twowheelsgood Posted June 29, 2014 Report Posted June 29, 2014 If you extrapolate £500 a day over the course of a year that would be a £130k salary. The Prime Minister is on £142k per year ... Yes, but its worse than that - its 2 x £130k, for two assistants to support someone on a £120k job - £380k to fund a poxy council employee position (plus pensions, NI contributions, 'benefits' etc) - lets see what OFSTED has to say about her performance. Quote
twowheelsgood Posted June 29, 2014 Report Posted June 29, 2014 It was only in September of last year that the Council restructured, and yet they're off again playing musical chairs. Was there a power struggle between Geoff Hughes and Mr Norman, who won and now has his own directorate (and presumably yet more money)? Even their own web site can't keep up with it - so much for transparency … https://www.herefordshire.gov.uk/government-citizens-and-rights/democracy/transparency-senior-management-salaries-and-roles Quote
gdj Posted June 29, 2014 Report Posted June 29, 2014 I think I remember - can't be sure as I sometimes get confused between fact and fiction - that the council recruited a shiny new Chief Executive last year. It might be a false memory because I haven't seen any evidence of communication between this mythical figure and the people who pay his wages. If this person does exist perhaps he operates through trusted lieutenants - people he brings in despite them having left other councils under very dark and expensive clouds - people that know they are beholden to the one man, in the one council, who is still willing to pay them good money for a bad job. Perhaps that could explain the continuing `transformations' of dodgy managers into directors and front line workers into jobseekers. Has anyone else heard of any sightings of the Chief Executive? Quote
megilleland Posted June 29, 2014 Author Report Posted June 29, 2014 How about this FOI highighting further extravagance: Penny Richards in another FOI request to Lord Scudamore school commented on a possible headline for our local newspaper which joked that each of the two Heads here were earning more than the Chief Executive of Herefordshire Council. I thought she was just exaggerating for effect. She wasn't. Its's going on everywhere! Quote
dippyhippy Posted June 29, 2014 Report Posted June 29, 2014 Yes, but its worse than that - its 2 x £130k, for two assistants to support someone on a £120k job - £380k to fund a poxy council employee position (plus pensions, NI contributions, 'benefits' etc) - lets see what OFSTED has to say about her performance. I believe the latest findings from OFSTED will be made available on the 30th June.....so not long! Quote
bobby47 Posted June 30, 2014 Report Posted June 30, 2014 Oh, I know what the troops at Plough Lane say when Neill is about. 'Scares us he does' and 'you wouldn't want to disturb him whilst he was burgling your house and rummaging through your trinkets of wealth and fine china'. Well he doesn't scare me! Never has and never will. As far as Im concerned being handy with your fists upon a Submarine that's berthed up at Southampton Dock is no qualification for being labelled tough. Bloody Neill should pop into the Commercial and try swinging his George Medal about and see what that sort of vanity brings him. My advice to the front line staff who's jobs are constantly under threat from this man and his fellow blue sky thinkers is to take a leap of faith, get yourselves angry, go hurtling upstairs, bang on his door and scream, 'Neil! Outside now. Im going to give you a good thrashing. In the backyard now you yellow bellied, canvas kissing rotter'. That's how you deal with Neill. If he had to fight the staff every day of the week you'd soon see him changing course or moving on to some other position that doesn't involve him boxing during his Tea Breaks. I mean, you'd be an odd sort if you enjoyed having to fight the staff. And another thing, if ever he did decide to go out in the dead of night intent upon burgling my house he'd be asking for trouble. If I tippy toed down my staircase after hearing my fine China tea set getting packed into his bloody holdall, I'd tell him straight.'Neill', I'd say, 'you are a trespasser and you've no authority to come creeping around my dwelling. I'd tether him to my chair, the one my wife sits me on whenever I've done wrong and I'd go to work on him ensuring that if he did continue burgling homes he wouldn't be quick to revisit me and attempt to purloin my valuables. That how you deal with this Chief Executive. If he's arrogant enough to think he can creep into our homes and steal our precious belongings with impunity then its essential he's caught, beaten badly and handed over to the Police for questioning. Scared? There's nothing to be scared of. He doesn't scare me and he shouldn't scare you. Quote
