On Wednesday 17 August UNISON members working in Parking Service begin working to rule.

This is part of a Trades Dispute called the ‘identity of the employer’ as Barnet is seeking a private sector contractor to run Parking services in the future.

Many of our members have previous experience of working for a Parking private sector contractor. They have given me a shocking reports on how parking private contractors bully & harass staff issue to as many parking tickets as possible; which is bad news for motorists, what could this mean for Barnet residents?

I decided to have a look at the issue of parking ticket quota’s in Barnet.  

I first had a look at Barnet Councils web site to see what message they have for residents.

It says this

“We do not link numbers of penalties issued with pay or any other incentives. There are no “targets” for the number of tickets a Civil Enforcement Officer must issue. We simply require that our Officers, when on duty, issues penalties to vehicles observed in contravention.”

Well I think that is very clear, no quotas and no incentives.

I conducted an anonymous questionnaire with our members and I heard some alarming reports.

I was told that there are no quota’s (good news residents!) but there are ticket expectations (oops!)

Apparently each enforcement officer has to reach a target of 12 Parking tickets a shift. I am also led to believe that we are employing 10 Agency workers who are bringing in on average 30+ parking tickets a shift. This is a significant number of parking tickets.

This is a serious amount of tickets and a significant amount of fines.

 I was concerned because I remembered reading something about Signs and Lines in the business case which the Council produced to outsource the Parking Service.

Sign & Lines and issuing tickets

In, paragraph 1.3 of the Councils business case continues it states: 

“Effective enforcement relies on the controls being effectively signed, and it proposed that the provider undertake a full assessment of the signs and lines and provide a priced proposal to upgrade them to an acceptable standard.” 

This appears to be an explicit admission that the signs and lines are not currently maintained to an acceptable standard.  It is my understanding that the Council are legally required to maintain traffic signs and road markings in accordance with the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions (TSRGD).  When applying to commence Civil Enforcement, Authorities are required to confirm that 

“…all Traffic Regulation Orders (TROs), traffic signs and road markings are in compliance with legal requirements and the traffic signs and road markings are consonant with the orders” (para 17). 

Although not explicitly stated, it follows that this compliance needs to continue after commencement of Civil Enforcement.  Given that the Council considers the signs and lines are not maintained to an acceptable standard, it’s appears enforcement activity would appear to be in conflict the requirements of the Statutory Guidance, and also with Annex D of the operational guidance, specifically:

“All local authorities are responsible for the accuracy and condition of the traffic signs and road markings that identify parking restrictions in their area. The traffic signs and road markings must conform strictly to the relevant regulations (currently the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002 – TSRGD – and subsequent amendments) or have special authorisation from DfT. They should also conform to the guidance set out in Chapters 3 and 5 of the Traffic Signs Manual.” (para D1)

“PCNs may not be valid if they are issued where traffic signs and road markings are incorrect or in poor condition. Representations demonstrating this should be accepted. If such representations are not accepted, any subsequent appeal may be successful….” (para D2)

In light of the above I was seriously concerned on behalf of my members that I decided to write to the senior officer responsible for Parking. I specifically asked that he give me an assurance that there are no ticket expectations for civil enforcement officers and no pressure on them to issue tickets where the ‘traffic signs and road markings are incorrect or in poor condition’.

I will report back to my members after I receive a response back from the senior officer responsible.

Overtime

This was issue was raised by members; I was told that if they did not issue enough ‘parking expectations’ they would not get any overtime. The Council web site is clear on this matter ‘We do not link numbers of penalties issued with pay or any other incentives’

I am chasing this matter up and will report back to my members when I hear back from the senior officer responsible.

I note in a Local Blog that Barnet plan to abolish Pay & Display machines read post here 

http://barneteye.blogspot.com/2011/08/brian-coleman-sneaks-through-cashless.html

Privatisation is all the rage in central government as they swing the axe at public services, with budget cuts, the Localism Bill and the Open Public White Paper.  But the failures of outsourcing are becoming more obvious in local government and new research for UNISON by APSE highlights eight detailed case studies where councils have taken services back in-house to make them better and cheaper.

