Equal Pay in Local Government

I thank the Local Government and Communities Committee and its convener for the work that they have done on the matter. The committee's report is a stark reminder of just how far councils still have to go to implement equal pay.

From the report, it appears that some sort of collective malaise is afflicting local authorities and unions, and compromising their ability to tackle the issue. I hope that the councils, the unions and all the other partners that are involved will be galvanised into more concerted action to resolve the issues that the committee has highlighted. I want more urgency to be brought to the matter, as almost every other member in the chamber has said today.

Investing even more time and effort will not only benefit the tens of thousands of women who are still waiting to be treated fairly, but will limit councils' liability in equal pay claims that come through the courts in the future. It is truly time, as many members have noted, that the matter was properly resolved.

It is clear from the report that councils are still sitting on a financial timebomb; David McLetchie identified that the cost is about £600 million and still rising. Councils will welcome the cabinet secretary's announcement of a capitalisation scheme for retrospective payments at least, provided that it is adequate; I hope that the cabinet secretary will give us more clarity on that.

As many members have said today, the single status agreement was originally signed 10 years ago, in 1999, and the rate of progress since then has been painfully slow. It is clear from the report that the longer the matter drags on, the harder it is to resolve, as more and more court rulings are reached. I agree with the committee's view that if single status had been implemented earlier, a number of the legal challenges would not have come about.

In paragraph 25 of the committee's report, a witness from COSLA is quoted as saying:

"We have a legal obligation to introduce equal pay. We will continue to do that as quickly as we can, but the negotiations have been the most difficult, protracted and complex that I have ever been involved in. Every time there are judgements ... the process is set back."

It is clear that the situation will only get worse unless all parties bring some stronger resolve to the matter.

Two of the most urgent points that arise from the report concern the settling of equal pay claims and equal pay audits. All the parties involved should be embarrassed that, as many members have pointed out, more than 35,000 equal pay claims have now been lodged with tribunals. That does not include, as members have said, those women who have retired or died and not been able to bring claims. Everything possible must be done to bring those to closure.

The convener of the Local Government and Communities Committee said earlier that strong cases should be settled, and paragraph 53 of the report states:

"The Committee agrees that it would not be a good use of public money for local authorities to settle cases they believe have no validity. However, it also believes that it serves no-one well (least of all the claimants) for strong cases not to be settled. This is particularly true of cases where the main issue is not over whether discrimination has occurred, but is over the level of compensation."

I therefore agree with Margaret Mitchell and others and commend the following recommendation in paragraph 72:

"The Committee is firmly of the view that all of the parties concerned (councils, trade unions, COSLA and lawyers) should be brought together, to enter into discussions over the potential settling of strong cases that are currently within the system."

Like others, I urge the cabinet secretary to do all that he can to facilitate such a meeting.

I turn to the need for equal pay audits. I was astounded to discover that the committee heard in evidence that the new pay schemes that some councils are implementing have not necessarily been equality proofed. While any doubt remains about that, we will continue to face the possibility that even more equal pay claims will be lodged. The report contains a number of examples. Mark Irvine from Action 4 Equality gave the example of Glasgow City Council. He said that the new structure in Glasgow might well be discriminatory, given that the vast majority of part-time workers, who do not qualify, are women.

The recommendations in paragraphs 112 to 114 go into some detail on what should be done in new pay and grading agreements and state that we need a consistent approach. Paragraph 112 proposes an independent assessment and states:

"the Committee suggests there should be a clause stating that local authorities will undertake any necessary adjustments to their schemes as recommended by the independent assessment."

Comments have also been made this morning about the role of Audit Scotland and the suggestion that, through best-value audits, it should check and report on whether the local authority's scheme has been equality proofed.

Paragraph 114 states:

"On the issue of regular reviews, the Committee recommends that local authorities undertake an annual equal pay audit, if they are not already doing so".

I would like to see mandatory pay audits in both the public and private sectors. What are the cabinet secretary's views on that?

The historical undervaluing of women's work is a disgrace and it is indefensible to allow it to carry on today, yet women are still being undervalued and poorly paid. Unions and local authorities throughout the country seem to have lost sight of that. I hope that the report will bring about some changes.