Cllr Ladbrooke, as Chair of the Group, introduced the report. He said the work of the group had proved to be a hugely positive experience and a good example of cross-party working. This was a matter whose “time had come.” It was, however, also at a time when the work environment for many was becoming increasingly precarious as a result of zero hours contracts etc. The report drew attention to a number of related issues such as the impacts of health and the stark difference in life expectancy between those who happen to live in different Wards in the City. There were strong connections too between low pay; female employees; those with a disability; and   BAME.

The report had been informed by input from a wide range of organisations and individuals who had spoken with passion and commitment.

It was clear that improvements in wages, alone, whilst important, would not provide a ‘silver bullet’. In Oxford in particular the cost of housing was bound to remain an issue, even for those in receipt of the Oxford Living Wage (OLW).

He was pleased to report that the Council had implemented the OLW for its own employees and major contractors.  It was hoped that the Council could exercise some leverage and or promote the introduction of OLW amongst other employers and that, with the support of partners, it would become the ‘social norm.’ The Council should, when seeking tenders, give serious consideration to awarding contracts to those who pay the OLW, even if not the cheapest.

Members thanked Cllr Ladbrooke and other members of the group for an excellent report which was both “thorough and revealing.” Thanks were also given to the Scrutiny Officer for his role in co-ordinating the work of the group and pulling together the report.

It was noted that the £100k threshold for contracts awarded by the Council was not lower because it was unlikely that such contractors would have employees.

There was universal support for the aspirations of the report but some concern about the ways in which and the extent to which its recommendations can be monitored. It was recognised that this was unavoidably dependent to a large extent on self-reporting and the trust associated with that.

The Committee noted that Council apprentices were not paid the OLW but did receive more than the statutory minimum.  A previous recommendation that apprentices be paid the OLW had not been agreed.

It was noted that rates of poverty in the City varied widely from Ward to Ward and while the principle of the OLW was of universal application, particular attention should be paid to those areas where poverty was greatest.

Consideration might be given to an event to promote and celebrate good practice by employers who have embraced the OLW and agreed that this could be incorporated with recommendation 11.

There was concern lest the valuable work of the group might be lost as a result of subsequent inertia. The CEB should therefore be encouraged to be very active in its support of the report’s recommendations.  The Committee agreed to recommend to the Board that a member should be identified who will have responsibility for leading this work.