dippyhippy Posted June 30, 2014 Report Posted June 30, 2014 Thank you Bobby! That pep talk has worked wonders! I feel ...Brave! And fearless! Empowered even! And with this newly rekindled fighting spirit, when I see that Mr Neill, I'm going to jump up, introduce myself and give him a jolly good telling off......only one problem, would I actually recognise Mr Invisible should he be in front of me in the ten items or less queue?? Probably not! Perhaps that's how he likes it.......?? Quote
Cambo Posted July 2, 2014 Report Posted July 2, 2014 Oh I wish I worked in mr Neill's world as I've got sum kryptonite I need using up!!! Quote
stupidfrustration Posted July 2, 2014 Report Posted July 2, 2014 So I saw "our chief exec" in asdas - he doesn't know me but I know him. I smiled to say hello - however he turned his head and went about his business. I'm told by those he works with - he's not so bad! Quote
megilleland Posted July 3, 2014 Author Report Posted July 3, 2014 By Ian Parker, BBC News, Bristol today: Hundreds in zero-hours council jobs in the West Councils in the West have been criticised for employing hundreds of staff on zero-hours contracts. More than 700 people at 17 councils are employed on the contracts, which allow authorities to hire staff but with no guarantee of work, the BBC has found. The Labour group on Gloucester City Council, where 23% of workers are on zero-hours contracts, called it a "blight on the workforce". The council said many zero-hours workers were employed for events. The BBC used Freedom of Information requests sent to 18 councils in the west of England to determine how many people were employed on zero-hours contacts. One did not reply. Gloucester City Council leader, Conservative councillor Paul James, said the authority runs many "popular events" during the year. Should 'set example' "With such a programme to maintain, it is inevitable that we will need more people to help run them than we need to keep on our permanent establishment," he said. But Kate Haigh, who leads the Labour group in Gloucester, said the council should set an example to its partners who provide services to the council. "People on zero hours often suffer from the inability to plan financially and predict income," she said. "There are some services where work is seasonal or specialist, but nonetheless we ought to offer a minimum fixed number of hours to staff who are providing the public with services." Wiltshire Council, which has the highest number of zero-hours workers, said many were employed in the authority's leisure centres. The contracts offer flexibility, it said. Joanne Kaye, from Unison, said the overall number of zero-hours workers may be higher because of the increased use of contractors. 'Should be clear' But she believed the public backlash against zero-hours work would lead to more services coming back in-house. The Office of National Statistics (ONS) said 583,000 people reported they were on a zero-hours contract in the period October to December 2013. This is more than double than in the same period in 2012. The ONS said the changes were likely to have been influenced by increased awareness of zero-hours contracts following media coverage. Total of zero-hour employees per council and the total number of full time equivalent staff per council. Wiltshire Council - 287/3,652 Gloucestershire County Council - 204/2,555 South Gloucestershire Council - 110/2,484 Gloucester City Council - 74/323 Somerset County Council - 20/8,812 Taunton Deane Council - 17/508 North Somerset Council - 8/1,400 Sedgemoor Council - 4/331 Bath and North East Somerset Council, Mendip, West Somerset, Forest of Dean, Tewkesbury, Bristol City, Stroud, Cheltenham Borough and South Somerset said they do not employ anybody on zero-hour contracts. Swindon Borough Council did not reply to the Freedom of Information request. Total - 724 No figures for Herefordshire Council. Quote
megilleland Posted July 20, 2014 Author Report Posted July 20, 2014 Ambulance boss now earning £232,000 a year after landing himself a £50,000 pay rise for taking on another service Article in the Daily Mail today about another public worthy being paid a write your own cheque salary. Amazing that they couldn't find anyone else to do the job on half the salary. Tom Watson, Labour MP for West Bromwich East, said: “This man is probably the highest paid public servant in the West Midlands and nobody has ever heard of him. In a statement, West Midlands Ambulance Trust, which covers 5.3 million people Herefordshire, Shropshire, Staffordshire, Warwickshire, West Midlands and Worcestershire, said paying Dr Marsh to perform both roles saved the taxpayer approximately £130,000 on the cost of a having a substantive Chief Executive in each ambulance trust. A good example of where you pay someone more money to make savings! Quote
megilleland Posted August 5, 2014 Author Report Posted August 5, 2014 BBC H&W Radio this morning discussion about large pay packets in councils across UK. Hereford in the limelight today on the Elliott Webb morning programme. I can see him aggravating a few individuals. Quote
