SENIOR members of an Inverclyde Leisure body are in dispute with some of Inverclyde's councillors over plans to reduce how long employees can serve on its board. 

The chief executive and chair of Inverclyde Leisure board want to reduce the period for which a company employee can sit on the board from 36 months to 12 months. 

The senior figures say the change will give more employees the opportunity to become part of the board, which has to have a maximum of nine members at any one time, and share their views. 

Councillor Elizabeth Robertson (Image: Newsquest) Speaking at a recent meeting of the council's education and communities committee, Councillor Elizabeth Robertson said she did not think the change would be a 'good move' and said she was 'not on board' with the idea. 

She added: "I don't think this is a step in the right direction from a governance point of view. 

"One year term being the only representation of voice of employees on the board is a retrograde step.

"More than 30 years' experience on boards tells me it won't work. 

"The first year on a board is a year of learning, so if someone is leaving after that time, I don't think they will have had the chance to have an impact on that board.

"I worry therefore that the voice of employees is never going to be a truly consistent parity of esteem with everyone else. 

"The way to build in the development side of things would be for somebody have the ability to shadow members of the board to attend as an observer. 

"I understand that Inverclyde Leisure wants to have a development opportunity for people, but I think there's a way to do that while still having a member of staff on the board on parity with the rest of the board members.

"I just don’t think one year will make a stronger link.

"I think what they think it’s going to do is not going to achieve. 

"I'm happy to go back and say we're not convinced it's the right course of action, and ask for more on the rationale."

(Image: Newsquest) Councillor Pam Armstrong added: "I am also minded that the employee representative has to be a full meaningful participant on an equal basis with everyone else. 

"That's not possible if they're only there for a year. 

"I understand about wanting employees to be more involved, and that is laudable, but a board member has to be there on an equal basis, and I don’t think that's possible in annual term. 

"I'm hoping Inverclyde Leisure can find other ways of meaningfully involving employees other than reducing the term."

Councillor Tommy McVey highlighted the 'lack of continuity' if a one-year term is introduced, and Councillor Natasha McGuire asked if it would be possible to increase the number of employees on the board. 

Inverclyde Leisure board member Councillor Lynne Quinn said she felt 'conflicted' as she had to look at the situation as a member of the board and an elected member. 

She added: "I understand the reason for the change and I am supportive of the reason for the change. 

"The positive aspect was something I pushed for in relation to gender balance. 

"I wonder if we can we come up with a compromise."

Ruth Binks, corporate director for education, communities, and organisational developments, said: "This is the want of the board to change and they're asking the committee to understand why they've opted to do that. 

"They say it will improve employee connection with the board, and they want more people to have the confidence to come up and stand on the board. 

"As well as having people observing, people will understand more of the workings of the board."

The concerns of members of the committee will be relayed to the Inverclyde Leisure board and discussed at the next meeting.