Does anyone have experience of terminating a clerk through a settlement /compromise agreement

Question

Our clerk has been in situ for around 10 years and has a track record of being rude (to councillors and the public) unhelpful and obstructive. The clerk can turn on the charm and be pleasant but the next minute be very rude and disrespectful. It is like walking on eggshells.

Sadly in the past, nobody has dealt with this and the clerk has been allowed to carry on and call the shots.

The current chairman has now grasped this situation and the council want to remove the clerk - -probably via a  settlement agreement as nobody want to enter into a long winded disciplinary procedure. the council just want to make a clean start.

Answer 1

When was the last performance appraisal?

What did it say?

Is the employee likely to “want” to depart or are they more likely to contest? (I bet I know the answer to that even if you don’t!!)

Unless you can arrive at a mutually agreeable settlement, your only option is restoring efficiency and effective appraisal processes which will either lead to professional improvement OR dismissal.
I would suggest the council cannot realistically expect to justify the use of public money to “settle” an unsatisfactory employment supervision situation since it is the council which has allowed this situation to degenerate which should not be an expense to the public fund.
To answer the direct question - yes I do have experience (Jun 23) of dismissal gross misconduct for the clerk but it took about 12 months to get there.
Prior to this clerk being dismissed, the previous clerk was “terminated” by the previous council under a so-called confidential severance agreement which was beneficial to both parties since it masked the employees disgraceful behaviour and it masked the council’s appalling lack of management.
Unless you have an HR expert as a Cllr you’d be better off engaging a contract HR service and follow a properly independent process.

Comments

So your last two paragraphs is confirmation that it has been/can be achieved with the legal paperwork for both parties in place. Thank you.

---

Yes, it certainly ‘can’ be done. It WAS done by previous members of my PC BUT they were so wrong to do so that it suited them to keep it under wraps.
It was tax payers money (in my opinion inappropriately) spent to get rid of a problem clerk rather than sacking them.
Yes it CAN be done, my issue is that can the cost be properly justified?

I can send you a copy of the ternation agreement if useful…

---

The Clerk being terminated brings to mind the horse's head scene from The Godfather!

If you have not followed your own competence and disciplinary procedures, you will need the Clerk to sign a full and final settlement agreement with you. Your Clerk will be advised not to unless the sum you are offering is more than the sum he or she will win at employment tribunal for unfair dismissal. You should avoid a tribunal claim at all costs because it has wider implications than a simple financial settlement. There is the reputational damage and potentially higher insurance premiums for many years to come. The last tribunal claim I was involved in increased the premium by 60%, even though the Council won on most aspects of the case. The insurance company took the view that the circumstances leading to the claim demonstrated that the Council was not fit to govern.

This is not something your Council should attempt without specialist advice.

---

All these answers have been valid and useful, and thank you to all that have responded.

Let me cut to the chase.
Council not at full complement.
Good Councillors that have resigned say that they will not return while said Clerk is in situ.
It is a small parish and there is no interest from other members of the public to join the council.

New chairman grasped the situation within six months, 'gets the importance of following the proper procedure' and wanted to deal with performance and behaviour of said Clerk.
But the remaining councillors (only just quorate) did not want to follow the procedure 'and get involved'. 'They hadn't signed up for this"

So where do we go from here ?

Answer 2

If the Clerk doesn't want to leave, you'll need to compensate for future loss of earnings. One of my neighbouring parish councils spent £27k parting company with a clerk who had only been there a couple of years.

Your insurance company probably provides free legal and HR advice, so that would be a good starting point.

Comments

That’s my point! £27k paid out for loss of future earnings.
If they had done proper appraisal and improving efficiency they could have got a better employee or sacked them for irrecoverable deficiencies rather than a £27k bill plus additional staff costs for the new incumbent.
How was the £27k justified in the council accounts?

---

"Legal expenses" which wasn't enough to satisfy the curiosity of the local papers, who gave it front page billing! It didn't help that they slashed front line expenditure and increased the precept at the same time. A case study entitled "You couldn't have done it any worse if you'd tried!"

Answer 3

Your clerk's trade union/advisers would see it this way.

"X is a long-standing loyal employee with an unblemished disciplinary record who the council now want to get rid of without any regard for THEIR OWN well established disciplinary process".

Discuss ...