 “Insourcing update: The value of returning local authority services in-house in an era of budget constraints” sets out the financial advantages of “insourcing”, to help branches oppose privatisation proposals and build a case for current outsourcings to be brought to an end.  It also gives a step-by-step guide to taking services back in-house.

Survey results in the report show that the case studies are not isolated examples.  60% of council officers surveyed said the need to improve efficiency and reduce service costs had led them to consider bringing services back in-house. After cost, 44% of respondents said there was a need to improve service quality.

 

The financial benefit obviously depends on the size of the service involved, but 13% of respondents expected savings of up to £25,000 a year.  A further 8% reported savings of up to £250,000, 6% said £500,000 and 5% said £1 million could be saved per year.  Other advantages of insourcing included flexibility (64% of respondents), greater local responsibility (52%), improved staff morale (33%) and better terms and conditions (25%).

 

This publication builds on research in 2009 which highlighted 50 examples of councils’ insourcing services (see www.apse.org.uk/page-flips/2011/insourcing/files/in-sourcing.pdf).

 

You can read the report online here

 

Dear Colleagues

It has come to our attention that the Councils attempts to break the action short of strike have been escalated. The Council is seeking staff in Revs & Bens to break the strike by coming in to work overtime this Saturday. Any staff working overtime are being asked to sign this statement

 

“Overtime Proforma

In agreeing to work overtime on Saturday 13 August 2011, I understand that this means I am giving notice that I no longer intend to participate in the industrial action outlined in the notification of my Trade Union to (Unison) to LBB on 9 June 2011 and which started on 16 June 2011. 

 

For the sake of clarity this means I will agree to work overtime and amend my hours of attendance (subject to any personal commitments) as I did prior to the current period of industrial action, and I will agree to attend meetings and/or undertake work related to the One Barnet project.”

 

This crass attempt to undermine the actions of our members in Revs & Bens is unacceptable and more evidence as to why members across all the balloted services have called for strike action in September.

 

We are organising pickets lines for this Saturday, if you can help please contact the UNISON office on 0208 359 2088 or email contactus@barnetunison.org.uk

 

Help to build to build for strike action on Barnet Independence Day 13 September.

 

Best wishes

John Burgess

Branch Secretary.

Barnet UNISON

Standing up for staff and public services

Not for onward transmission in whole or part without permission

Barnet Council made plans late this week to use agency workers to break the work to rule being taken by UNISON members in Revs and Bens.

Initial estimates were that up to 40 agency workers would be paid to come in on Saturday morning.

I can report no agency workers turned up today.

Well done to our members by responding so quickly and a big thanks to Barnet Alliance who also came along.

13 September

Barnet Independence Day

View here 

Barnet UNISON members working in the following areas:

Trading Standards & Licensing, Land Charges, Planning & Development, Building Control & Structures, Registration (Births, Deaths & Marriages) Environmental Health, Highways Strategy, Highways Network Management, Highways Traffic & Development, Highways Transport & Regeneration, Strategic Planning & Regeneration, Cemeteries & Crematoria;, Parking Services, Revs & Bens,

have informed the branch through a number of workplaces meetings that they wish to escalate the action. They do not believe the Council is taking the Trades Dispute seriously.

Members have therefore requested that a programme of strike action be agreed to take place over the next few months.

They have asked that the first wave of action to take place on Tuesday 13 September which will be now known as ‘Barnet Independence Day’

Further details of the action will be discussed with members in due course.

* If the Council provides a meaningful proposal to the Trades Dispute we will consider postponing the action whilst we consult with our members.

Keep Public Services Public

Southampton workers taking the lead in the fight back

To view click

ENTER

 

Dear Councillors

I understand that August is the time for you all to take a break.

I am enclosing some potential summer holiday reading material.

