BBBREAKING NEWS!

The big issue coming out of this Briefing is the location issue. UNISON members are already fully aware that the two Bidders (EC Harris and Capita Symonds) for the DRS contract  also in Dialogue Two made a public statement that they will be delivering the services within the borough of Barnet for the life of the10 year contract and beyond.

The evidence is for all Barnet staff to read here on the intranet

Click here to view the EC Harris and Capita Symonds presentations from the Meet the Bidder Days

However at the NSCSO ‘Meet the Bidder briefing’ the response from Capita is that they are unable to answer this question at this stage, the reason being they are about to enter Dialogue Two. Furthermore they are not the ‘preferred bidder’ so until that point (approx 5 month time) they will be unable to answer this question.

I left the briefing with the following questions ringing in my ear “why are they refusing to answer this question, if they can do it for DRS why can they not do the same for NSCSO?”

I wonder what BT have to say this Friday?

If there is one news story I would ask every UNISON to read then it is the story that broke earlier this week about a senior figure working for Goldman Sachs who had his resignation letter published in the New York Times. It is of massive interest is the connection of Goldman Sachs with a number of catastrophic financial failures including the Greek Debt crisis? At a time when we are told that we need to accept the deficit and accept less money, less services, more misery, it appears that the whole financial system has learnt nothing. Please find a number of high profile articles of the subject of Goldman Sachs and their connection with the Greek Debt Crisis.

1. TIME Magazine “ 7 Ways of Seeing Goldman Sachs”

The article in the TIME magazine see link below refers to another article by James Shaft of Reuters argues along similar lines, saying that financial markets don’t operate properly without strict regulation, and that pining for the days when banks took the long view misrepresents the past. It wasn’t because investment banks weren’t publicly traded or that bankers of 40 years ago had more scruples, he argues, but that heavy regulation prevented the kind of excesses that investment banks engage in now.

http://business.time.com/2012/03/16/is-goldman-sachs-guilty-of-nothing-more-than-hardnosed-capitalism/

2. “Goldman Sachs shares slump”

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2115794/Goldman-Sachs-shares-slump-amid-row-Greg-Smith-resignation.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

3. “Goldman Secret Greece Loan Shows Two Sinners as Client Unravels”

According to the article below Goldman Sachs appears to have used a clever financial instrument to disguise the Greek Governments growing debt burden

“As first reported in 2003, Goldman Sachs used a fictitious, historical exchange rate in the swaps to make about 2 percent of Greece’s debt disappear from its national accounts. To repay the 2.8 billion euros it borrowed from the bank, Greece entered into a separate swap contract tied to interest-rate swings.”

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-03-05/goldman-secret-greece-loan-shows-two-sinners-as-client-unravels

4. “Toxic bank Goldman”

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/toxic-bank-goldman-sachs-web-763345

5. Goldman Sachs involved in the Greek debt crisis watch this YouTube clip http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07-hA9DW-Po

Questions:

“In light of this story breaking what should the Regulators do about Goldman Sachs?”

“Should those people who lost out as a result of Goldman Sachs advice now consider putting in a claim for losses from Goldman Sachs?”

Last night I attended a Barnet version of BBC Question time in Woodhouse College, I was on the panel responding to some excellent questions submitted by pupils form Barnet schools

1) Do you think the cuts to youth support services together with youth unemployment in Barnet doubling since 2008 will lead to further youth disengagement and a repeat of the summer riots?

2) Considering the fact that groups such as the Royal College of Nursing and the British Medical Association have withdrawn support for the Health Bill, do you think the Bill should still be pursued and why?

3) Do you think that Livingstone’s pledge to introduce a London EMA is necessary and feasible?

4) To what extent do you believe that reported proposals to privatise parts of the police services will obstruct the course of justice and lead to problems in the relationship between the state and the police?

5) Last week whilst travelling on a bus in Barnet I was attacked because of my postcode, do you think that this is a sign of increasing social tensions between young people and what do you think should be done to address issues of safety on public transport?

 6) With Barnet Council spending £4.6 million on CCTV between 2007 and 2011 – one of the top 10 local authority spenders on CCTV – do you think this is inappropriate in times of such austerity?

7) Considering recent tensions with regards to Baroness Warsi’s claims of ‘militant Atheists’ and a ‘Christian Britain’, do you agree that Michael Goves plan to send a copy of the King James’ Bible to every English school is a waste of money and out-dated? (If you had the opportunity to send one book to all schools in England what would it be?)

8) Considering the u-turns and broken promises that have occurred over the past two years – in particular those concerning tuition fees – do you think that the coalition is an effective and capable government?

