Forum Topic

Last person to leave - please turn the lights out

One thousand vulnerability to redundancy notices are to be issued to staff at Hounslow Council next Tuesday - will the last person to leave the Civic Centre please turn out the lights. Amazed is not the phrase I'd use - no doubt 'culture change' is some sort of euphemism for cock-up in this brave new Tory/ICG fantasy land.

Vanessa Smith ● 6378d33 Comments

Please remind me what I have voted for oh wise one?

Paul Fisher ● 6373d

Yea right and just what have you voted for...is your memory failing you as well as reading and hearing.

Dave Hughes ● 6373d

Oh yes how I remember those days of the Council Tax going up year after year after year with no regard to those who had to pay it.John Aird House and The Isleworth Day Centre being closed down,no Council Scrutiny,jobs for the boys and men of your intelligence in charge...........Oh what happy days!!

Paul Fisher ● 6373d

I off to get the locals and see what they have done to Hounslow this week...we once had a great town with loads of facilities and adult education that was second to none...

Dave Hughes ● 6373d

It will be a long long time before we get any answers from those who should be anwerable...so while we wait here some music

Dave Hughes ● 6373d

Could not agree more...look at the Heston residents who did not get a new swimming pool due to the Tory/ICG in-competance..now they will have to swim in a pool that will only remain open as long as the pumps still work and pay more for the privillage, I am sure that will be more gin & tonics in the Tory office as they make residents pay more and more for less and less...

Dave Hughes ● 6373d

Hit the nail on the head Sue, and with today's news about the demise of CIP - I wonder if any of the brains who are busy dreaming all this up have given any thought to the managers who are on the contract monitoring side and who have had their vulnerability to redundancy notices this week? Trees and grounds maintenance to name but two areas. I would think privatisation would mean more close monitoring not less, and of course privatisation only means profit. I cannot think that residents will derive any benefit, I wonder how many people will be able to afford to go swimming in this brave new world for instance? I really fear for our library services. Consultants by and large do not understand the difference between the public sector and the private, hence the crass and crude methodology they use.

Vanessa Smith ● 6373d

I suppose whether this works or not really depends on whether the Councillors have any understanding at all of what the vast majority of staff actually do. Having worked in Local Governent, it wouldn't surprise me if KPMG haven't said omething along the lines of - "1000 frontline staff, one supervisor to every 10 staff gives 100 supervisors, 1 senior supervisor to every ten supervisors gives 10 senior supervisors. One senior, senior supervisor to every 10 senior supervisors gives one, top, senior senior supervisor. Nice flat structure with 1111 staff". Would probably work in a factory where you've got lots of people doing the same job and you have the right numbers of frontline staff to deliver the product. Won't work in Local Government where you have small numbers of staff delivering very widely varying services. My experience of local government is that, contrary to popular belief, they are invariably under-resourced and have a myriad of duties and responsibilities foisted onto them by Central Government without the accompanying funding to deliver the duty. Managers therefore are rarely just managing but having to carry a fair share of delivering the service. Cutting out management layers just reduces service delivery.The trouble is that cutting jobs gives good financial savings that look attractive to politicians who very often have no experience of running a major business and don't understand the impact of their cuts, and their highly paid consultants will fill their heads with management speak and the latest jargon to convince the members of the immense value of their investigations. Throw in a bit of male testosterone " we went in there and we weren't afraid to cut jobs" and you have a recipe for disaster.  

Sue Thornton ● 6373d

"What about the Council Tax payers..don't we have a say?"  Well yes you do, as a voter,you are part of the voting union called an Electorate. On a good day,with a following wind,basically we get what we want. (some are disappointed but learn to live with it,some don't)  If the Council workers weren't in a union they'd have to air any grievances/pay rises etc. individually,I doubt that much notice would be taken,in the same way that an individual voter complaining to a councillor/MP doesn't hold much sway.  Personally I can't see an option to unions,there was a time before unions,when I have to say the "Ruling Classes" didn't (IMHO) do a very good job,and that's putting it mildly!  It was the poor working/pay conditions that gave rise to the unions in the form of the Chartists.  I'm sorry but even under the Labour party the wealth divide has got cavernous and growing at an alarming rate,that can't be good for anyone except the already rich.  A quick Google will turn up any number of references to the growing wealth divide...here's just one I Googled earlier:http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/jan/21/highstreetretailers.retailI can't help thinking that your estimate of a £40 million saving,might be a bit on the optimistic side,the income from council tax is only (he says!) £92 million,it'll be a stupendous job if they can pull it off.

Tony Wood ● 6374d

Duh?

Steve Taylor ● 6374d

Is KMPG responcible for the forms and the findings!!!

