similar features, suggesting mimicking or copying. The reluctance of disaggregated
service units to use their HR discretions can be related to a number of factors, as
the experience of pay determination illustrates. First, the expertise of local HR
specialists and trade unionists was limited, considering the legacy of centralized pay
determination, which restricted their scope to take advantage of devolution. There
was also inadequate specialist HR capacity and trade union organization at this
level and it is not clear that general managers were always willing to involve HR
specialists or union representatives in employment matters.
Second, many managers were unwilling to exercise their HR discretion because
they believed that local variation would cause more problems that it would resolve.
In NHS trusts and local authorities, employers successfully resisted government
calls to develop local bargaining. They saw little beneWt in implementing a policy
that was opposed by trade unions and which would antagonize the workforce. In
the absence of additional resources ‘to pay for change,’ they were also concerned
about the administrative costs associated with local pay determination and anxious
to avoid the pay ‘leapfrogging’ that might arise in a more ‘balkanized’ pay set-up
(Bach and Winchester 1994 ).
There were also instances where employers were unable to develop local prac-
tices. In the case of the civil service executive agencies, pay devolution remained
heavily constrained by Treasury control over pay mandates, limiting the money
available and how it could be spent. More generally, the issue of political account-
ability placed limits on the risks that service units were prepared to take in the
developments of new HR practices. The OECD ( 1996 : 27 ) noted:
In each of the countries, traditional public sector values of merit, equity, fairness and ethical
behaviour continue to inXuence human resource policies and practices. These values
constrain the risks executives and managers are prepared to take. They remain aware that
their employment policies may become subject to closer public scrutiny than would likely
be applied to a private sectorWrm and that they must not needlessly expose their Minister
or other public oYcial to risk through unacceptable or controversial practices.
- 3 Resource Utilization
The values which the OECD Report suggests continue to underpin HR practice
should not obscure the emphasis on a tighter control of resources, not least staV
costs. There have been workforce reductions across a number of countries,
particularly in central government. Between the mid- 1980 s and 1990 s, employment
in central government fell by around 30 percent in Germany and the UK, by 16
percent in Australia, and by 10 percent in Sweden (Ingraham et al. 2000 : 395 ). These
reductions were clearly eroding the traditional job security of public servants,
particularly when allied to the growth ofWxed-term working associated with the
competitive pressures noted earlier.
480 stephen bach and ian kessler