At the end of the evening a pupil explained that there was a consistent theme emerging i.e. Budget cuts, privatisation of public services. He asked the panel

“Does this not spell the end of the Capitalist system?”

This is a question that should be on everyone’s lips. How can we carry on with the same financial system that refuses to be regulated and continues to reward banking bonus culture even when they are failing., whilst at the same time the majority of citizens are told to tighten our belts, work more for less and in some case lose your job.

At the same time it appears that Consultants are taking over the running of public services before handing them over to private sector companies who will drain public money to feed the avarice of the shareholders of those companies. If an when they are exposed, they intimidate public sector organisations with their big city lawyers threatening massive penalty pay outs if they dare to question the quality of the delivery of the contract.

This event was a well organised and professional, a tribute to those students who organised it and those students who took part in the event. I think it is safe to say that the future is NOT Orange but very challenging, but, I have confidence that things will have to change, so…..politicians beware!

 

Barnet Council staff have had a visit from EC Harris & Capita Symonds, both of whom were shortlisted through to the next round for the £275 million Development & Regulatory Services (DRS).

Both bidders delivered a presentation to staff and will now be going in confidential discussions with the Council.

In the meantime there have been smaller scale One Barnet outsourcing taking place across the Council. Our branch is currently supporting members who are facing the daunting prospect of being handed a ‘at risk of redundancy’ letters in the first week of their TUPE transfer. In pre-consultation discussions UNISON has learnt that some Council jobs being TUPED to the contractor are  immediately going to be handed over to another subcontractor, all before the contract has even started!

What is really upsetting staff is that senior managers have known about this, months ago!

Any way UNISON members working across DRS services are going to meet up for lunch on Wednesday 14 March to evaluate the presentations delivered by EC Harris and Capita Symonds.

Key message to the Bidders from members – ‘Sign up to TUPE Plus’

TUPE Plus can be viewed here

Over the last few weeks I have attended a number of TUPE meetings with contractors (Barnet Homes and NSL) and tow briefing sessions with EC Harris and Capita Symonds who are bidding for the DRS contract.

A common theme is emerging from these discussions, TUPE. In every meeting I have attended the contractors have been at pains to point out that they will honour TUPE not just for 12 months but for the life of the contract, something which was a key issue in TUPE plus.

Barnet Council rejected TUPE Plus and offered TUPE Commitments instead. However the TUPE commitments are rapidly proving to be, in the words of a UNISON member facing a TUPE transfer ‘not worth the paper there are written on’ a view which was overwhelming supported at the UNISON AGM last week.

We will be asking all of the Bidders to back up their statements and sign up to TUPE PLUS and have put up the details on our web site here

On Wednesday 22 February Housing council workers attended the first TUPE meeting with Barnet Homes and asked the following questions.

1. Is the restructure mentioned in the measures letter dated the 19^th January a measure?  What is the Operations Directorate mentioned in the letter?  If the restructure is a measure presumably the consultation will start once we have been transferred over.

 

2. Are we facing a situation where we could be tupe’d over and face having 30 days notice served on us as there are less than 100 staff in HNR.

If this is the case will we immediately be served with “at risk” letters and will this lead to compulsory redundancies?

 

3. Barnet Homes is funded through Housing Revenue Account and we understand that this cannot be used for HNR staff.  The General Fund money that HNR staff will be being transferred with – is this ring fenced just for general fund activities i.e. not related to Council Tenants.  If so how do you propose to demonstrate that this money is being used solely for this purpose?

 

4. We understand that there is a time pressure on saving money due to the reduction in the budget.  As part of the natural wastage we keep hearing about will there be voluntary redundancies allowed?  Will you also be looking at other ways to save money other than reductions in staff which will have a direct impact on our already struggling service?

 

5. If jobs are to be downgraded how will you consult on this and how long will grades be protected?

 

6. How long is the existing Barnet Homes contact with Barnet Council and how much of that contact is outstanding as an ALMO?  Is it likely to be renewed as an ALMO?  If not what status does Barnet Homes have outside the LATC? 

 

7. Capita are applying for some contracts – is there a relationship between Barnet Homes and Capita.

 

8. Data is being delivered to find out how many posts will go into the Call Centre.  Will posts be going from Barnet Homes and HNR as a collective into the call centre?

 

9. Can staff be TUPE’d across from Barnet Homes into the LATC? 

 

 

Project X was one of the action to be completed on the last day of One Barnet strike action on Thursday 9 February.

Letters were sent to 6 Big private sector companies

The letters were signed by staff currently working in services which are down to be outsourced early 2013.

