Thatcham Town Clerk retires, Opportunity knocks! Options

[On the edge]

Thatcham's Town Clerk will be retiring shortly after long and distinguished service. The Council is presently advertising for two new members of staff to fill the gap she'll leave.

Given our present extreme financial situation, does this vacancy present a great opportunity for some innovative and forward thinking solutions? Surely, particularly as other, bigger authorities have demonstrated, there is a potential to absorb these roles into other local government establishments?

Certainly, with present day software packages it should be eminently feasible and practical to run the financial management as a marginal addition to the self same roles in the WBC establishment. Similarly, the role of the Clerk ought to be reasonably straightforward to absorb.

Doing this might also provide a bit of a lift for the existing WBC admin / finance people who are presently seeing the demotivating phenomena of work disappearing. Another big plus would be for us, the general public. Apparently, one of the biggest issues the present clerk had to deal with is our confusion over which council does what. Putting the 'admin' under one hat goes a long way to solving that!

So will we see some real local leadership demonstrating that with some effective management we can actually improve our service in these stringent times. Or do we simply carry on regardless; because we really aren't all in this together.

[Simon Kirby]

In the news at the moment is Thatcham Town Council's hapless management of a property development project with the administration pulling the plug on the project are leaving wht is reported to be a £600k loss.

Not particularly my concern as I don't live in Thatcham or pay the TTC precept, but it is something of a pattern. The only service that the parish-level tier of local government is required by statute to provide is an allotment service, and the most effective way of delivering that service is to hand it over to the allotmenteers themselves to run. That leaves very little for the parish council to do and plenty of parishes are content with that, but the institution can attract the pompous, vain, and self-important.

[spartacus]

Gobsmacked... Town Clerk for Thatcham..? A two-bit town of no import yet the advertised salary for a clerk is between £37,483 and £41,140?!!

[newres]

Gobsmacked... Town Clerk for Thatcham..? A two-bit town of no import yet the advertised salary for a clerk is between £37,483 and £41,140?!!

Why gobsmacked? Sounds about right to me. It's not a fortune is it?

[On the edge]

Why gobsmacked? Sounds about right to me. It's not a fortune is it?

No, it's not; provided there is actually that amount of work to be done. Therein lies the rub. There is also another point here, which is the appointment of the Finance bod. That adds another thirty grand plus to the total.

So then, this 'role' is going to cost double, some £60,000 plus per annum. Now we are getting into a small fortune. If that still seems an unfair judgement, remember there are also four other full time people and about the same part time.

Now, if this was any other organisation, this increase in the head count and salary bill would herald a pretty big expansion of the operation. Whereas (forgive me if I'm wrong) I thought that Local Government was supposed to be reducing; getting smaller.

Does this affect West Berkshire? Well, yes - if this type of thinking is endemic in parish level councils, and remember they are all 'conservative' lead, what cost are we looking at to deliver this duplicate administration?

Just a thought, from what little I know of local government HR, it would seem that the present incumbent has good grounds for a retrospective grading appeal?

[The Hatter]

I'd do it for £25,000. I've shown my boss this thread because it looks as if we deserve a rise. It all goes to show that voting is just a waste of time. The last lot wasted money, this lot waste money, what's the difference?

[On the edge]

I'd do it for £25,000. I've shown my boss this thread because it looks as if we deserve a rise. It all goes to show that voting is just a waste of time. The last lot wasted money, this lot waste money, what's the difference?

Sorry, I doubt if you have the necessary qualification; it's very specialist you know, indeed so specialist that no one I know has ever heard of it! Still, you could always go for the Finance one, where qualification doesn't seem so important. Mind, numeracy doesn't seem to be a desired strong point in Local Government workers in West Berkshire!

[nerc]

No, it's not; provided there is actually that amount of work to be done. Therein lies the rub. There is also another point here, which is the appointment of the Finance bod. That adds another thirty grand plus to the total.

So then, this 'role' is going to cost double, some £60,000 plus per annum. Now we are getting into a small fortune. If that still seems an unfair judgement, remember there are also four other full time people and about the same part time.

Now, if this was any other organisation, this increase in the head count and salary bill would herald a pretty big expansion of the operation. Whereas (forgive me if I'm wrong) I thought that Local Government was supposed to be reducing; getting smaller.

Does this affect West Berkshire? Well, yes - if this type of thinking is endemic in parish level councils, and remember they are all 'conservative' lead, what cost are we looking at to deliver this duplicate administration?

Just a thought, from what little I know of local government HR, it would seem that the present incumbent has good grounds for a retrospective grading appeal?

