Agenda item

The Panel considered a report of the Chief of Staff which provided details of a new staffing structure and complement in the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner (for copy see file Minutes).

The report was presented by the Chief of Staff, following which all staff of the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner left the meeting during the Member discussion.

Councillor Allen asked how the structure compared to other PCC office structures.  The PCC replied that although it was similar, no two PCC offices were the same.  There was a need to achieve a balanced structure so the office could continue to deliver, as it had done to date.  The office now shared the Finance Officer role with the Constabulary, which was nationally recognised as good practice, had recruited two graduate interns and had employed a modern apprentice, as well as having secondees, and this had resulted in a reduction in employee costs in excess of £200,000, from £704,000 to £494,000.  The PCC then provided the Panel with details of the Chief of Staff’s level of remuneration.

Councillor Brookes informed the Panel he was disappointed with the level of detail in the report with not all salaries and grades being included and no descriptions of roles and responsibilities.  Mr Dodwell asked whether the structure had been approved by the PCC alone.  The PCC confirmed that he had approved the structure and informed the Panel he would provide the information referred to by Councillor Brookes.

Councillor Allen sought details of the Police Staff Group (PSG) referred to in the report.  The PCC replied that as a matter of courtesy he had taken the new structure to the PSG, which had examined the job roles and pay grades, which ensured the process had rigour.

Councillor May asked whether the sharing of jobs had been considered.  The PCC replied that the office was a corporation sole, and as such, couldn’t collaborate with other organisations, for example, fire and rescue.  However, collaboration with other PCC offices had been considered.

Councillor Jones informed the Panel he had been unaware of the PSG and asked whether the office structure had been approved before being brought to the Panel.  The PCC replied that the approval of the office structure was not a role of the Panel, which had the role of scrutiny.

Councillor Allen commented that the changes in process, monitoring and governance since the appointment of the Chief of Staff had all been positive.

Mr Dodwell asked how the structure compared to the staffing structure of the former Police Authority.  The PCC replied that as the role of the PCC developed, comparisons with the former Police Authority weakened,

Resolved:

That the report be noted.

The Chief of Staff rejoined the meeting.