Glenda Powell Posted February 3, 2015 Report Posted February 3, 2015 WirralPC, I attended my first employment panel meeting on 14th January, where the 2 salaries were discussed at the meeting, I said that we could not vote on the salaries, as it needed to go to full council to be ratified as I felt the panel 5 Councillors should not be asked to vote on such a large salary. See my comments on the link above. Quote
flamboyant Posted February 3, 2015 Report Posted February 3, 2015 The absolute irony of this is, we hear Councillors saying we have to pay well to attract the best. Let's see how well that's worked http://thebristolian.net/tag/peter-robinson/ https://wirralleaks.wordpress.com/tag/ The huge salaries do not attract the best, it attracts people with no integrity! Quote
Glenda Powell Posted February 3, 2015 Report Posted February 3, 2015 Flamboyant, that was said to me as well, my response is unrepeatable here. I don't think they going to like me being on this panel I ask to many awkward questions they could not answer. Out of the 5 councillors who sit on this panel 3 are Tory, one of which is a cabinet member. Quote
Biomech Posted February 3, 2015 Report Posted February 3, 2015 Do you think the council would give me a job? heh Quote
megilleland Posted February 3, 2015 Author Report Posted February 3, 2015 I think this piece by Robert Reich gives us the future. He predicted way back in 2008 that we were heading for Inequality for All. MONDAY, FEBRUARY 2, 2015 The Share-the-Scraps Economy How would you like to live in an economy where robots do everything that can be predictably programmed in advance, and almost all profits go to the robots’ owners? Meanwhile, human beings do the work that’s unpredictable – odd jobs, on-call projects, fetching and fixing, driving and delivering, tiny tasks needed at any and all hours – and patch together barely enough to live on. Brace yourself. This is the economy we’re now barreling toward. They’re Uber drivers, Instacart shoppers, and Airbnb hosts. They include Taskrabbit jobbers, Upcounsel’s on-demand attorneys, and Healthtap’s on-line doctors. They’re Mechanical Turks. The euphemism is the “share†economy. A more accurate term would be the “share-the-scraps†economy. New software technologies are allowing almost any job to be divided up into discrete tasks that can be parceled out to workers when they’re needed, with pay determined by demand for that particular job at that particular moment. Customers and workers are matched online. Workers are rated on quality and reliability. The big money goes to the corporations that own the software. The scraps go to the on-demand workers. Consider Amazon’s “Mechanical Turk.†Amazon calls it “a marketplace for work that requires human intelligence.†In reality, it’s an Internet job board offering minimal pay for mindlessly-boring bite-sized chores. Computers can’t do them because they require some minimal judgment, so human beings do them for peanuts — say, writing a product description, for $3; or choosing the best of several photographs, for 30 cents; or deciphering handwriting, for 50 cents. Amazon takes a healthy cut of every transaction. This is the logical culmination of a process that began thirty years ago when corporations began turning over full-time jobs to temporary workers, independent contractors, free-lancers, and consultants. It was a way to shift risks and uncertainties onto the workers – work that might entail more hours than planned for, or was more stressful than expected. And a way to circumvent labor laws that set minimal standards for wages, hours, and working conditions. And that enabled employees to join together to bargain for better pay and benefits. The new on-demand work shifts risks entirely onto workers, and eliminates minimal standards completely. In effect, on-demand work is a reversion to the piece work of the nineteenth century – when workers had no power and no legal rights, took all the risks, and worked all hours for almost nothing. Uber drivers use their own cars, take out their own insurance, work as many hours as they want or can – and pay Uber a fat percent. Worker safety? Social Security? Uber says it’s not the employer so it’s not responsible. Amazon’s Mechanical Turks work for pennies, literally. Minimum wage? Time-and-a half for overtime? Amazon says it just connects buyers and sellers so it’s not responsible. Defenders of on-demand work emphasize its flexibility. Workers can put in whatever time they want, work around their schedules, fill in the downtime in their calendars. “People are monetizing their own downtime,†Arun Sundararajan, a professor at New York University’s business school, told the New York Times. But this argument confuses “downtime†with the time people normally reserve for the rest of their lives. There are still only twenty-four hours in a day. When “downtime†is turned into work time, and that work time is unpredictable and low-paid, what happens to personal relationships? Family? One’s own health? Other proponents of on-demand work point to studies, such as one recently commissioned by Uber, showing Uber’s on-demand workers to be “happy.†But how many of them would be happier with a good-paying job offering regular hours? An opportunity to make some extra bucks can seem mighty attractive in an economy whose median wage has been stagnant for thirty years and almost all of whose economic gains have been going to the top. That doesn’t make the opportunity a great deal. It only shows how bad a deal most working people have otherwise been getting. Defenders also point out that as on-demand work continues to grow, on-demand workers are joining together in guild-like groups to buy insurance and other benefits. But, notably, they aren’t using their bargaining power to get a larger share of the income they pull in, or steadier hours. That would be a union – something that Uber, Amazon, and other on-demand companies don’t want. Some economists laud on-demand work as a means of utilizing people more efficiently. But the biggest economic challenge we face isn’t using people more efficiently. It’s allocating work and the gains from work more decently. On this measure, the share-the-scraps economy is hurtling us backwards. Quote