Dave Hughes ● 6374d

Well that sums it up doesn't it?  If staff couldn't be bothered to fill in their response forms with due diligence and 'just put anything down'  its no wonder the new administration believes the workforce  needs a good overhaul and culture change.

Steve Taylor ● 6374d

When in doubt make it up...Councillor Peter Carey as Chairman of the Overview and Scruting Committee to Councillors Thompson and McGregor stating:  'We are concerned that for some of the business cases the statistics, facts, methodology and responses of staff are basically flawed. Managers in the focus groups said that asfar as the time allocation statistics were concerned they had "put anything down, just to get them done." And yet these responses in your report are considered as gospel'.

Dave Hughes ● 6374d

Read 'Private Eye' when ne'er an edition goes by without some terrible tale of 'consultants' right royally cocking things up for some local authority, horrifying.

Vanessa Smith ● 6375d

""HOUNSLOW JOINT TRADE UNIONSPROTECTING JOBS AND SERVICES IN HOUNSLOW""What about the Council Tax payers..don't we have a say?It's staggering that there could be savings of £10,000,000,let alone £40,000,000...EACH YEAR!!Get real I say to the Unions..and stop encouraging the waste of our hard earned money to support your "Spanish Customs" and unco-operative stances...which would have been supported by the ideology of the Previous Administration.Whistleblowers needed!

Jim Lawes ● 6376d

KPMG. The last words in sound advice. The local taxpayers can be reassured that our leaders have placed their faith in them. Or maybe not, do a simple google search on 'KPMG and scandal' and count the fines and settlement monies KPMG have doled out.Certainly reasuring to be fired on the advice of such a company.

Ken Collins ● 6376d

I half agree with Vanessa, and John Connelly, when they say that I should defend the actions of the present administration rather than delving into history.  If we get it wrong, it would be no defence I agree just to protest that the old administration was crap as well.  I am up for that challenge.However, no matter how much they might like it to be so the fact cannot simply be ignored that not only was it the totally avoidable actions of the previous incumbents which led to their demise, but also that it is their current, also avoidable actions which keep the present administration which they profess to believe is such a threat to world peace in office.  They can close their eyes, hold their hands over their ears or dig a big hole and stick their heads in it, but this fact remains a fact all the same!I find it beyond belief that Vanessa seems to think it has not occurred to anybody to examine all the proposals emanating from KMPG to ensure that they will actually work.  I can tell her that I have spent many a day which I would rather have spent elsewhere doing just that, in the company of members and officers whose expertise and advice has been crucial in helping to identify just what is and is not feasible.  There have been many suggestions rejected, many others have been sent back to the drawing board for the case to be made.  At the end of the day we need to have an organisation which functions, and functions well.  But I thank her all the same for bringing to my attention what Basil Fawlty would have described as "the bleeding obvious", just in case.Each year for as long as I remember Borough Council has had to slice away at our services to hit an acceptable level of Council Tax increase, whatever that acceptable level is perceived to be.  This happened under New Labour administrations as well as under the current one, whatever Vanessa, John or anybody else would have forum users believe.  This doesn't cease to be a fact just because those who were responsible plead for it not to be discussed.I don't feel I have to justify, far less apologise for, a project which will help us to put an end to that debilitating process.  The protestations I am hearing seem to emanate in the main from those who have the most to lose from an initiative which will reduce backroom costs in preference to repeatedly targeting frontline services.

Phil Andrews ● 6376d

No, not really, Andrew  :-)People go to cast a vote for somebody - if there were a system to go and vote to get somebody out - there would be a much higher turn out, methinks.  Look at the number of 'no shows' at election time.

Sarah Felstead ● 6377d

"Also, this business about counting 'points' against Vanessa at every given opportunity - she wasn't voted out, it is just that others were voted in".Same meat.......different gravy!!!!!!!!!!!

Account suspended ● 6377d

Thanks for clarifying Sarah - all understood now.

Steve Taylor ● 6377d

Sorry, Phil's reply was strange considering the position he holds within the Council and that this is a very important subject.  Everyone is affected either because they have a family member working within or because it is our tax money and the management of our investments in the civic structure being banded about.Also, this business about counting 'points' against Vanessa at every given opportunity - she wasn't voted out, it is just that others were voted in.

Sarah Felstead ● 6377d

"That was a strange reply, Phil."Which one? Phil's or Vanessa's?

Steve Taylor ● 6377d

That was a strange reply, Phil.

Sarah Felstead ● 6377d

"I imagine it is simply 300 employees x average £13,333 annual salary"I am still confused about the £40 million saving. £13,333 @ 300 = ?? What about the missing £36million?

