Ray Collins has just been announced as the next Labour Party general secretary. He rang me up a couple of weeks ago to talk about his application. We discussed the equal ops issues. Two other candidates and I who were told are services weren't required either in the earier recruitment Round (January to March) or Round Two (May - June) wrote to the NEC chair earlier this week. These are the questions we raised:
Key questions of NEC officers that apply throughout the process for all NEC members are:
i. What documents would have to be disclosed in the event of a case before an Employment Tribunal?
ii. What discussions took place between NEC officers and No. 10 staff during the recruitment process? What were the outcomes?
Round One (January to March 2008) - Short-listing
-
How many applicants were there and what was the gender/ethnicity breakdown?
-
Was each candidate evaluated in the same way? In particular, which criteria were used to select from the list of applicants through each stage to invitation to interview?
-
Did all candidates subsequently invited for interview by the NEC (hereafter referred to as ‘the Panel’) meet the criteria as set out in the Person Specification?
Round One – Appointment
-
Did the Panel decide which candidates were eligible for appointment prior to voting?
-
If so, was the Panel invited at the time, or subsequently, to decide whether the post should be offered to the next best candidate?
Round Two (May to June 2008) – Advertising
-
How did each of the applicants hear about the post? In particular, was anyone invited to apply and, if so, by whom?
-
Did NEC officers consider whether or not previous applicants should be advised not to apply, irrespective of whether they had been short-listed or not?
-
If not, why not?
Round Two (May to June 2008) – Short-listing
-
Who were the applicants?
-
Was each applicant evaluated in the same way?
-
Were potential conflicts of interest between any NEC officer and any applicant declared?
-
If so, did any NEC officer absent her/himself from the process?
-
Having allowed previous applicants to re-apply, why did NEC officers then decide to preclude some applicants in Round Two on the basis of the outcome of the evaluation in Round One?
We are acutely aware of the frustration not just for the NEC, but the Party as a whole, about the time that has elapsed since the previous General Secretary resigned. But if the NEC proceeds to appoint on 12 June, without due consideration of the process to date, the NEC leaves itself and the Party at risk of allegations of possible breaches of equal opportunities recruitment procedures.
We do not wish to comment on the worthiness of any of the candidates, but it is possible that after due consideration there were eligible applicants in Round One and Round Two who were excluded from interview unfairly due to flaws in the recruitment processes adopted by NEC officers.
We consider that in the interests of natural justice, all NEC members should be given the necessary facts to enable them to decide next steps. There is no need for a protracted delay. But we believe an open, transparent and fair recruitment would allow the Party to rally united behind the successful applicant in good time for Annual Party Conference.
As matters stand we are aware that, rightly or wrongly, the perception in the outside world is that an appointment even following interview from a shortlist of one is a political fix, not an equal opportunities recruitment. This will undoubtedly undermine the authority of the new General Secretary and the standing of the Party generally. This cannot be desirable at a time when Labour’s performance in recent elections, its level of elected representation in devolved government in Scotland and Wales and on local councils throughout the UK, as well as party membership are at historic lows.> I will find out later whether they were brushed under the carpet, or raised and answered somehow.