dippyhippy Posted February 13, 2015 Report Posted February 13, 2015 Well, Helen Coombes is certainly worth every penny of that large salary. She has been very busy lately sending out questionnaires to adults with learning disabilities. She would very much like to know how they rate their care. One parent, whose adult "child" still lives at home, wasn't sure if they were amused or annoyed at this. On the one hand, they are saving the council thousands upon thousands, by still struggling on and caring for this person -they have no choice really, as there is no real alternative - and yet the care they give as parents, is rated in the same way as a care home! Add in the fact that their offspring can neither read, write or understand the questionaire, it does make you wonder what exactly the point of this is. Could it possibly be just another pointless box ticking exercise? Thankfully, this parent was able to ask that very question. On the questionnaire was a helpful note which stated should anyone have any queries they could contact Helen on her direct number. The parent rang it. It was a recorded message which said "If you are in crisis telephone your social worker.If you do not have a social worker, ring the duty team." So very helpful. Quote
megilleland Posted June 2, 2015 Author Report Posted June 2, 2015 Tuesday 2 June 2015 in Hereford Times by Bill Tanner, Senior Reporter Council starts interviews for "top jobs" on offer CANDIDATES for one of Herefordshire Council’s biggest jobs are to be interviewed on Friday. The council’s employment panel meets in closed session at Hereford Shirehall to select a director of resources. Service performance and financial planning are the key responsibilities for a role that comes with a salary worth just over £98,000. In April, the Hereford Times revealed the council as ready to shell out a five figure sum to recruit three top bosses on salaries collectively worth nearly £300,000. Short listing assessment for the posts of director adults and wellbeing, director of resources and assistant director (commissioning) adults and wellbeing was done in the week prior to the council election on May 7. Costs for recruitment and selection to the three posts - currently held by interim appointments - amount to £36,300 which the council says can be covered by existing budgets. The recruitment process was approved by the employment panel in January. For two of the posts - director of resources and director of adults and wellbeing - the panel is the responsible body in relation to recruitment. The tight deadline had the panel asked to delegate authority for short listing approval to director of economy, communities and corporate Geoff Hughes, when it met on March 31. In February, full council approved the annual salary for the director of adult and wellbeing as £120,000. The salary for director of resources is currently listed at £98,040 and that for assistant director (commissioning) adults and wellbeing at £80,132. Three quotations for specialist recruitment expertise were sought by the council with West Midlands Employers (WME) - recruiting for councils and the wider public sector appointed, partnering with specialist executive search consultants Veredus. It was advice from WME that prompted the parallel recruitment campaign for the posts of director of adults and wellbeing and the directorate’s assistant director (commissioning). WME also ruled out a “full colour†campaign for recruiting a director of resources. Instead, the role received a advertisement in the Municipal Journal directing candidates to a specially set up information site. Details of the vacancy were also circulated to regional employers organisations. Other roles were targeted for “full colour, prime positioning†advertisements for both posts in the Municipal Journal, accompanied by an interview with chief executive Alistair Neill. In January, the Hereford Times revealed that Herefordshire Council was ready to pay some £60,000 to recruit a new set of permanent senior managers on salaries into six figures to replace existing interim roles. The other role to be recruited was director of public health. Over the year, the council will review posts filled by agency staff and recruitment to those posts where they are key long-term roles. Behind the scenes, the council has considered continuing with interim arrangements, an option over-ruled by an acknowledged need for stability in organisational leadership. The redesigning of roles and responsibilities to combine chief officer functions has also been considered but not pursued as significant reduction in the senior team has already taken place, limiting the scope for further combination. Overtures to neighbouring councils about shared chief officer roles have not progressed, with no workable models emerging. Telephone number salaries for the chosen few. Listening to Jeremy Vine today on Radio 2 and he was highlighting the use of agency staff, at fantastic cost to the NHS with most of the money going to the agency and not to the workers. Capita was mentioned several times enough said. I have predicted that Herefordshire Council will vanish in 10 to 15 years time leaving half a dozen henchmen in control of where our council tax will be spent, mainly with privatised Tory donor companies. This article in The Guardian highlights what is going on in Barnet. Capita was mentioned several times enough said. Well worth a read. Quote