megilleland Posted August 5, 2014 Author Report Posted August 5, 2014 Following on from above, I thought that this piece by Robert Reich, who has his fingers on the pulse of the US economy and its following effect on the UK was worth a read. SATURDAY, AUGUST 2, 2014 Work and Worth What someone is paid has little or no relationship to what their work is worth to society. Does anyone seriously believe hedge-fund mogul Steven A. Cohen is worth the $2.3 billion he raked in last year, despite being slapped with a $1.8 billion fine after his firm pleaded guilty to insider trading? On the other hand, what’s the worth to society of social workers who put in long and difficult hours dealing with patients suffering from mental illness or substance abuse? Probably higher than their average pay of $18.14 an hour, which translates into less than $38,000 a year. How much does society gain from personal-care aides who assist the elderly, convalescents, and persons with disabilities? Likely more than their average pay of $9.67 an hour, or just over $20,000 a year. What’s the social worth of hospital orderlies who feed, bathe, dress, and move patients, and empty their ben pans? Surely higher than their median wage of $11.63 an hour, or $24,190 a year. Or of child care workers, who get $10.33 an hour, $21.490 a year? And preschool teachers, who earn $13.26 an hour, $27,570 a year? Yet what would the rest of us do without these dedicated people? Or consider kindergarten teachers, who make an average of $53,590 a year. Before you conclude that’s generous, consider that a good kindergarten teacher is worth his or her weight in gold, almost. One study found that children with outstanding kindergarten teachers are more likely to go to college and less likely to become single parents than a random set of children similar to them in every way other than being assigned a superb teacher. And what of writers, actors, painters, and poets? Only a tiny fraction ever become rich and famous. Most barely make enough to live on (many don’t, and are forced to take paying jobs to pursue their art). But society is surely all the richer for their efforts. At the other extreme are hedge-fund and private-equity managers, investment bankers, corporate lawyers, management consultants, high-frequency traders, and top Washington lobbyists. They’re getting paid vast sums for their labors. Yet it seems doubtful that society is really that much better off because of what they do. I don’t mean to sound unduly harsh, but I’ve never heard of a hedge-fund manager whose jobs entails attending to basic human needs (unless you consider having more money as basic human need) or enriching our culture (except through the myriad novels, exposes, and movies made about greedy hedge-fund managers and investment bankers). They don’t even build the economy. Most financiers, corporate lawyers, lobbyists, and management consultants are competing with other financiers, lawyers, lobbyists, and management consultants in zero-sum games that take money out of one set of pockets and put it into another. They’re paid gigantic amounts because winning these games can generate far bigger sums, while losing them can be extremely costly. It’s said that by moving money to where it can make more money, these games make the economy more efficient. In fact, the games amount to a mammoth waste of societal resources. They demand ever more cunning innovations but they create no social value. High-frequency traders who win by a thousandth of a second can reap a fortune, but society as a whole is no better off. Meanwhile, the games consume the energies of loads of talented people who might otherwise be making real contributions to society — if not by tending to human needs or enriching our culture then by curing diseases or devising new technological breakthroughs, or helping solve some of our most intractable social problems. Graduates of Ivy League universities are more likely to enter finance and consulting than any other career. For example, in 2010 (the most recent date for which we have data) close to 36 percent of Princeton graduates went into finance (down from the pre-financial crisis high of 46 percent in 2006). Add in management consulting, and it was close to 60 percent. The hefty endowments of such elite institutions are swollen with tax-subsidized donations from wealthy alumni, many of whom are seeking to guarantee their own kids’ admissions so they too can become enormously rich financiers and management consultants. But I can think of a better way for taxpayers to subsidize occupations with more social merit: Forgive the student debts of graduates who choose social work, child care, elder care, nursing, and teaching. Quote
dippyhippy Posted August 5, 2014 Report Posted August 5, 2014 A really brilliant piece, Megilleland. Thanks for sharing. Quote
