Bill Norman Takes Redundancy

[Colin James]

From recent reports received today we are to understand that Bill Norman has taken redundancy with immediate effect and no longer works for Herefordshire Council.

[Frank Smith]

No 1 Ledbury Road is the most important issue at the moment, we can deal with Blaackmarston at a slower rate.

 

I will be unable to ask Bill Norman questions about legality of process, as he has been made redundant with immediate effect and no long works for Herefordshire Council as I understand it!

 

Bill Norman redundant? This sounds like it came out of the blue Chris or was this expected? 

[Denise Lloyd]

Going right off topic sorry Bill Norman redundant - no doubt he will have a nice big payout sorry another nice bit payout

[Cambo]

 

I will be unable to ask Bill Norman questions about legality of process, as he has been made redundant with immediate effect and no long works for Herefordshire Council as I understand it!

 

Oh no what has he been up to now?!

 

So is that redundant or suspended?…whichever I'm sure he will be paid off handsomely?!

[K.Butt]

Good riddance. 

[Denise Lloyd]

But will he reincarnate himself as a Consultant at double the money?

 

It is now we will miss the cut and thrust of Bill Tanner.

[H.Wilson]

Yes this chap has a habit of being paid off... :Cha ching:  :Cha ching:  :Cha ching:  :Cha ching:  :Cha ching:  :Cha ching:

 

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=10151569351259767&id=248435374766

 

What I Heard About Herefordshire Council Bets are already being taken down at Brockington on how long Bill Norman, the Council's new top legal eagle, will remain in post (Oh great, we're taking on another lawyer - Ed.) Mr Norman has a record of joining councils and then, in a few short yeard, leaving under mysterious circumstances with a substantial payoff. Yes, it's another one of those folks.

[Maverick]

Finally! About time ...

 

Redundant would suggest the Council have deleted the post of Council Soilictor/ Section 151 officer, I doubt that!

[Glenda Powell]

having just spoken to one of my ex senior colleagues at the council, the council has to get rid of 6 middle management officers, Bill Norman has taken early retirement from HC with immediate effect, another has gone from children services, four more to go from different departments of the council.

[Pete Boggs]

Finally! About time ...

 

Redundant would suggest the Council have deleted the post of Council Soilictor/ Section 151 officer, I doubt that!

Section 151 officer relates to financial matters is more likely to be Peter Robinson I'd have thought.  Bill the Bung would have been the Council's monitoring officer and Megilland's recent post on the Guy Taylor thread indicates that one of the deputy solicitors has taken that role over.

 

I wonder if the Bung's redundancy has anything to do with his botched restructuring of legal services which has seen them advertising the same jobs, with increased desperation, at least four times in the last twelve months?

 

Like Denise I hope he hasn't been paid off but that's probably a bit too much to hope for. 

[Colin James]

Section 151 officer relates to financial matters is more likely to be Peter Robinson I'd have thought.  Bill the Bung would have been the Council's monitoring officer and Megilland's recent post on the Guy Taylor thread indicates that one of the deputy solicitors has taken that role over.

 

I wonder if the Bung's redundancy has anything to do with his botched restructuring of legal services which has seen them advertising the same jobs, with increased desperation, at least four times in the last twelve months?

 

Like Denise I hope he hasn't been paid off but that's probably a bit too much to hope for. 

 

If there is a big payoff that will not sit well with anyone, lets see how transparent it all becomes over the coming weeks, I am sure more will be revealed. 

[Maverick]

Section 151 officer relates to financial matters is more likely to be Peter Robinson I'd have thought.  Bill the Bung would have been the Council's monitoring officer and Megilland's recent post on the Guy Taylor thread indicates that one of the deputy solicitors has taken that role over.

 

I wonder if the Bung's redundancy has anything to do with his botched restructuring of legal services which has seen them advertising the same jobs, with increased desperation, at least four times in the last twelve months?

Like Denise I hope he hasn't been paid off but that's probably a bit too much to hope for.

 

Opps sorry I meant the Monitoring Officer. I'm confused why the Council would allow the Councils Head Solicitor/ Monitoring Officer to leave via a redundancy package when the post can not be redundant. Isn't it a legal requirement to have a monitoring officer? Also early retirement will cost the Council a pretty penny, if Mr Norman wanted to leave why offer him an early retirement package?

