Skip to main content

Labour delivers a London Living Wage for Southwark


Great news for anyone interested in the campaign to end poverty wages in London. Southwark's Labour run council has given a cast iron, fully funded commitment to pay all staff providing services on behalf of Southwark Council a London Living Wage. The pledge came in recently published Southwark Cabinet documents which can be found here (page 24).

The London Living Wage (LLW) was introduced in 2005 by Mayor Ken Livingstone to provide a voluntary marker, above the National Minimum Wage, to stop working Londoners from falling into poverty.  The level is set each year by the Mayor's Living Wage Unit.  The introduction of LLW followed a very long and determined campaign by numerous organisations, most notably London Citizens.

In November 2008 Southwark's Council Assembly passed a motion (with cross party support) to pay all staff the London Living Wage including, crucially, all contracted out staff.  A higher proportion of directly employed local authority staff in London are paid at or above LLW, not least because so many of the lowest paid jobs have been outsourced to private contractors.  However, despite confirming their intention to implement the plan, Southwark's previous Lib Dem lead administration did not put forward any detailed plans to actually deliver the LLW.  I don't think it would be unfair to say that they liked the idea of paying a LLW but, as on so many other issues, didn't have the political will to see it through.

Following the election of a Labour Council in May 2010 Southwark became one of a minority of councils in London to pay all its permanent employees at or above the £8.30 level of the London Living Wage.  But this was clearly not enough.  Labour Councillors felt strongly that no member of staff delivering services to people in our borough deserved to be paid poverty wages.  That meant fulfilling the pledge to deliver on a Living Wage for contracted out staff.

The recently published papers state "Cabinet members have now asked that officers plan to bring all contracted staff up to this level over the next three years. Future new contract procurements will
contain the requirement for contractors to pay employees the LLW."  It goes on:

"Additional resources to support low paid staff arising from commitment made by council  assembly in setting three year budget in February 2011 (£375k),a new commitment to  support agency worker directive requiring parity pay rates with Council staff and the  requirement for external contractors to pay London living wage in contracts to be let or re-let  by the council in the future (£1m). The commitment to london living wage in contracts will require annual increases in budget provision over the period to 2015/16"

There are other councils in London paying LLW on their contracts (Islington and Lewisham) but Southwark is the first to have plans ensure everyone providing services gets paid at this minimum level.  Apart from the obvious moral case for paying people a wage which keeps them above the poverty line, there is also a strong argument that paying these wages will boost service quality, particularly in areas such as care for the elderly and vulnerable.  I strongly believe Southwark Council taxpayers will get better value for money as a result of this decision.

A huge amount of credit should go to Southwark's Labour Cabinet members for seeing through this commitment.  In particular, Cabinet Member for Finance Richard Livingstone and the Leader of the Council  Peter John have ensured this important issue was given sufficient priority.  This is a significant step forward for the campaign against in-work poverty and I hope it will act as a spur to other London Council's to do the same thing.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Know Your Ryes!

A few weeks ago I was in a meeting with some local residents and council officers. During the meeting one person started referring to Rye Lane, when in fact they meant Peckham Rye East. Later on another started talking about Peckham Rye Common and it took us a little while to work out that they really meant Peckham Rye Park.   You can't really blame people for getting a little confused. There are so many references to "Rye" in our little bit of South London that even the locals can get mixed up. So I thought I'd have a go at writing a little glossary of all the Ryes hereabout.  Clearly I'm making a rod for my own back here, so please point out any errors I've made in the comments box below.  Anyway, here are my definitions of the ubiquitous Ryes. Some serious, some not so serious, and in no particular order: Peckham Rye Ward - The council ward area. Peckham Rye Ward was created out of Rye Ward, Waverley Ward and Bellenden Ward following the Local

Lib Dems claim they're not in charge in Peckham Rye

(A tweet from the Peckham Rye Lib Dems) Peckham Rye Lib Dems are now claiming that Labour 'run' Peckham Rye (take a look above). When asked by a local resident "Am I right in thinking Lib Dems run Southwark but Labour run Peckham Rye?", a Peckham Rye Lib Dem candiate replied, "Yes you're right. For the next three months Lab run Peckham Rye. Then we take over..." Given that, just like every other area in Southwark, Peckham Rye is run by the Lib Dem-Tory Executive it seems this is just the latest in a string of attempts to mislead people into thinking they've got nothing to do with Southwark's failures. Of course, Peckham Rye does have three Labour councillors, who do a great job of representing our area and our concerns at the Town Hall. However this is very different from 'running' Peckham Rye. If only we could just opt out of the Lib Dem chaos! In truth, the policy levers and almost all the money spent by the council are under the cont

Another Bog Standard Update

Many local residents may well be wondering what is happening with the previously proposed development of the toilet block near the junction of Peckham Rye and East Dulwich Road. Before Renata, Victoria and I were even elected as councillors, this had become quite a lively issue. I recently asked officers at the council what is going on, because nothing appeared to be happening with the block. Well, since the last update, this is what has happened: 1. The last proposed tenant - a not-for-profit gallery offering outreach programmes to local schools and groups - dropped out of the process without having made the required planning application. 2. The property is now under offer to a new proposed tenant. They run a children's nursery and wish to expand. 3. They have already made a planning application for a change of use. 4. We are currently waiting for a formal decision from development control so that the lease can proceed. I'll update again here as soon as I have further news. Sp