcpitman said:

Jillanddy said:

Grumpy_chap said:

Jackboy said:

I received payment for day yesterday and it is at the lower rate (£46 less for me, £30 less for each of the Poll Clerks). 

Was the £46 / £30 on top of a normal wage for the day? If not, surely, NMW applies.

The amounts quoted are shortfall - the payment is substantially more, and on top of normal council wages.  In our authority you get normal wages, plus the payment, plus 1.5 days time off in lieu. None of which would induce me to volunteer. Certainly not in order to pay most of it to the tax nan.

Civil service nepotism at it's finest.

Local government is not part of the Civil Service. Staff are public servants.

Would you rather your local council advertised, interviewed, vetted and trained random people every four years (or more if there are local by-elections)? Or should they, perhaps, offer the roles first to the staff they already have, where, aside from a couple of hours of training, usually done during lunch breaks from their day job (because they already know the basics, which most 'outsiders' don't) there's no additional staff outlay? I can imagine your response to the rise in your Council Tax to cover those costs.

As an example of how unaware the general public are, I once had a mother and daughter as tellers at a Count who brought several bags of food and drink with them and proceeded to lay it all out on the trestle table in front of them. When I politely but firmly reminded them that NOTHING could be on the table but pencils, teller sheets and ballot papers during the Count, as had been covered during training, they were so angry at being told what to do that they walked out. It should be common sense that ballot papers could be ruined by food or drink spillage but common sense really isn't very common.

You're very welcome to express an interest in working on your next local or national election. Just contact your local authority's Electoral Services team, they'll be delighted to hear from you. It's a very long day with extended periods of doing nothing but as I said above, it's a great insight into the general public.