n Sir, South Lakeland District Council employees accepted a negotiated settlement for what they believed to be a fair pay, grading and working conditions agreement.

UNISON has, over several years, worked to negotiate the new pay and grading structure as part of the move towards Single Status. Single Status is about ensuring all employees are treated consistently and fairly, and all have the same working terms and conditions. The 1997 Single Status Agreement requires all councils to implement Single Status.

Councils must also carry out an equal pay audit as required in the 2004/05 National Pay Agreement and in line with the Equal Pay Act 1970.

Under the new structure, 18 per cent of posts were to be on higher salary grades, 16 per cent were to be on lower salary grades and 66 per cent of staff stayed the same.

The misleading information on the number of staff reportedly having received pay increases arises out of the way the information was "leaked" into the public domain, giving the impression that staff were all to receive pay increases costing the ratepayer £1m over and above the "projected" cost of the scheme.

The majority of staff are on the same grade as before job evaluation was implemented, the only difference being that the number of increments in some grades increased. Therefore the projected cost could have increased by £1m had all staff reach grade maxima. I would emphasise that the cost of £1m is projected and not actual cost. This money has not been paid to staff nor is it likely to have been paid as many staff have since left the council and their replacements start at the bottom of the grade.

It should also be made clear that staff accepted reductions in their working conditions as part of the deal including the loss of weekend working enhancements and unsociable hours payments.

South Lakeland District Council was among the first local authorities in the country to take this step of addressing equal pay claims. This was done in order to protect ratepayers from unnecessary and costly litigation. Mistakes may have been made but the underlying principle of addressing discrimination is to be applauded.

The aim of the process was to ensure that employees doing the same job are paid the same salary regardless of gender, race, disability or background.

Councils who fail to address equal pay guidelines properly leave the ratepayer open to costly and damaging legal action.

UNISON recently won a landmark victory against Leicestershire County Council's failure to consult the union before it sacked 2,500 staff and imposed new terms and conditions arising out of a job evaluation scheme. Compensation of approximately £8m may be paid to council staff many of whom are women.

As reported previously in The Westmorland Gazette, Cumbria County Council was also taken to an Employment Tribunal. Both situations show the costs of ignoring legislation.

Councils should be open and transparent about the cost and implications of the equal pay agreements. The press should not have to rely on "leaks", neither should staff be faced with vilification and uncertainly about their future when the only thing they did was to agree to a package, which they believed to be fair.

Vivienne Procter UNISON Branch Secretary