This is what was in the letter

Dear Chief Executive

We are employees for the London Borough of Barnet providing services which your company is interested in taking over. We are currently in dispute with our employer, London Borough of Barnet, as we wish to remain working for the authority and to be based in Barnet.

We want to take this opportunity on the fourth day of strike action to pass on this message that staff want to remain employees of Barnet Council. This is not a reflection of the way we view your business. We hope that you will take our position into consideration in your ongoing discussions with Barnet Council.

Yours sincerely,

John Burgess

Branch Secretary

Barnet UNISON

Proof of delivery to

Serco,

BT,

Capita,

FM Conway,

EC Harris,

HCL Axon (consortium)

*** UPDATE since we delivered the letters, the Council annouced yesterday that BT & Capita were selected to go through to the next round and Serco and HCL Axon (consortium) were unsuccessful.

 

 

 

 

Barnet UNISON have invited Edinburgh UNISON down to speak at our AGM on Thursday 1 March.

Edinburgh Council also have been through massively expensive Competitive Dialogue using expensive consultants and had even named the contractor to take on the 2,000 council workers, when at the eleventh hour, councillors across the political divide woke up and smelt the coffee and reversed the decision. Read the article here

Below are Ten reasons why City of Edinburgh Councillors should oppose privatisation (and they did)

1 – Privatisation doesn’t work. From fatal accidents on unsafe railways, and deaths from hospital infections to the soar away bills of energy companies. Private companies put profit before people, cutting corners and selling the tax payer short.

2 – If private companies are so wise with money why do so many go bust? The residents in Southern Cross care homes have had an anxious year praying that the spectacular demise of the profligate care company doesn’t leave them on the streets. Edinburgh’s preferred bidder for environmental services has only just been rescued from £740 million debt by the intervention of a consortium of banks. Privatisation is laden with risk.

 

3 – Once their feet are under the table, private companies drive up costs. Another Edinburgh bidder, BT, just agreed to refund £27 million to the people of Liverpool after a report found they were massively overcharging the local council.

 

4 – Managing commercial contracts is an art that takes skill to master. We don’t have to remind people of the tram fiasco in Edinburgh, but a recent Audit Scotland report indicated the council still lacks the ability to manage large commercial contracts. We need another tram fiasco like a hole in the head!

 

5 – Along with worries for service users, privatisation brings fear to the workforce. Fear of job losses and fear of pay cuts. Two hundred jobs will go if councillors vote for privatisation on Thursday and the pension scheme will close its door on new employees. The beginning of the end for decent pensions in the capital.

 

6 – Not all private companies are the same but two companies who progressed during the Edinburgh bidding process were caught concealing the fact they had been prosecuted and convicted for unsafe practices which led to workplace deaths. The public sector works to higher standards of safety and integrity.

 

7 – Privatisation plans are hidden behind a veil of secrecy. All the key documents for Edinburgh privatisation are locked in a “data room” away from public scrutiny. Even the MORI report on local attitudes to privatisation is secret. Apparently the views of the people might prejudice the position of the council. We need to preserve openness and transparency in local government.

 

8 – Local service providers should be accountable to elected councillors not shareholders. Neither the Liberal Democrats nor the SNP were elected with a mandate for privatisation yet they could tie the council to a private contract for twelve years. It will be the private contract and not newly elected councillors which will determine how services are provided. Why bother voting in the next three elections? Privatisation undermines local democracy.

 

9 – In addition to having no mandate from the electorate, the council in Edinburgh never went to the public to explain their plans. There has been no public consultation. Council services belong to the people. They have a right to have their say. They have a right to be heard.

 

10 – With the exception of a few failed bankers, the council’s money problems were not caused by the people of Edinburgh. They certainly were not caused by the workers. No street sweeper brought the country to its knees by gambling with the nation’s wealth. Why should we pay with the loss of jobs and services?

These are just the top ten reasons to oppose privatisation. There are many more. If Edinburgh goes private council services across Scotland will be at risk. We ask people to join us in a simple message – Scotland wants services based on public need, not private greed

Barnet UNISON Press release: 07 February 2012

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

 

On Thursday 9 February hundreds of *UNISON members working for Barnet Council will be taking strike action.

A decision has been made that a team of UNISON strikers will leave the pickets lines to donate their labour to the ‘Larches Community’ a local Charity in Edgware which provides services for adults with Learning Difficulties. Our members are committed public servants and have this to say

“We have withdrawn our labour from the Council but we have not withdrawn our commitment to our community which is why a team of UNISON strikers is heading off to donate their labour to help out a local charity providing services for adults with learning difficulties in Barnet!”

