• The post you are reporting:
   
  But it does work and is far more benificial for everyone, except for shareholders making cash from the essential provision of young people. If these facilities (and I extend that to other public services) can be run efficiently by a private contractor making a profit, then they can be run efficiently by the school (or state in the broader sense)
  
  My mum is a dinner lady at a large school in Dover. The school went through a number of contracts with many external companies. However it was apparent that these contractors where always cutting corners (quality of produce etc) also opening of the canteen or catering facilites for development days or special events had to be nogotiated, as many things in schools (not always foreseen) did not fall within the terms. Everyone, except 2, who worked for the contractors (prodominently young mothers getting back to work) were on minimum wage.
  
  The school realised that they had very little control over any of the contractors, the last one being 'Initial Catering' or as you may know them, as their parent company 'Rentokil' (I'm not quite sure where rentokil stand on the welfare of our young people) So the school decided to get rid of the Contractors being run by fat-rats....oh I mean Cats.
  
  The result; the food is cheaper, much of the produce is from local suppliers, The staff are paid a little more. The school can cater for unforseen events or close the kitchen all together for the day. The school has complete control of menu and produce. The dinner ladies can even join the KCC pension scheme if they like (far better than the rip-off offered by rentokil) The staff feel safer and happier.
  
  Now I don't believe that they have cured the cultural food problem that we are faced with. But surely this model is far more equiped to do so than a contractor?

Report Post

Your Name

Reason