Agenda item

Report of the Director of People Services.

To follow.

7.1       Carmel Millar (Director of People Services) presented the first report on Pension Auto Re-Enrolment and advised that BT was due to send out letters advising those who will be opted into the scheme and those who are not eligible in the next few days. In reply to a query from Members, Sarah Hay (Pensions and Payroll Officer) anticipated that around 200 people would receive letters advising them of this, however once the exact figure from BT was provided, this would be communicated to the Committee.

7.2       Carmel Millar then presented the second report on Surrey County Council Administration Performance and advised that performance had deteriorated between April 2015 and March 2016, primarily due to BT’s lack of staff that were knowledgeable of LGPS requirements, as well as the lack of interface between BT’s Agresso and the Altair software used for administering the pension scheme. Surrey County Council had also taken on pension administration work with the Council’s other tri-borough partners, which had placed an additional strain. The Council was working with BT and Surrey County Council to improve performance and it had communicated the necessity of this. Of particular concern was the performance in payment of pensions to scheme members who had recently retired and this matter had been raised at a recent meeting with Surrey County Council and BT. Carmel Millar added that Surrey County Council had also undergone an internal re-organisation and recruiting more staff to administer the pension scheme.

7.3       During discussions, Members sought clarification as to what notifications were not being provided. A Member asked whether the problems being experienced were primarily due to BT and could action be taken in respect of a sub-standard performance in terms of the service level agreement. The Committee expressed its concern about the performance issues, especially in relation to delayed pension payments to scheme members who had recently retired and the impact it may have on their lives.

7.4       In reply to the issues raised, Carmel Millar explained that there were instances of delays in some notifications about staff who had just retired and consequently there were delays to their initial pension payments. Sarah Hay added that in some instances pension payments had been as late as a month after they were due. She felt that BT and Surrey County Council were equally attributable to the problems being experienced.

7.5       Steven Mair advised that the contract with BT was extensive and there were a number of avenues open to the Council to take action in respect of the sub-standard performance experienced. The Council was presently in commercial negotiations with BT on this matter and staff had put considerable efforts in trying to resolve this. There had also been a number of Audit and Performance Committee meetings that had taken place solely to discuss this issue. George Bruce added that separate key performance indicators for Surrey County Council are included within the annual accounts.

7.6       The Chairman requested that he meet with Surrey County Council, along with any other Committee Members who wished to attend, in order to have the opportunity to impress upon Surrey County Council the implications of the problems being considered and the need to prioritise in resolving them. He requested that the meeting take place in July, prior to the next Committee meeting.