megilleland Posted August 7, 2014 Author Report Posted August 7, 2014 BBC News South West Wales: 7 August 2014 Councillor quits over Bryn Parry Jones' unlawful payments A Pembrokeshire councillor has resigned from the council's ruling group after the chief executive was not reprimanded for unlawful pension payments. Bryn Parry Jones is being investigated by Gloucestershire Constabulary for unlawful salary supplements made in lieu of pension contributions. In July, the council voted to not to reclaim the money; Stephen Joseph said this inaction had "pushed" him to quit. Council leader Jamie Adams said he was sorry Mr Joseph has resigned. A Wales Audit Office (WAO) investigation carried out earlier this year ruled Pembrokeshire and Carmarthenshire councils acted unlawfully by letting Mr Parry Jones and Carmarthen chief executive Mark James opt out of the pension scheme to avoid tax payments. . . . Mr Joseph said the chief executive was responsible for a number of "mistakes" that had recently plagued the council, including the case of a sacked youth worker who later went on to abuse a boy. "I don't accept that the chief executive wasn't aware of the situation with Mik Smith and I don't accept that he is immune from disciplinary procedures that all employees are bound by," he said. Quote
magicroundabout Posted August 7, 2014 Report Posted August 7, 2014 Really enjoyed the "Work and Worth" article. Anyone seen any noble cabinet members in Hereford? Would one of them resign if they suspected any untoward dealings by the executive council officers? Quote
dippyhippy Posted August 7, 2014 Report Posted August 7, 2014 No. But just knowing this information would put them under an unbearable strain, which would probably result in a vast sum of money being paid to compensate! Quote
megilleland Posted August 18, 2014 Author Report Posted August 18, 2014 Council heads are not the only ones who know they are worth more than the rest of us. Today in The Guardian, the High Pay Centre revealed that the bosses of Britain's 100 biggest listed companies are earning on average 143 times more than their staff, according to data that exposes the growing imbalance between how the nation's workforce and its business leaders are rewarded. "When bosses make hundreds of times as much money as the rest of the workforce, it creates a deep sense of unfairness," said High Pay Centre director, Deborah Hargreaves. "Britain's executives haven't got so much better over the past two decades. The only reason why their pay has increased so rapidly compared to their employees is that they are able to get away with it." Not only are these overpaid chumps taking home ridiculous salaries because the general public throw money at them through the services we buy off them, but they continue to strip away the asset base of this country but sending most of their cash wealth offshore. Looking closer at home a year ago, The Worcestershire Partnership with Herefordshire Council was looking at setting up a JPV (Joint Vehicle Partnership). "A visit by Bruce Mann is proposed for 23rd April 2014 to review progress on our project and be available to discuss any issues with senior executives. An agenda is being prepared and availability will be clarified." Here they say: 24. The formation of the JPV also offers the opportunity to transform the way that property services are delivered in the public sector. The OBC anticipates a significant downsizing of the total resources needed to deliver the service by bringing the joint skills and experience of the teams together. Something in the region of a 20% reduction in staffing levels is expected in the first year of operation. 25. It should also be acknowledged that this will mean there will be a need to recruit new skills in order to ensure the JPV Company is both structured and run on much more commercial lines. For example, the OBC anticipates the recruitment of the new company's senior management team from an open recruitment process within the industry. 26. The OBC also anticipates that the operating company will seek to add a number of Non-Executive Directors from outside of the partnership (and likely to be from the private sector) to ensure that a wide range of skills are brought to bear on driving the new approach. Move forward to today and we see Bruce Mann, executive director, Government Property Unit (GPU) at the Cabinet Office, has been appointed as chairman of a new Shadow Shareholder Group designed to oversee the creation of a groundbreaking regional property management unit in the West Midlands. A unique Joint Property Vehicle (JPV) is currently being explored by a number of public sector partners in the West Midlands which – if approved – could see the creation of a single property unit tasked with overseeing the management of public sector estates in the region. This approach would be the first of its kind anywhere in the UK and would help protect front-line services while delivering property-related revenue savings of around £110.7m between 2015 and 2025. The partners currently exploring the potential of a JPV include Herefordshire Council, Hereford and Worcester Fire and Rescue Service, Redditch Borough Council, Warwickshire Police, West Mercia Police, Worcestershire County Council, and Worcester City Council. I wonder how much Mr Mannn will get to strip away our assets and I wonder where the money saved will be spent? Quote
