Committee to meet to decide council acting chief executive's pay-off
As councillors consider whether to endorse their agreement to offer Chris Harman £74,000 to quite his post, city council reporter Iain Robinson weighs up the panel's options
TOMORROW at 10.30am, nine councillors will sit down around a table to make one of the most difficult decisions ever put to the city's elected members.
Stoke-on-Trent City Council's human resources committee must have thought the toughest choice they could face would be choosing a new chief executive from more than two dozen candidates who had applied for the £195,000 post.
The selection of John van de Laarschot, Torridge District Council's chief officer, should have been the panel's last act before its dissolution.
But instead their decision, which was supposed to bring stability to the council, unexpectedly plunged the authority into an unforeseen crisis.
Heavily-edited minutes reveal, just a day after Mr van de Laarschot's formal appointment by the council on October 1, the committee was reconvened to deal with a more pressing matter.
Chris Harman, interim chief executive, had not turned up for work on September 30 and it now appears he was already demanding compensation to leave his post without serving his three-month notice period.
The minutes state: "Members discussed the options, as set out in the paper, while expressing concerns regarding the commentary within.
"Members held a lengthy debate, requesting further detail and clarification from the head of human resources regarding a number of points and seeking confirmation of the constitutional authority of the committee to take a decision on the matter.
"Upon being put to the vote, it was resolved the committee delegate power to the head of human resources to agree, within the remit agreed by the committee, a compromise agreement with the chief officer based on contractual obligations within the chief officer's contract of employment, to be signed off by the statutory officers."
This excerpt indicates that, contrary to the outward message at the time that Mr Harman was away on leave, the council was apparently negotiating a pay-out just two days into his absence.
What is less clear is the nature and extent of the "concerns" members raised.
But given that, four weeks later, meetings are still taking place, it would seem those concerns have not gone away.
And the unexpected public backlash against the notion of a pay-off for Mr Harman will not have made the panel's task any easier.
As one council source put it: "The committee is in a difficult position, because they will be damned if they agree to a pay-out, but they will also be damned if they don't and it then leads to much bigger problems later on."
The perceived wisdom among senior councillors appears to be it would be wiser to pay a bit now than risk paying a lot later on, should the council face an employment tribunal.
One cabinet source summed up the mood by saying: "There is a feeling we should do what is in the best long-term interests of the council, even if that means a painful choice in the short-term."
Related content:
11 Comments
View all
by Chris Cooper, Newcastle
Friday, October 30 2009, 8:35AM
“Diana of Hanley he will be seeking redress for what is Constructive Dismissal, a judgement on that and then a Civil Action, the guys not stupid, he as been left in an untenable position by a bunch of well lets say wallies to be polite, who appointed "surf boy" to the fold. As for Sick Leave all City employees are entitled to Statutory sick leave, well used in the past by many Senior Officers to effect an exit from the clutches of the incompetents called Councillors quaintly enough, should really have been called something else, but eh such is life.
If this chap as got any modicum of common sense he will have salted away documentation for the unlikely event they may make the wrong decision. If I was to be honest I would love the Council Commitee to tell to go forth, not for any reason other than to see what this chap has got on em, they will however cough up with an obligatory gagging clause that will be written out and be being perused as we sit waiting in anticipation, there is no legal way in which the Council can justify the position they are in and about the decision they are about to take, there is the little matter of "custom and practice" as this type of action has been carried out many times already.
No, I`d say refuse him a pay off, just to see the resulting fireworks display, after all Bonfire Night is around the Corner, and I`m sure Mr. Harman as a few dummies targetted to pass out as Guys on Bonfire night, a few rockets, bangers and the like.
Any way good luck Councillors, you know which ever way you go, you re stuffed......................”
by L.J., Hartshill
Thursday, October 29 2009, 8:31PM
“I'll be there tomorrow. Hope to see you all there. Hope to see my local councillor there actually.”
by steven, Trentham
Thursday, October 29 2009, 8:14PM
“I agree with the ex council employee....there must be something else concerning this payoff - some deep rooted secret that the Councillors will be afraid of what he will spill.
Maybe a case for Mulder and Scully to investigate maybe.
I wished Guy Falkes was around today”
by Julie, Trentham
Thursday, October 29 2009, 7:09PM
“40+ people have just been made redundant where I work. They were expressly told, after their 30 day consultation period, that if they went off sick, they would not be paid in line with company procedures. Harman has not been made redundant, merely passed up for promotion, he still has his job. He has decided to walk so I fail to understand why this puts him in a position to receive a pay off. Am I missing something, as it seems he is taking us all for fools and taking advantage of weak leadership at the council??”
by ex council employee, thank goodness
Thursday, October 29 2009, 6:20PM
“Like I said in the previous story, there is more to this than meets the eye. The fact that they are trying to draw up a Compromise Agreement means Harman has something on the Council. If he signs this agreement there will be a clause in it about not being able to go to a Tribunal. Who would offer a Compromise Agreement if there was nothig to hide? Think about it everyone.”
by John, Stoke
Thursday, October 29 2009, 6:10PM
“Come on you shower, call his bluff. Let him take you to a tribunal. Let's see how he would justify a claim. If the reported facts are true there should be no chance of him winning, unless, there is something we are not being told.”
by Kerry, Meir
Thursday, October 29 2009, 5:02PM
“If the meeting is at 10.30 a.m. surely everyone who can gather oustide the civic offices should do tomorrow to voice their disgust at this ludicrous pay-out.
Will you be there? If you are then I will be.
See if the councillors will finally lsiten to the voice of the people in Stoke on Trent.
Lets hope that Stoke on Trent the town (is that right ???) can be brought to a standstill by people who are opposed to this waste of money.”
by Fred, Stoke
Thursday, October 29 2009, 2:46PM
“As all have said, he's still got a job, and we'll be happy to seem him back (errmm well maybe). It's just that he doesn't want to do it and the Council haven't the guts to tell him so. By the look of it, Head of HR isn't giving the right advice to the Committee - especially if they were anticipating this claim so early into his leave. oh, wait a minute, Harman was a HR guy aahh now I see......”
by Terry, Stoke
Thursday, October 29 2009, 12:59PM
“Why are we paying this man anything to leave the job that it would appear that he either did not want or was incapable of doing?”
by Jon, Hartshill
Thursday, October 29 2009, 9:59AM
“If the situation is as reported above, then surely it is Mr Harman who is in breach of HIS contract. He has to give 3 months notice to quit his job, instead of which he's thrown a sicky for the first month and appears to have no intention of returning to complete the remaining 2 months of his notice.
The council should grow a spine and tell Mr Harman that unless he returns to his desk pronto then it is THEY who will be seeking compensation from HIM.”