It is a report published by the Public Administration Select Committee (PASC) entitled ‘Public Administration Committee – Twelfth Report  Government and IT- “A Recipe For Rip-Offs”:

The report was discussed on the BBC Today programme yesterday I was struck by the comment made by Conservative chair of the committee Bernard Jenkin MP speaking on the Today Programme

 

“The Government has said that it is overly reliant on an “oligopoly” of suppliers; some witnesses went further and described the situation as a ‘cartel.’ Whatever we call the situation it has led to an inexcusable situation that sees governments waste an obscene amount of public money.”

 

“Committee chairman, Conservative MP Bernard Jenkin, said that according to some sources, the government had paid contractors between seven and 10 times more than the standard rate.”

 

“The last Labour government spent £16bn in IT projects in 2009.”

 

“It warned: “The lack of IT skills in government and over-reliance on contracting out is a fundamental problem which has been described as a ‘recipe for rip-offs’.”

 

“IT procurement has too often resulted in late, over-budget IT systems that are not fit for purpose.”

 UNISON is not alone in making the parallels with the One Barnet programme where Council services are being bundled together in order they are delivered by a big multinational organisations some of whom are likely to be providing services to government. I am sure expensive consultants were brought into advise politicians that contracts with the ‘big boys’ would deliver innovation, efficiency and improves services.; this independent report clearly proves otherwise. Paying ten times the going rate is inexcusable, but you have to ask yourself how did this happen and why was it not picked up? These companies knew what going on but appear to have no scruples about taking extortionate amounts of public money at a time when the public services are having to make massive cuts.

Enjoy the break 

Best wishes

John Burgess

Branch Secretary.

Barnet UNISON

Standing up for staff and public services

Not for onward transmission in whole or part without permission

Yesterday the Government Public Administration Select Committee (PASC) published this report the title of the report (their words not mine!)

“Government and IT- “A Recipe For Rip-Offs”:

Here are a few quotes from the report

One of the report’s recurring themes is the dominance of Government IT by a small number of large companies.

Bernard Jenkin commented:

“The Government has said that it is overly reliant on an “oligopoly” of suppliers; some witnesses went further and described the situation as a ‘cartel.’ Whatever we call the situation it has led to an inexcusable situation that sees governments waste an obscene amount of public money.”

“Committee chairman, Conservative MP Bernard Jenkin, said that according to some sources, the government had paid contractors between seven and 10 times more than the standard rate.”

“The last Labour government spent £16bn in IT projects in 2009.”

 “It warned: “The lack of IT skills in government and over-reliance on contracting out is a fundamental problem which has been described as a ‘recipe for rip-offs’.”

“IT procurement has too often resulted in late, over-budget IT systems that are not fit for purpose.”

You can read the damning report here

You really could not make it up!

To sum up the report the government has been ripped off by the private sector (what a surprise!)

M They have placed contracts worth £16billion a year in the hand of the ‘Big Boys’ (please take note Barnet Homes!)

M They have been paying 10 times the going rate for the work (Please take note One Barnet fans).

M Poor Procurement often resulted in late, over-budget IT systems that are not fit for purpose (please take note One Barnet fans).

£16 billion a year. Incredible, remember that figure when your pension is being attacked or your job is threatened by cuts to funding or privatisation. How can politicians stand up in front of cameras; when they can’t put their own house in order!

If the above report is true we are the tax payer are paying to line the pockets of the private sector and at the same time being asked to take a cuts to our pensions, redundancy or cuts to our terms and conditions.

Speaking on the Today Programme the committee’s chair Bernard Jenkin said the Government have outsourced too many IT projects and that there has been “too cosy” a relationship with big IT firms

One Barnet programme is systematically bundling up Council services and putting out to the market to deliver them.

If someone would like to explain why One Barnet is different to the above please send in your response and UNISON will publish.

The Pensions war is ongoing and there is a lot of disinformation coming from the media.

UNISON have published an excellent briefing for members.

To view click here