What is happening in Barnet is what is likely to happen across NHS services as Private Sector companies fight to win lucrative guaranteed contracts, all funded by the tax payer.

For many of our members this will be the fourth day of action in response to the One Barnet Project which seeks to transfer the majority of the staff out of the Council. The total cost of these projects will look to exceed £2Billion which is why the Big Private Sector Fat Cats are all lined up to try and win the contracts!

John Burgess Barnet UNISON Branch Secretary said

“Doing nothing is not an option for our members. I am proud of our members for taking what is always a difficult decision to go on strike. Furthermore their decision to want to go an help out a local charity demonstrates their commitment to their community. I am asking the Leader of the Council to donate all strike pay deductions to be donated to the Mayors Charities.

Barnet UNISON is asking for the One Barnet programme to be put on hold.

 

 

* Council services taking action will be in the following Trading Standards & Licensing, Land Charges, Planning & Development, Building Control & Structures, Environmental Health, Highways Strategy, Highways Network Management, Highways Traffic & Development, Highways Transport & Regeneration, Strategic Planning & Regeneration, Cemeteries & Crematoria; Parking Services, Revs & Bens, Social Care Direct

 

End.

 

Contact: John Burgess Barnet UNISON on 07738389569 or email: john.burgess@barnetunison.org.uk

 

Useful Links

 

1. UNISON strikers donate their Labor to local charity

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GQN8q0nQms

 

2. List of Private Sector contractors involving in the bidding process

 

• Capita Symonds
• EC Harris and FM Conway
• SERCO,
• Capita,
• BT,
• HCL Axon
• NSL

 

 

3. UNISON response to transfer of Housing workers out of the Council

http://www.barnetunison.me.uk/?q=node/749

 

4. UNISON response to transfer of social care staff out of the council

http://www.barnetunison.me.uk/?q=node/750

 

5. UNISON response to transfer of Parking staff to NSL

http://www.barnetunison.me.uk/sites/default/files/2011.12.13.UNISONPARKINGresponsetoCRC.pdf

 

 

To view our full report click here

Questions to the Cabinet Resources Committee on the Local Authority Trading Company: Privatising Adults and Housing Services.
1) If the LATC fails to make the profits outlined but makes losses instead will the Council bring the services back in-house?
2) The council wholly owns the LATC. What is the logic of extracting a “profit” from payments it makes and which now incur tax liabilities?
3) How does the drive for the LATC deriving profits from Direct Payments influence the level at which Direct Payments are set?
4) P.25 6.32 “The LATC should charge full market value for the goods or services it provides to the Council given that its tax liability will be based on the market value for such goods/ services.” What effect could this have on the level of Direct Payments issued to service users?
5) In the table 3 p.23 6.15 many of the amounts remain constant over the period of 4 years – is this realistic?
6) If surpluses are liable to Corporation Tax, why is this not reflected in the table?
7) At p.43 2.4 shouldn’t the cumulative figure in the table for year 3 and year 4 be a loss and not a profit? If no, why not?
8) P.64 7.1 Why does this not reflect the profit after tax?
9) Where does the figure of £49 million come from for the BarnetGroup Ltd p.32
9.18 and why is this not reflected in the table p.64 at 7.1 for the Barnet Group?
10) P.16 4.3 “The BarnetGroup Ltd could offset any corporation tax liability with additional trading activities” – what are the additional trading activities?
11) Which services are at risk of coming under a decision to close by April 2013 if they are not viable (p.51 table under 3.17.4)?
12) In the table listing risks p.50-51 there are no strategic risks lists, such as market penetration – what is being done to come up with a list of such risks and
the planned mitigation?
13) Where is the cost reduction programme referred to in the box against “Your Choice” (p.51 table)?
14) P.67 table at 1.1.5 identifies clients with no SWIFT ID – what are the business risks resulting from this?
15) From where will the group and its subsidiaries obtain working capital and where is the cost of this working capital?
Governance and TUPE
16) p.52 3.19.5 makes mention of a Barnet Group Procurement Officer. Who employs this person if BarnetGroup Ltd has no employees?
17) Who is the employer the Chief Executive Tracey Lees?
18) Remuneration has become a national issue therefore, what is the Governance arrangement for determining the remuneration of the Chief Executive and Directors?
Consultation
19) There is mention of unit costs in day services equating to one half day rather than one day. What are the plans for consultation with service users and their
carers with respect to this?
20) There is mention of moving to opening 7 days/ week and extending the opening times. What are the plans for consultation with staff, service users and carers with respect to this?