Local Government Reorganisation and Staffing: Key Considerations
- truthaboutlocalgov
- Sep 1
- 6 min read
With the English Devolution White Paper advocating for universal coverage by strategic authorities and a strong governmental preference for mayoral leadership local government is on the cusp of significant structural change. At the heart of this transformation lies the anticipated Local Government Reorganisation (LGR), a process that will reshape the landscape of local governance across England.
Understanding LGR: Structural Shifts and Strategic Intent
LGR refers to the redrawing of local authority boundaries and the redistribution of responsibilities. The government’s vision is to move away from the traditional two-tier system of district and county councils, favouring instead a streamlined model of unitary authorities. These bodies would hold consolidated powers over services such as planning, housing, transport, and social care ideally improving efficiency, accountability, and strategic coherence.
This reorganisation could take several forms:
Splitting counties into multiple unitary authorities.
Merging districts, boroughs, and cities into larger strategic units.
Realigning boundaries to reflect economic geographies or community identities.
While the policy rationale is clear simplification, cost-effectiveness, and stronger local leadership the operational reality is complex. Stakeholders must navigate the transfer of functions, assets, liabilities, contracts, and staff from predecessor councils to successor bodies. These transitions carry significant implications for workforce stability, service continuity, and organisational culture.
Staff Transfers and TUPE: Legal Frameworks and Grey Areas
A central concern in any LGR process is the fate of the workforce. Typically, when services and responsibilities are transferred, staff move with them under the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (TUPE). TUPE is designed to protect employees’ terms and conditions when their employment changes hands due to a service or business transfer.
However, TUPE is not always straightforward in the public sector. Regulation 3(5) commonly referred to as the Henke exception states that transfers of functions between public authorities as part of administrative reorganisations do not constitute a “relevant transfer” under TUPE. This creates ambiguity and potential risk for staff, particularly where roles are restructured or eliminated.
To mitigate this, the government introduced the Local Government (Structural and Boundary Changes) (Staffing) Regulations 2008, which effectively override the Henke exception in the context of LGR. These regulations ensure that staff transferring to new unitary authorities are treated as if TUPE applies, preserving employment rights and continuity.
Yet, even with these safeguards, challenges remain:
Role matching and job evaluation can be contentious.
Terms and conditions harmonisation may lead to disputes.
Pension entitlements and LGPS access must be carefully managed.
Union engagement and consultation are critical to avoid legal challenges.
Complex Staffing Issues in LGR: Leadership, Redundancy, and Legal Risk
Heads of Paid Service: A Unique Case
The Staffing Regulations explicitly state that TUPE does not apply to Heads of Paid Service typically chief executives. If a chief executive from a predecessor council does not secure a role in the new unitary authority, they are deemed to have been made redundant. This entitles them to:
A statutory and contractual redundancy payment.
An unreduced Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) pension if aged 55 or over (rising to 57 from April 2028), regardless of whether they applied for the new role.
This provision raises several practical and legal questions:
Can chief executives argue that their role has been transferred in substance, even if not in title?
Is there a risk of constructive dismissal claims if the recruitment process is perceived as unfair?
How should councils manage succession planning and leadership continuity during reorganisation?
These questions have surfaced in previous reorganisations, such as in Dorset and Buckinghamshire, and remain unresolved in the courts. The lack of legal clarity means that each LGR process must be carefully designed to avoid reputational damage, litigation, and leadership vacuum.
Strategic Workforce Planning: Beyond Compliance
While legal compliance is essential, successful LGR demands a broader strategic approach to workforce planning. Key considerations include:
Talent retention: How do you retain high-performing staff amid uncertainty?
Culture integration: How do you merge different organisational cultures into a cohesive whole?
Leadership development: How do you equip new leaders to manage change and deliver transformation?
Communication and engagement: How do you keep staff informed, motivated, and involved?
Ultimately, LGR is not just a structural exercise it’s a human one. The success of any reorganisation will depend on how well councils manage the transition for their people.
Certainly, Matthew. Here's an expanded and more detailed version of your section on Disaggregating Staff Across Multiple New Authorities, with added strategic, legal, and operational context:
Disaggregating Staff Across Multiple New Authorities
In areas where more than one unitary authority is proposed, the challenge of staff disaggregation becomes particularly complex. Unlike a single transfer scenario, multi-authority reorganisations require careful, often politically sensitive decisions about who goes where. This process must balance legal compliance, operational continuity, and fairness to staff.