megilleland Posted October 4, 2014 Author Report Posted October 4, 2014 Another piece here by Robert Reich highlighting Why the Economy is Still Failing Most Americans and is applicable here. SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 28, 2014 Why the Economy is Still Failing Most Americans (and the UK) I was in Seattle, Washington, recently, to congratulate union and community organizers who helped Seattle enact the first $15 per hour minimum wage in the country. Other cities and states should follow Seattle’s example. Contrary to the dire predictions of opponents, the hike won’t cost Seattle jobs. In fact, it will put more money into the hands of low-wage workers who are likely to spend almost all of it in the vicinity. That will create jobs. Conservatives believe the economy functions better if the rich have more money and everyone else has less. But they’re wrong. It’s just the opposite. The real job creators are not CEOs or corporations or wealthy investors. The job creators are members of America’s vast middle class and the poor, whose purchases cause businesses to expand and invest. America’s wealthy are richer than they’ve ever been. Big corporations are sitting on more cash they know what to do with. Corporate profits are at record levels. CEO pay continues to soar. But the wealthy aren’t investing in new companies. Between 1980 and 2014, the rate of new business formation in the United States dropped by half, according to a Brookings study released in May. Corporations aren’t expanding production or investing in research and development. Instead, they’re using their money to buy back their shares of stock. There’s no reason for them to expand or invest if customers aren’t buying. Consumer spending has grown more slowly in this recovery than in any previous one because consumers don’t have enough money to buy. All the economic gains have been going to the top. The Commerce Department reported last Friday that the economy grew at a 4.6 percent annual rate in the second quarter of the year. So what? The median household’s income continues to drop. Median household income is now 8 percent below what it was in 2007, adjusted for inflation. It’s 11 percent below its level in 2000. It used to be that economic expansions improved the incomes of the bottom 90 percent more than the top 10 percent. But starting with the “Reagan†recovery of 1982 to 1990, the benefits of economic growth during expansions have gone mostly to the top 10 percent. Since the current recovery began in 2009, all economic gains have gone to the top 10 percent. The bottom 90 percent has lost ground. We’re in the first economic upturn on record in which 90 percent of Americans have become worse off. Why did the playing field start to tilt against the middle class in the Reagan recovery, and why has it tilted further ever since? Don’t blame globalization. Other advanced nations facing the same global competition have managed to preserve middle class wages. Germany’s median wage is now higher than America’s. One factor here has been a sharp decline in union membership. In the mid 1970s, 25 percent of the private-sector workforce was unionized. Then came the Reagan revolution. By the end of the 1980s, only 17 percent of the private workforce was unionized. Today, fewer than 7 percent of the nation’s private-sector workers belong to a union. This means most workers no longer have the bargaining power to get a share of the gains from growth. Another structural change is the drop in the minimum wage. In 1979, it was $9.67 an hour (in 2013 dollars). By 1990, it had declined to $6.84. Today it’s $7.25, well below where it was in 1979. Given that workers are far more productive now – computers have even increased the output of retail and fast food workers — the minimum wage should be even higher. By setting a floor on wages, a higher minimum helps push up other wages. It undergirds higher median household incomes. The only way to grow the economy in a way that benefits the bottom 90 percent is to change the structure of the economy. At the least, this requires stronger unions and a higher minimum wage. It also requires better schools for the children of the bottom 90 percent, better access to higher education, and a more progressive tax system. GDP growth is less and less relevant to the wellbeing of most Americans. We should be paying less attention to growth and more to median household income. If the median household’s income is is heading upward, the economy is in good shape. If it’s heading downward, as it’s been for this entire recovery, we’re all in deep trouble. I like how he simply gets the point across. It's well worth watching his lectures on Youtube. Quote
