Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Issue
51 Greater Cambridge Shared Planning Service Staffing Update PDF 203 KB
Minutes:
Matter for Decision
Decision
of Executive Councilor for Planning Policy and Open Spaces and the Executive
Councilor for Transport and Community Safety
i.
Noted the content of the
report and ongoing work to secure appropriate staffing to support the work of
the team.
Reason for the Decision
As set out in the Officer’s report.
Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected
Not applicable.
Scrutiny Considerations
The Committee received a report from the Joint Director of
Planning & Economic Development and Assistant Director which provided
progress of the delivery of recruitment to the Shared Planning Service.
An updated staffing structure was handed to Members for
their information.
In response to comments and questions from the Committee the
Joint Director for Planning and Economic Development and Assistant Director
said the following:
i.
Reasons that staff had given in exit interviews
for leaving had included a range of matters though workloads, career
progression, change of direction such as work in the private sector and the
cost of living issues; there had also been several retirements in the service.
ii.
A development programme was now in place
developed from the feedback of the exit interviews, allowing a structured
approach to learning and development.
iii.
Generic job description had been introduced
giving flexibility to officers to move around the service with internal
processes simplified, again based on feedback received from staff. This would
allow staff to gain experience in different disciplines of the planning service
without having to look externally.
iv.
There was a national shortage of planners;
neighbouring local authorities were facing the same recruitment challenges,
particularly at senior and principal level.
v.
There was a large variety of work within the
service that was attracting people’s interest.
vi.
Acknowledged that 2019 had been a very
challenging year for the planning service.
vii.
A vast number of additional hours had not been
focused on service delivery as the service was transformed and merged into one
single service.
viii.
An improvement in the service would be seen this
year; there was several changes to assist officers which were:
·
A new ICT system and workflow which would be
rolled out in February which would offer an improved self-service capability.
This would also show the live progress of the application.
·
Additional staff would be joining the service in
January which would improve the contact access for members of the public.
·
Alongside the enhanced “workforce management”
the service was also the first large shared service to roll out “Council
Anywhere”.
·
An investment had been made in issuing mobile
phones to all professional officers to enable fully flexible working and making
them more contactable.
·
Agile management and a progressive approach to
delivering work outcomes meant that some specialist staff had been enabled to
work remotely. This had retained their skills when personal commitments would
have otherwise prompted them to leave.
·
Continued dialogue with local agents outlining
the changes that the planning service was undertaking; highlighting practices such
as high frequency amendments to planning applications would have to cease as
this was inefficient use of staff time and created long delays for residents.
ix.
Acknowledged there was a back log of outstanding
planning cases. Target days had been introduced to reduce these cases.
x.
A current recruitment campaign was live to
target more senior staff.
xi.
Infrastructure was being put in place to retain
staff for career progression.
xii.
There were no junior planner vacancies as young
graduates wanted to come to Cambridge; the challenge was they could not
progress fast enough to meet the needs of the business.
xiii.
Recruitment of more experienced planners who had
families raised the issue of affordability of living in Cambridge. Relocation
was an issue.
xiv.
Exploring the possibility of recruiting oversees
with a view to advertising this year; South Cambridgeshire District Council
held a licence with the Home Office to recruit overseas.
xv.
Had engaged with unions regarding pay but there
were issues with single status legislation. Neighbouring authorities which did
not have union recognition were able to offer higher salaries for the same
job.
xvi.
Working with the unions had allowed the planning
services to offer other financials benefits such as golden hello process and
market factor supplement.
xvii.
Education and training were also enticements
that staff would benefit from.
xviii.
A Performance and Improvement Officer would work
to produce new indicators to highlight long standing planning cases much
quicker and procedures were in place on how they could be dealt with.
xix.
Reiterated the changes to the recruitment
policy and practice.
xx.
Confident that there would be improvements in
the ‘turnaround time’ and the capacity to respond to queries from the public.
xxi.
Work was being undertaken for staff to understand
the priority and importance of customer engagement.
xxii.
There were some outstanding applications which
were unusual as they had not been progressed by the applicant for numerous
years.
xxiii.
Data could be provided on the backlog to the
Committee and the level of work that was being undertaken and completed.
xxiv.
Agreed to publish in a monthly information sheet
/ e-mail on the following statistics to show how the service was evolving:
·
Number of permanent number of staff in service
·
Number of agency staff in service
·
Number of vacancies.
·
Contact details of staff.
·
A focus on communication and how information was
communicated to residents.
xxv.
Moving to more digital platforms to raise the
profile of the planning service; there was a post for an Engagement and
Marketing officer to assist with this service.
xxvi.
New team leaders would increase communication
with communities and residents increasing the personalisation of the service.
xxvii.
Thanked the Committee for their continued
support.
The Committee then spoke of the incredible work that those
in the planning services undertook and were aware of the immense pressure that
they must be under. It was important to
note the Committees’ thanks to all staff and understand that the report had
been brought forward to ensure that improvements were being made for both staff
and residents. Would expect a mid-year report on the service.
The Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Open Spaces
reminded the Committee that Building Control had undertaken a similar
transition, which had been through some ‘terrible’ times. The service now had a
solid reputation throughout the industry and was deemed as one of the best in
the Country, winning awards and setting new standards.
There were positive comments coming through on the forums.
The planning team and planning officers were an integral
part to all the schemes taking place in the city and south Cambridgeshire and
didn’t get the recognition when awards were won. Moving forward when awards
were won, those officers involved will be recognised internally.
The Committee unanimously endorsed the Officer
recommendations.
The Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Open
Spaces approved the recommendations.
Conflicts
of Interest Declared by the Executive Councillor (and
any Dispensations Granted)
No conflicts of interest were declared by
the Executive Councillor