Pete Boggs Posted June 2, 2015 Report Posted June 2, 2015 Overtures to neighbouring councils about shared chief officer roles have not progressed, with no workable models emerging. I'd hazard a guess that's because nobody wants to touch them with a bargepole. They're finding recruitment difficult further down the ladder as well. Like I said before, word gets around. Am I reading that article right? They spent a load of money on recruitment consultants who suggested putting an ad in the Municipal Journal. Could they not have figured that out for themselves? Evidently not. Quote
dippyhippy Posted June 2, 2015 Report Posted June 2, 2015 Quite unbelievable isn't it, Pete? HCC.... 'We have a vacancy.....errr, what do we do??' Option A. Advertise it. Option B. Pay out thousands of pounds for a recruitment agency who suggest..... Advertising it. Beyond ridiculous. Nice to see that the ever present Geoff Hughes was delegated the task of shortlisting. That part of the job obviously wasn't included in the £60,000 that recruitment experts WME seem to have charged for their "services"......... Quote
Jimbo Posted June 3, 2015 Report Posted June 3, 2015 Another problem is the people that take these top jobs in the council very often don't live in Herefordshire and only view the job as a way to improve their CV and the job as short term. Once they are given the job they decide they need to make their mark and get noticed so they change everything in their department costing even more money and disruption, it's a never ending cycle unfortunately. Quote
dippyhippy Posted June 3, 2015 Report Posted June 3, 2015 Indeed, Jim. Anybody else remember Sharon Menghini, and the infamous schools closure programme??? Not a pleasant episode in Hereford's educational history..... Quote
Jimbo Posted June 3, 2015 Report Posted June 3, 2015 Sharon Menghini also cut children's services in Stoke on Trent then got a nice pay out of £174000. Quote
dippyhippy Posted June 3, 2015 Report Posted June 3, 2015 Correct Jim. She left Hereford for Stoke. Previously she'd been at Shropshire, Dudley and Newport. She then took her pay out, and set up her own little consultancy business ....... Nice work if you can get it. Quote
Pete Boggs Posted June 3, 2015 Report Posted June 3, 2015 Another problem is the people that take these top jobs in the council very often don't live in Herefordshire and only view the job as a way to improve their CV and the job as short term. Once they are given the job they decide they need to make their mark and get noticed so they change everything in their department costing even more money and disruption, it's a never ending cycle unfortunately. All true Jimbo, and let's not forget the two deputy chief executives Annie Faulder and Dean Taylor, brought in at exorbitant rates to do the dirty work that Chris Bull didn't have the guts for. They're also the primary architects of the Hoople fiasco, which they've no doubt listed as a noteworthy achievement on their overinflated CVs. Quote
twowheelsgood Posted June 3, 2015 Report Posted June 3, 2015 Correct Jim. She left Hereford for Stoke. Previously she'd been at Shropshire, Dudley and Newport. She then took her pay out, and set up her own little consultancy business ....... Nice work if you can get it. Nah, these people can very rarely if ever cut it in the private sector - she's drawing from the public purse again and making a right old mess it seems - 140 staff left! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-31323526 Quote
dippyhippy Posted June 3, 2015 Report Posted June 3, 2015 Interesting Two Wheels! I checked her Linked In profile after reading your link. It states that from May 2012 until present, she is director at Sharon Menghini - Education And Children's Services Consultancy..... Worcester. (A little too close for my liking.....) It also states that from December 2012 until present, she is Chief Executive at Talking Trust..... Bexhill on Sea, which fits nicely with your link! What a very busy person.... Quote
dippyhippy Posted June 12, 2015 Report Posted June 12, 2015 Peter Robinson has been appointed to the Director of Resources post. Salary....£98,000.00. Following a very costly nationwide search, the council have given the job to someone who already works for them. He was, apparently, the "unanimous" choice. Shortlisting for the post was delegated to Geoff "the man of many hats" Hughes. The search has only cost tax payers £36,300.00. To find someone who was already an employee ....... This makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever. Quote
twowheelsgood Posted June 12, 2015 Report Posted June 12, 2015 It makes every sense to those within the secret circle - every one of them is a financial winner - those outside, ie you and me, merely have the trouble of paying for it all whilst reeling, slack jawed, incredulous at the madness of it all. Quote
Pete Boggs Posted June 13, 2015 Report Posted June 13, 2015 I'm sure it was all done fair and (on the) square. Quote
Jimbo Posted June 13, 2015 Report Posted June 13, 2015 There is a saying "if you pay peanuts you get monkey's" unfortunately we don't pay peanuts but still get the monkey's. Quote
Pete Boggs Posted June 13, 2015 Report Posted June 13, 2015 I see that yokelyokel has nicked my "on the square" line for their post in the comments section of the HT: http://www.herefordtimes.com/news/13329499.Herefordshire_Council_appoints_a__new__director_of_resources/ YY if you're reading this you owe me rent, we'll call it a pony all right? 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.