The Financial bod as you put it is not £30 grand, the position is a part time one of 7 hours per week paying pro rata so your sums are wrong. perhaps you should apply for the position with your mathematical skills

[On the edge]

The Financial bod as you put it is not £30 grand, the position is a part time one of 7 hours per week paying pro rata so your sums are wrong. perhaps you should apply for the position with your mathematical skills

Quite right; its comprehension skills I need, rather than numeracy!

When I see big numbers in parish council contexts, I simply can't comprehend. Look at the other numbers they band around; always understated! So, how long before the 7 hours become 17 and then 27 and then 37? What was the point in quoting a pro rata rate, why not simply give the real figure and the pay grade. Or is ambiguity their stock in trade? After all, they are aiming their adverts at the public, people like me, with limited comprehension.

[user23]

Quite right; its comprehension skills I need, rather than numeracy!

When I see big numbers in parish council contexts, I simply can't comprehend. Look at the other numbers they band around; always understated! So, how long before the 7 hours become 17 and then 27 and then 37? What was the point in quoting a pro rata rate, why not simply give the real figure and the pay grade. Or is ambiguity their stock in trade? After all, they are aiming their adverts at the public, people like me, with limited comprehension.

Pro rata is the usual way of showing the salary when advertising vacancies in professions such as this.

[The Hatter]

Pro rata is the usual way of showing the salary when advertising vacancies in professions such as this.

A Council clerical assistant isn't a profession is it? If it is, I'm in for a big pay rise.

[user23]

A Council clerical assistant isn't a profession is it? If it is, I'm in for a big pay rise.

I assumed it was classed as a Local Government Officer which is a recognised profession, according to this anyway.

[Mr Brown]

The chap who sells us sandwiches mid morning calls himself a professional caterer, everyone seems to be a professional these days. I'd take the person of standing description any day.

[nerc]

A Council clerical assistant isn't a profession is it? If it is, I'm in for a big pay rise.

The position is for a RFO which is responsible Financial Officer which is similar to a basic accountant, hence the salary

[nerc]

A Council clerical assistant isn't a profession is it? If it is, I'm in for a big pay rise.

The position is for a RFO which is responsible Financial Officer which is similar to a basic accountant, hence the salary

[Exhausted]

I'd be more inclined to accept the salary figure if I knew what the job actually was.

There doesn't seem to be any accountability in the job based on another council locally. What do I know though.

[user23]

I'd be more inclined to accept the salary figure if I knew what the job actually was.

There doesn't seem to be any accountability in the job based on another council locally. What do I know though.

Do you need more detail than what's in the 14 page Candidates Pack, which clearly states who the role is responsible to?

[On the edge]

I'd be more inclined to accept the salary figure if I knew what the job actually was.

There doesn't seem to be any accountability in the job based on another council locally. What do I know though.

The published pack is certainly interesting; but not for the reasons intended. If you look at the job specification, it's a basic book keeping job. No issue with that, a justified role in any organisation. However, remember this is just 7 hours or less than a day a week!

However, there is then the statutory sign off bit. That clearly indicates that the job holder will report to the Council directly, so the Clerk will in future have no financial responsibility. Does this mean the grading for that role has been adjusted accordingly?

It certainly seems very odd that what is, in effect, a new management structure is being put in place without reference to the Head, and without any apparent justification. Arguably, the process works today; except there is an overload of up to a days work a week. Will we ever know if a more practical and certainly more economic solution could have been used?

Nonetheless, it's a job, and we'll be needing those as the likes of Bayer exit for pastures new.

[user23]

The published pack is certainly interesting; but not for the reasons intended. If you look at the job specification, it's a basic book keeping job. No issue with that, a justified role in any organisation. However, remember this is just 7 hours or less than a day a week!

However, there is then the statutory sign off bit. That clearly indicates that the job holder will report to the Council directly, so the Clerk will in future have no financial responsibility. Does this mean the grading for that role has been adjusted accordingly?

It certainly seems very odd that what is, in effect, a new management structure is being put in place without reference to the Head, and without any apparent justification. Arguably, the process works today; except there is an overload of up to a days work a week. Will we ever know if a more practical and certainly more economic solution could have been used?

It says it's responsible to the Town Clerk, in the first few lines of the job description.

[On the edge]

It says it's responsible to the Town Clerk, in the first few lines of the job description.

How can it be? I think this is what is confusing with this document; rather a lot is ambiguous and as in this case, actually conflicting. By statute, the 'responsible officer' signs off their own work how then can the Clerk exert responsibility? What happens when the Clerk disagrees with the 'responsible officer'?

It would make far more logical sense legally and in process terms for the Clerk to be the Responsible Officer (as today) and then to simply employ a book keeper, working under the usual rules.