John Lewis Partnership plc Annual Report and Accounts 2014
65 Significant feedback
on the year’s developments In October 2013, the debate on the half- year results was dominated by the recently announced back payment of several years of holiday pay, which was distributed to Partners in August 2013 following a review of the Partnership’s holiday pay policy.
Councillors had been invited to confidential briefings in London at the end of July to understand the background and the Board’s rationale for its decision. They were invited to help shape the approach to communicating the announcement to Partners in August.
At the meeting itself, the Chairman was robustly held to account on holiday pay, both on how the issue was being managed as well as how it had arisen, with a number of Councillors frustrated that their advice on communication appeared not to have been heeded. At the President’s request, a report was prepared for the Council (discussed in detail with the Co-ownership Group and subsequently tabled at the annual conference in November) listing more than 40 separate points where the Council’s advice had indeed led to a change in management’s plans.
In March 2014, Councillors shared their views and challenges on our 2013/14 results with the Chairman and reflecting their thoughts on his leadership of the Partnership. The key debates were: the experience of Partners during a period of significant change – both good and challenging; a focus on IT including the experience of users; our investment – whether it was sufficient and whether we would be market-leading. There was also comment that although our results were good, were they good enough, how did our cash flow link to our ability to live within our means and how can we be agile enough to adapt to changing market conditions. Finally there was a conversation on co-ownership and the dividend this brings for Partners.
Councillors also provided feedback on the first draft proposal for the review of the pension scheme. Councillors really felt the weight of their responsibilities. Their concerns were about communications, to ensure Partners were well informed, understood the assumptions behind the proposal and the other options that might be available. Partners also wanted to know what the impact would be for them personally and they expressed the view that halving of the accrual rate in the defined benefit scheme was too harsh.
The results of the voting on the proposal to support the leadership of the Chairman were:
October 2013: Carried with one abstention
March 2014: Carried with one abstention
The most important decision that the Council could make is to instruct the Trustees to remove the Chairman. Though such a “resolution on the Constitution” has never been passed, it remains the ultimate signal of the Council’s authority.
What were the key decisions that the Council was involved in during
the year? The two more usual areas for Council decision-making are changes to the Constitution’s Principles and Rules, and the election of Directors and trustees.
This year, the Council agreed changes to Rules 25-37 governing other democratic bodies (Divisional Councils, Forums and PartnerVoice) and Rules 82-92, on the role of the Partners’ Counsellor and Registry. These rule changes require a two-thirds majority of all voting members of the Council, namely 44 Councillors. Both changes were passed (two and none voting against respectively).
As a result of the changes proposed to our democratic bodies, the Council also agreed to a three-month extension to the terms of Branch Forums and PartnerVoice, thereby enabling arrangements to be fully in place for 2014 to be a significant year of elections. Divisional councils and Forums move from a two year to a three year term of office, recognising the advantages of greater continuity, whilst PartnerVoice remains a two year term, reflecting the greater Partner turnover at a local level.
Making way for new trustees The retirement of Noel Saunders, Managing Director, John Lewis Stratford City, triggered a by-election in July for an Elected Director of the Partnership Board, for which seven candidates put themselves forward. Each nomination requires the support of three Councillors proposing and seconding, as well as a comprehensive manifesto. Candidates are then invited to join Councillors at their meeting and to take part in hustings, giving short presentations about their suitability. After a 100% turnout in the paper ballot the following day, Kate Brewer, Business Analyst IT Relationships, John Lewis, was elected for the remainder of the three years to 2015.
Later in the year, there was a by-election for a Trustee of the John Spedan Lewis Foundation, which supports environmental research and conservation projects throughout the UK. Where the gap between meetings is long, elections can be held online – and that is what happened here as Ged Keogh-Peters, Head of Returns & Operational Development, John Lewis, was chosen for the remainder of the Council term.
Lastly, during the year under review, the resignation of a Partner created a vacancy on the Pension Trustee Board. The elections were held in March 2014. Two retired Partners, Peter White and Maurice Dunster, were re-elected, and two working Partners were elected – Victoria Wheal, Senior Manager, Public Affairs and Andrew Ingram, Senior Group Insurance Manager.
THE JOHN LEWIS PARTNERSHIP
OUR PERFORMANCE
GOVERNANCE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136