howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
19 November 2010
13:1180772#1
thanet council have announced they are laying off a quarter of their senior officers due to cuts.
they state that half of their expenditure is on staff wages, so this had to be addressed.
they will work with the unions to make the process as smooth as possible.
where this interests me is that the front line people are left unaffected, will be very interesting to see whether services continue as they are now.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
19 November 2010
13:4980774#2
It's not surprising that the Council in Thanet are laying off senior staff, and it won't be surprising if the same happens in Dover too, considering the enormous spending cuts to come in over the next four years in Council spending.
Guest 660- Registered: 14 Mar 2008
- Posts: 3,205
19 November 2010
13:5180775#3
It is already happening Alexander where 2 senior posts are going before the Summer.
If you knew what I know,we would both be in trouble!
19 November 2010
14:2780776#4
Efficiencies are welcome, but I hope the baby doesn't get thrown out with the bath water - every business or organisation needs good managers to function.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
19 November 2010
14:3180779#5
If these posts can be spared, it makes one wonder why they were needed in the first place. At least the cuts will put a stop to the empire-building tendencies of local government. All we need now is the rigid imposition of zero-based budgeting, which should help keep a lid on expenditure in the future.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
19 November 2010
14:3580780#6
It is a question, isn't it? If they can go now what were they worth in the first place?!!
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
19 November 2010
14:5580781#7
Trouble is that you end up with 1 person severely struggling to do 2 people's jobs... there is still a heck of statutory duties, meetings, supervision to do and the people below do suffer through lack of managerial support...
Been nice knowing you :)
19 November 2010
15:0680782#8
Exactly - efficiencies are welcome and needed, but baby and bathwater come to mind.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
19 November 2010
15:3580785#9
I have been saying this for time, local govt wages(at the top level)are very over paid.
This is part of Reg Hansells argument on cuttng back of councils.
if your satisfied on staff being paid over £140,000 and many officers on wages up to £100,000 then its fine.
I look at Dover and ask if its money well spent
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
19 November 2010
15:4680788#10
let's not forget 3 out of 4 senior posts will remain, i will be very interested in seeing the results in a years time.
i have a strong feeling that services will suffer little.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
19 November 2010
15:4980789#11
Howard
apart from the bankning industry(lol)
few other companies could survive payng these types of wages, and believe me there are a high number of them.
And then you look at multiplying this by the 3 councils.
And don't forget it's us, the taxpaper that is footing the bill.
if these wages did become more public m sure that many members of the publc would be in uproar.
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
19 November 2010
17:3780801#12
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
19 November 2010
18:4280807#13
is there much need for a legion of senior management in education?
teachers teach, head teachers run the show, the staff get together with the school governors when need be to discuss problems.
if more interference is required, there are plenty of politicians ready to do so at the drop of a hat.
Unregistered User
19 November 2010
19:5480812#14
re. Education.
There well might be no need for senior management in Education other than at school level.
What is not known yet is other functions that need to be addressed that schools don't do .
School allocations when choice can't be accomodated, transport, special educational needs support that can't be provided in mainstream education, just a few that come to mind.
You will not need senoir management but you will need an organised set up to pick the shortfalls schools don't cover, providing they can't be bought in.
More work to be done on some of thess topics other than populist favourites.
Not a District Council subject but info. I have gained over the years.,
Watty
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
19 November 2010
20:0180814#15
agree entirely paul, after the teachers, heads and governors, i believe that just an administration department is required.
i have a suspicion that paul carter and chums will start looking at this in view of their budget cuts.
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,931
19 November 2010
20:0280815#16
One reason for extra managment is the sideways shuffle of someone where the payoff might be very big or jobs created for 'friends'. I think both practices will now end, as will work contracts that guarantee an extremely large payoff if the person is no longer wanted/sacked.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
19 November 2010
20:1780817#17
I don't think it as as sinister as jobs for the boys - I think it is a matter of poor management which leads to people who under-perform being moved rather than managed effectively. A risk averse organisation will also do anything to avoid an ET. Indeed, an unfairness is that organisations with ETs will be less successful in the tendering process, which does not reflect the reality of business. I would have more confidence in a business that accepted the risk of an ET in order to manage out an under-performing staff.
Unregistered User
19 November 2010
20:2080818#18
I spent today in London with other SE councils Leaders discussing current changes coming thru. the coalition gov.
The main topic that dominated the day however concerned the Chief Executive of the Local Gov.Assn. [LGA] who is paid £300k per annum and stands to take a £180k annual pension on leaving the job in the near future.
To say there was uproar from those present is an understatement.
Executive members were upbraided and a major threat of an exodus from the organisation followed.
This is a all political party membership organisation which purports to represent the views of Local gov.[all parties] to Government.
We are currently considering our ,tempered by the qualification that they are organisation that is doing the negotiation on Icelandic Bank debt recovery and I have to say are doing a good job.
Watty
Unregistered User
19 November 2010
20:3180819#19
I am with you Bern.
Employment Tribunals are a racket in the public sector, in particular.
The risk averse decision is normally a decision because proper processes have not been followed.
Back again to quality of management.
I qualify that by saying that is my experience of all sectors.
Small business will invariably get on with it because their businesses can't afford to carry passengers.
Watty
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
19 November 2010
21:4780828#20
Paul, the public sector can't afford to carry passengers any more, either. Actually it never could but as long as the cash flow was there it didn't seem to matter. Now we have crunch time and I think all public sector jobs over about £40k should be re-advertised. My experience and skills would qualify me for a senior job in the council and I would not have the cheek to ask more than £50k for it.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