Steve Taylor ● 6377d

For once, instead of falling back on sarcasm and just being a general all round clever dick, why don't you address these very serious issues? People aren't particularly interested in constant rambles down your version of memory lane, have you any idea how these proposals are going to work regarding service delivery? There does seem to be a reluctance to say anything at all either by way of justification or explanation.

Vanessa Smith ● 6377d

I imagine it is simply 300 employees x average £13,333 annual salary.Vanessa are you implying that KPMG aren't up for the job - it is them doing the assessment and making the recommendations to the council decision makers about what positions, what departments etc. - that is what the £4M is for - which is a pittance compared to the savings.In an organisation this size most will be taken up by voluntary redundancy. Remeber circa 15 years ago when BT said it was shedding 36,000 jobs? Most went that way (voluntarily) despite the rather alarming number involved.And an organisation like KPMG are bought in as an independent - the parties can't even agree on things in this forum, let alone on decisions affecting the workings of the very organisation. No that is best kept at some distance, recommendations made and acted upon. Then completely unbiased outcomes prevail.I look forward to the savings on my council tax - but why do I suspect a) that won't happen, and b) that statement will become fuel to dump on the council some more.

Stephen Browne ● 6377d

"The joint Trade Unions are alarmed and concerned at the effect these cuts, totalling £40 Million" Is there a breakdown of the £40 Million available anywhere?

Steve Taylor ● 6377d

Thanks for the explanation - its indeed food for thought

Steve Taylor ● 6377d

Unison, Unite and the GMB  has issued the following statement:Performance Improvement ProgrammeHounslow Council has issued formal notice to the joint Trade Unions that 300 posts are to be axed by way of redundancy, beginning in March 2008. Further redundancies are likely to follow as the Council progresses the Performance Improvement Programme.The joint Trade Unions are alarmed and concerned at the effect these cuts, totalling £40 Million, will have both on the workforce and the residents of Hounslow.  The Joint Trade Unions are equally concerned that the Council is willing to spend £4 million of council taxpayers money to employ KPMG as consultants for the programme.During the next few weeks the Joint Trade Unions will be meeting with management to discuss the proposals in more detail.In the meantime we have given notice to the Council that;We are opposed to any compulsory redundancies. We are opposed to cuts that will lead to the deterioration of services and delivery within the council. We are opposed to any deterioration of staff pay or terms and conditions of employment. We are concerned that a programme of redundancies will put a strain on the Pension fund for staff. HOUNSLOW JOINT TRADE UNIONSPROTECTING JOBS AND SERVICES IN HOUNSLOWhttp://www.unisonhounslow.co.uk/index.htmlJL

Jim Linwood ● 6377d

SteveWe are sacking everybody at the Civic Centre and selling the building for private development - it says so on the Labour Party forum!With regard to Vanessa's closing comments, I can only defer to her superior wit, wisdom, intelligence and ability as acknowledged by thousands of local voters.Sorry I forgot - they got it all wrong and didn't know what they were doing, did they?

Phil Andrews ● 6377d

It is what it says, that your post is vulnerable to redundancy, it is believed that the powers that be have a number of jobs in mind to go, rumoured to be just over 120 at the moment. Basic redundancy packages will be offered and people can apply for them, this of course means that services could be severely affected if a load of people in one or two sections were to apply, unless the plan is to see who applies but not let them go if it messes things up too much?? In which case shouldn't KPMG know what the implications for service delivery would be and investigated other cost savings instead of just getting rid of staff? One would think that being paid in excess of £3m and having been around for sometime now that KPMG could have identified any dead wood or over managed areas and concentrated on them, this seems to be a bit of 'casting a net and seeing what you catch in it' excercise. The other danger is that once positions go they will not be replaced, it seems our leaders haven't the wit nor concern to think about the consequences of what they are embarking on . Morale is at rock bottom as staff have had this threat hanging over them since before Christmas. Prepare to be amazed indeed!

Vanessa Smith ● 6377d

Excuse my ignorance,  but what is a "vulnerability to redundancy notice"  We don't use that term in the private sector (as far as I am aware)  so I'd be interested to know what its implications are

Steve Taylor ● 6377d

One thousand? That's a thousand ruined family evenings next Tuesday. That'll do wonders for the Councillor /Officer relationship. Just what qualifications and abilities do our Councillors have to be able to make decisions on people's lives like that?If I was an officer working at Hounslow who didn't get a redundancy notice, then I think I'd be looking for a new job elsewhere as the amtmosphere there must be awful. And believe me, the word will get round in local government circles and no-one will want to come to work for a Borough like that. Still I'm sure that's all been thought through by the Administration with their increased allowances and KPMG with their huge fees.

Sue Thornton ● 6377d