Strategic Staff Allocation: Beyond Geography
While some staff such as those tied to specific locations like schools, libraries, or depots can be assigned based on geography, others present more nuanced challenges:
Corporate services (HR, finance, IT) often serve multiple geographies and may need to be split or centralised.
Senior managers may have cross-cutting responsibilities that don’t map neatly onto new boundaries.
Shared services arrangements may need to be unwound or renegotiated.
Effective disaggregation requires:
Clear mapping of roles and functions: A detailed understanding of who does what, where, and for whom.
Transparent communication with staff and unions: Early and honest engagement to build trust and reduce anxiety.
Accurate employee data: Including job descriptions, reporting lines, service footprints, and contractual terms.
Restructuring and Role Duplication: Legal and Leadership Implications
LGR inevitably leads to role duplication, particularly at senior and middle management levels. This triggers the need for:
Restructuring: Designing new organisational charts that reflect the strategic priorities of the new authorities.
Role creation and revision: Some roles may be newly created to reflect new functions or governance models; others may be revised to align with new service delivery models.
Terms and conditions harmonisation: Aligning pay, benefits, and working arrangements across legacy councils often a politically sensitive and legally complex task.
These changes may qualify as “measures” under TUPE, requiring:
Advance disclosure to employee representatives.
Formal consultation under collective redundancy rules if applicable.
Careful documentation to avoid legal risk.
Failure to meet these obligations can result in:
Protective awards of up to 13 weeks’ pay per affected employee.
Reputational damage and union disputes.
Operational disruption due to staff disengagement or attrition.
Establishing the senior management team early is critical. These leaders will:
Shape the new organisational culture.
Lead change management efforts.
Make complex decisions about selection and pooling, especially where job titles do not reflect actual responsibilities.
Post-Vesting Challenges: The Employment Rights Bill
If changes to terms and conditions are needed after vesting day, and agreement cannot be reached, councils may face additional hurdles under the forthcoming Employment Rights Bill. This legislation aims to restrict the use of dismissal and re-engagement tactics (often called “fire and rehire”), making it harder to impose changes unilaterally.
This underscores the importance of:
Negotiating changes early and in good faith.
Documenting business rationale for any proposed changes.
Exploring alternatives such as voluntary agreements or phased harmonisation.
Contractor Staff Transfers: Procurement and TUPE Risks
LGR also affects contracted services, many of which are delivered by external providers under long-term agreements. Councils must consider:
Whether to bring services in-house, reprocure them, or novate existing contracts.
Whether provider staff are dedicated to the service and therefore eligible for TUPE transfer either to the new unitary authority or to a new provider.
This is particularly complex when:
Services are repackaged across multiple contracts.
Providers operate across multiple geographies.
Contracts include shared service arrangements or joint ventures.
Poor procurement planning can lead to:
TUPE disputes with providers.
Service disruption due to unclear staffing arrangements.
Legal liability for failure to consult or inform affected staff.
Councils should engage early with:
Legal advisors to assess TUPE applicability.
Procurement teams to design compliant and strategic tendering processes.
Providers to ensure continuity and clarity.
Conclusion
Local Government Reorganisation presents a unique opportunity to reshape public service delivery, improve efficiency, and strengthen local leadership. However, its success hinges on how well the transition is managed particularly in relation to staffing.
Clear legal frameworks like TUPE and the Staffing Regulations provide a foundation, but they do not eliminate the complexity involved in transferring, restructuring, and retaining staff. From senior leadership to frontline workers and contractor employees, every role must be considered with care, transparency, and strategic foresight.
Effective workforce planning, early engagement with staff and unions, and robust data management are essential to maintaining service continuity and morale. Councils must also prepare for the legal and operational challenges of disaggregation, redundancy, and harmonisation of terms and conditions especially in light of evolving employment legislation.
Ultimately, the human dimension of LGR is not just a technical exercise it is central to the long-term success of any new unitary authority. Investing in people, communicating clearly, and leading with empathy will be critical to building resilient, high-performing councils that are fit for the future.
