howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
13 September 2010
18:5470351#1
the title of the thread amounts to the mobile phone bills paid by kent county council in the last financial year.
the taxpayers alliance got this through the freedom of information act and are up in arms, don't forget that landline charges have to be added on too.
they query whether so many staff actually need a mobile telephone and they have expressed doubts that the authority have negotiated the best contracts.
13 September 2010
19:4470352#2
We're all so used to having the arse ripped out of us these days that I dare say we're all a bit numb to such things.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
14 September 2010
06:5370481#3
There must be times when KCC officers are out on site(s), or visiting businesses or organisations and need to call people via mobile phones.
If those officers are calling for reasons related to their job, or rather to allow them to do their job properly, then they would be using a KCC-owned mobile and KCC would pay for their calls.
Doesn't this happen with private industry - using the company-supplied phone ?
I have no idea of course how many of those mobile phone calls would have been private and not work-related.
I'm sure some DDC officers have DDC-supplied mobile phones and would need to use them when out of the office.
Maybe we have become too touchy about costs; I doubt if the majority of these costs is abused.
It is quite a sum though.
Roger
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
14 September 2010
07:0870486#4
My questions ,hopefully, are simple ones. How did the council manage before the era of mobile phones? and what ,if any, detriment or affect on services would be caused by scrapping of mobiles?
£670k goes a long way in paying other workers salaries.
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,931
14 September 2010
09:0570505#5
Some people use their phone just because it is there. I am sure a lot of the calls could be done back in their offices as they would have done before there were mobile phones. I would happily put money on the majority of calls being unnecessary.
I do not believe we have become "too touchy" about costs, wasteful spending deprives those who would make better use of OUR money.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
14 September 2010
09:2170509#6
we should always be wary about freedom of information requests - quite often the answer isnt always well asked and the data translated and also the data is only as good as the info that goes into the accounts system. At a large pharmacetical company i was at the corporate jet was coded to photocopying !!
Been nice knowing you :)
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
14 September 2010
10:0870513#7
And every coiunty cllr has a blackbery they aint cheap
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
14 September 2010
11:1770529#8
If it helps folks to understand, in today's hi-tech world of VOIP, VSAT and mobile telephony for data and voice, it is possible for mobile communicstions to be the cheaper option. It depends how you use the technology.
Mobile telephony also has the advantage over other technologies as it has terrific flexibility, enabling greater efficiency of working and a reduction of costs in other areas.
So, chaps and chappesses, we shouldn't get too excited until we have all the facts.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
14 September 2010
11:2370534#9
SID
Your correct, and i'm sure we will be all interested to know what benefits were obtained from this outlay
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
14 September 2010
11:2570535#10
I'm not sure we ever will Keith. Sometimes it is almost impossible to quantify in monetary terms all the benefits from efficiences brought about by the introduction of technology into a process.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
14 September 2010
11:2670538#11
SID
I do suppose your right
but it is quite an expediture
checks and balances i think is the words you used on other threads
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
14 September 2010
18:1370612#12
There could also be another reason.
It seems to be a trend that many DDC and KCC employees work more from home, instead of in the office and use their council mobiles to conduct their work talking to colleagues who are also probably at home and not in the office.
"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum"
14 September 2010
20:5670671#13
Keith, I am not advocating secrcy at all. Management of mobile services is one element of how I earn my living and so I am fully aware of the tangible and intangible benefits associated with modern technology. However, KCC are a publicly accountable body and should be able to explain why this cost is at the level it is. Perhaps when we have that information we will be able to judge better, rather than conjecturing like old ladies at a bus stop.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
14 September 2010
22:0470700#14
gary
if as you say people work from home more and more, why can they not use their landlines?
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
14 September 2010
22:0570701#15
HOWARD
What a fantastic point
SID
Like many issues we are just forming views
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
15 September 2010
09:0470789#16
Howard, They would have to pay the bill
"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum"
15 September 2010
09:2670798#17
Landline calls are more expensive.
With today's technology a mobile phone can become just another extension on a switchboard, meaning internal calls are free. In addition, using a mobile this way may allow the user to take advantage of network break-out to acheive cheaper long-distance calls too.
Like I say, instead of sarcastically sniping, why not try to get the facts, or is that too much like hard work? A FOI request may do the trick.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
15 September 2010
10:3870821#18
SID;
It's posters expressing an opinion.
not sniping
if someone came back with some answers then all would be fine
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
15 September 2010
10:5670827#19
this gets back to the original post, the taxpayers alliance used the freedom of information act to get the figures.
they are suggesting that the contracts have not been correctly negotiated.
15 September 2010
12:3370861#20
No such thing as incorrectly negotiated contracts Howard. Badly negotiated perhaps, but then that is a subjective view from those not attending the negotiations. Doesn't mean they aren't right of course, but it also doesn't mean they are either.
As I suggested and Keith and you have concurred, the FOI is good route to take to get more info. Better get the facts than offer opinon based on what?