megilleland Posted December 2, 2014 Author Report Posted December 2, 2014 We are in this all together. What austerity? And they are still shafting the public. Was this on the national news? December 2, 2014 by MARTYN BROWN, Daily Express Outrage as EU president Van Rompuy pockets £600,000 for doing nothing FURY has erupted over the revelation that the EU's outgoing president Herman Van Rompuy will pocket nearly £600,000 of taxpayers' money for doing nothing. The Belgian eurocrat is entitled to the money as a transitional allowance over the next three years after finishing his term as European Council president. In a sign that the juggernaut of EU excess shows no signs of slowing, Mr Van Rompuy will be paid £133,723 a year - 55 per cent of his basic salary - until December 2017, on top of his annual Brussels pension of £52,000. He will also receive a £21,000 one-off payment, taking his earnings to £578,000 over the next three years. The extraordinary golden goodbye, which is to ease him back into life outside the world of Brussels officialdom, immediately triggered an angry backlash. Ukip leader Nigel Farage, who once described Mr Van Rompuy as a "damp rag", blasted the payments. "Van Rompuy's term in office has seen millions driven into poverty and unemployment by the eurozone crisis but he himself has hit the jackpot," he said. "The EU is a racket which looks after its own." Under EU rules, Mr Van Rompuy does not have to do any work for his 'transitional allowance', which will be eligible for reduced-rate EU community tax, rather than the Belgian income tax rate. The Belgian has been replaced by Donald Tusk, who is being offered a package of pay and perks which total more than five times what he was earning as Polish Prime Minister. Labour peer Baroness Ashton, who finished her job as the European Commission's High Representative of Foreign Affairs in October, is receiving the same £133,723 allowance - although, at 58, she is not entitled to a pension. Mr Van Rompuy's golden goodbye is one of several transitional allowances being paid out to numerous European Commissioners who are standing down from the last Brussels executive - with the bill totalling £30 million. John O'Connell, Director of the Taxpayers said today: "This is an extraordinary figure. Taxpayers will be furious that Mr Van Rompuy, who has not exactly been the biggest cheerleader for much-needed reform in Europe, is walking off with such a significant golden goodbye. "Hard-pressed Brits deserve a better deal from Brussels, and that includes a crackdown on the ludicrous pensions and pay-offs handed out to former officials." Mr Van Rompuy, a former Belgian prime minister, plans to steer clear of frontline politics in his retirement. He has revealed he will be concentrating on his hobby of writing Haiku poetry - although he will give occasional lectures at the College of Europe in Bruges, which is a training school for EU officials. Mr Van Rompuy has been no stranger to enjoying the perks of life as a top Brussels bureaucrat since taking on the post at the end of 2009. On one occasion four years ago, he faced criticism after using his official motorcade - made up of five limousines - to ferry himself and nine members of his family on 325-mile round trip from Brussels to Paris Charles De Gaulle Airport for a private holiday in the Caribbean. In June, Mr Van Rompuy clashed with British Prime Minister David Cameron and was 'shown the door' at Downing Street after talks about the appointment of Jean-Claude Juncker as President of the European Commission. When Mr van Rompuy refused to guarantee a vote of all 28 EU leaders over whether Mr Juncker should be given the job, Mr Cameron declared there was 'no point in continuing this meeting'. The European Union defended Mr Van Rompuy's transitional allowance as "the price for the total independence" of senior European Union officials - adding that recipients of 'transitional allowances' must also "ask permission for any job they would like to do for 18 months after leaving". And more: BBC South Wales West News: 28th November 2014 Pembrokeshire chief Bryn Parry-Jones's work car was £90k Porsche A former council chief at the centre of a row over cash payments made in lieu of pension contributions was given a luxury Porsche lease car as his work vehicle, BBC Wales has learned. Pembrokeshire council confirmed Bryn Parry-Jones was given the car, after refusing to disclose the information at the BBC's request for eight months. The hybrid electric Porsche Panamera he used retails for around £90,000. Mr Parry-Jones got a £277,000 severance deal after quitting his job in October. The former chief executive left his post on 31 October. He came under pressure to resign from his post after it was revealed he received cash payments in lieu of pension contributions, which the Wales Audit Office said were unlawful. Police inquiries into the payments were dropped after no evidence was found of criminal offences. In July, Pembrokeshire council said it would take no further action to reclaim the money from him or another unnamed senior officer involved in a similar arrangement. Mr Parry-Jones was the highest paid council chief executive in Wales with a salary of almost £195,000 plus benefits. Pembrokeshire council said it had been unable to reveal details of the lease car while Mr Parry-Jones was still in his post, as the information was private and exempt from Freedom of Information requests. "Because this vehicle is no longer in use, we are now in a position to disclose the details," council officials confirmed. Quote
greenknight Posted December 2, 2014 Report Posted December 2, 2014 Just a few weeks ago we were still in times of austerity yet with an election coming it's all over.... with promises of 2 billion here and three billion there yet the deficit is getting worse. A politician is a politician whether that be at national or local level. " I'm in it for me" we here them whisper during another not so pubic meeting.The thing is where will they hide when it all goes Pete Tong. Money does not make you safe nor does sitting in a gated property far away in the hills. Brussels faceless beurocrats are no different to any of our national political suits......just taking what's not theirs and running into the crowd then lost with money and pension to squander on what remains of their grubby little lives. It is of no surprise that nationalism feeds on the disaffected. Could the kettle finally boil over...can we assume that " it could never happen in Blighty". I'd like to think not however we are building the stage and though it might not be set just yet things might change once this election is over and the next government realises that it will have to bring back taxes for the lower paid just to prop up those missing tax receipts. Quote
bobby47 Posted December 3, 2014 Report Posted December 3, 2014 Yes, good piece Greenknight. It's truly desperate ain't it. If there's one continent that can cause mass social discontent and create a recipe for a vast conflict, it's bloody Europe. And Van bloody Rumpuy walks off into the sunset with his not so significant smug face and six hundred thousand pounds and a huge 'thank you very much. I've enjoyed serving the public', tucked in his pocket, is enough to make my fat face glow as I race even faster to my headstone that'll read, 'here lies fatso. A life lived unblemished by any form of achievement'. The low tax receipts from this vast army of low paid, low skilled and highly expensive to maintain army of workers who pick our fruit, pluck our bloody chickens and wash me car, is certainly something that'll push us ever closer to a tipping point that'll see increasing cuts to our public services and at the same time make the rich and well to do very well off and the low and middle wage earners squeezed into a corner that'll only create mass social discontent. Why is it that my friend from Europe, a bio chemist in his own Country is here picking my fruit. Where's the sense and sanity in that little cosy arrangement. We get a highly intelligent man picking fruit for the minimum wage and an employer gets wealthier while his home Country are deprived of his education and the high potential that his great mind had before he decided to pack his bags and join the exodus. Madness! The greatest man made social engineering mistake made since bloody Hitler decided that the German people required more living space. And who pays for these mistakes? The poor, the weak, the vulnerable and a generation of young people who'll never know how it feels to think, 'I'm happy with my life and confident about the future'. Quote
Denise Lloyd Posted December 17, 2014 Report Posted December 17, 2014 Probably not the correct forum for this comment. This accompanies the advert for a Part Time Team Leader at a Residential Home:= "Herefordshire Care Homes has a clear vision to provide the kindest care possible, employing only the kindest and most professional people." Who on earth writes this inane crap? Anybody who has worked in care knows exactly what is needed and to think HC are actually paying people to write this utter tosh. Unbelievable. Quote
Denise Lloyd Posted December 17, 2014 Report Posted December 17, 2014 Can't edit the above even the name has been changed from blank Residential Care Home to blank Country Residence Quote
megilleland Posted January 12, 2015 Author Report Posted January 12, 2015 Herefordshire Council News: 6 January 2015 Chief executive proposes moving senior interim roles to a permanent position Herefordshire Council’s Employment Panel will consider a report by the council’s chief executive on the council’s approach to setting the pay of employees. The panel will then make recommendations to the full council which has the ultimate say over pay policy. Herefordshire Council, in common with all councils, is required to report annually on employee pay and does so through the Employment Panel. The employment panel is one of the decision making committees appointed by council and its membership reflects the political proportionality of the overall council. It makes recommendations to council about the annual pay policy statement and any salary proposed in excess of £100,000. It also has responsibility for overseeing the recruitment and selection to certain specified senior management posts. In his report the chief executive will also outline proposals to develop the structure of his senior management team, specifically by putting in place a number of permanent senior management posts in place of interim roles as the council continues to respond to unprecedented financial and policy challenges. The employment panel will be required to approve the salaries of two of these roles and another will need to be considered by the full council; the panel will be informed by the outcome of an independent job evaluation. The chief executive plans to replace the interim roles and to recruit to the permanent positions of director of adults and wellbeing, director of public health, director of resources (section 151 officer) over the next few months. This will be dependent on the decisions of the Employment Panel and the Council. Each of these jobs would cover a statutory post (meaning the council has a legal duty to employ someone in this role). He also proposes recruiting an Assistant director – adults commissioning Alistair Neill, the chief executive of the council, said “The council needs experienced, qualified professionals in place to manage, even after the large cuts of the past few years, one of the largest employers in the county, managing over £350 million annual expenditure. The way we run council services has an impact on the economy of the county, the lives of local people, particularly the young and the vulnerable and on the effectiveness of public services.†“We know that local people want the council to make sure it doesn’t spend too much on senior managers. The salary of our most senior employees must be agreed by councillors whether in the Employment Panel or in the full council. Those councillors expect me to run an effective and efficient organisation on their behalf and I look forward to discussing these matters with them in these public meetings.†Must be some spare cash floating around. Quote
WirralPC Posted January 12, 2015 Report Posted January 12, 2015 Is there a "bullying premium", set at a competitive rate, to attract the top movers and shakers? Quote
megilleland Posted February 2, 2015 Author Report Posted February 2, 2015 Monday 2 February 2015 in Hereford Times News SALARY packages for two director positions at Herefordshire Council totalling almost £200,000 have been agreed. An Employment Panel signed off a package of between £91,000 to £98,000 for the empty posts of director of public health and director of resources, both of which are yet to be appointed. The panel has also given its thumbs up to paying the director of adults and wellbeing £120,000, although this must be ratified by full council as the amount involved exceeds £100,000. Geoff Hughes, the council’s director for places and communities, said the council’s financial position had improved during a time when the authority had interim staff. “The chief executive, Alistair Neill, has proposed that we move to recruit a number of roles permanently that have previously been interim,†he added. The council believes the anticipated cost of recruiting would be as much as £15,000 per post. It justifies this by saying the money would be used for “specialist agencies†to source “good quality candidatesâ€, although Mr Hughes said the actual figure was likely to be less. The council’s deputy leader, however, said the recruits would save the council money in due course. “Sometimes we have to invest in a recruitment process to ensure we get value for money,†said Cllr Patricia Morgan. Adult and Wellbeing has a 2014/15 savings target of £5.5 million of which 44 per cent has been delivered. Quote
Glenda Powell Posted February 2, 2015 Report Posted February 2, 2015 This story been on my website for 3 days,(click onto my name on links here) I am a member of the employment panel, see my comments there, because I did not agree to this! Quote
WirralPC Posted February 2, 2015 Report Posted February 2, 2015 Hey Councillor Vaughan-Powell, as a member of the Employment Panel, please can you tell the public how long you've been on it and how many of the following you've voted for / against? Gagging clauses Compromise (Settlement) agreements Pay offs Clean bills of health for departing gagged officers Many thanks in advance, Paul p.s. I couldn't find a link to your website when I clicked on your name Quote
megilleland Posted February 2, 2015 Author Report Posted February 2, 2015 You can find Glenda's website here. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.