[Maverick]

The Monitoring Officer is a statutory appointment under the provisions of Section 5 of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989

[Pete Boggs]

Bill Norman redundant? This sounds like it came out of the blue Chris or was this expected? 

In that case can I suggest that Cllr Chappell directs his questions about the consultation, or lack of, to the  (Deputy) Solicitor to the Council (Property & Commercial) as they will have advised on the matter. Or should have.

 

Maverick, yes you're right, the monitoring officer is a statutory requirement. From Megilland's post on the Guy Taylor thread it appears that the other Deputy Solicitor has been appointed on an interim basis. If Bill the Bung has been allowed to retire early with a nice big package it's nothing short of a disgrace. An FOI request may be in order perhaps.

[megilleland]

Nicholas Watt Chief political correspondent - The Guardian

Friday 31 July 2015 

Public-sector redundancy payouts to be capped at £95,000

 

Treasury says end to NHS, civil service and local council ‘golden goodbyes’ will save taxpayer millions of pounds

 

A legally binding £95,000 cap is to be imposed on redundancy payments in the public sector in a move designed to save hundreds of millions of pounds, the government will announce on Friday. Greg Hands, the chief secretary to the Treasury, will say the new cap will be enforced through legislation and will bring an end to “golden goodbyes†in the NHS, the civil service and local government.

 

Hands will say the cap, which may be set at an even lower level after a government consultation, should apply to independent but publicly funded broadcasters – the BBC, Channel 4 and S4C. The broadcasters will be exempt from the legislation, but will be strongly encouraged to follow the spirit of the new law.

 

The announcement by the government follows thousands of payouts in the public sector that cost more than £100,000: the Treasury counted 2,000 such payouts in 2013. The taxpayer would have saved £200m if the cap had been in place between 2011 and 2013.

 

The National Audit Office, the main public spending watchdog, recently authorised two payments of more than £250,000. The NAO disclosed the payments in its annual report last month, shortly after George Osborne announced plans to impose a cap on payouts at the time of the Queen’s speech.

 

Hands, who is launching a consultation on whether to take the cap below the £95,000 limit, said it will apply to all forms of compensation. This includes redundancy payments, pension top-ups, compromise agreements and special severance payments.

 

He said: “It’s not right that highly paid public sector workers should receive huge taxpayer-funded payouts when they’re made redundant … The cap we are bringing into law will mean no more six-figure payoffs in the civil service, local authorities and the NHS. We also expect other bodies who rely on taxpayers’ money to follow suit.â€

 

The government consultation will say that the BBC, Channel 4 and S4C and other independent but publicly funded bodies, such as the Bank of England, will be formally excluded from the cap. But the consultation says: “The government’s strong expectation is that, consistent with the approach taken to exit payment recovery, bodies that are proposed to be outside the scope of the cap on exit payments will set out a commensurate cap on exit payments, at least equivalent to the arrangements proposed, and introduce this no later than the exit payment cap.â€

 

When does this come into effect. Obviously a good time to go is now, before it becomes law.

 

The government announced on 23 May 2015 that it intended to end six figure exit payments for public sector workers.

 

Exit payments associated with loss of employment including redundancy are important to employers’ ability to reform and react to new circumstances, and provide important support for employees as they find new employment. Equally it is important that these payments are proportionate and offer value for money.

 

Between 2011-12 and 2013-14 the cost of exit payments in the public sector was around £6.5 billion. More than £1 billion of this cost came as a result of exit payments costing more than £100,000.

 

The government does not believe that six figure exit payments, which are far in excess of those available to most workers in the public sector or wider economy, are fair or offer value for money to the taxpayer who funds them.

 

The government therefore proposes to introduce a cap of £95,000 on the total value of exit payments. This consultation seeks views on the scope, level and design of this cap. The table below offers a summary of the key features of the government’s proposal.

 

In addition to this measure to cap the value of the highest exit payments, the government is also keen to ensure that exit payments in the public sector more widely offer a proportionate level of support to employees and are value for money to the taxpayer. The government is therefore considering further reforms to the calculation of compensation terms and to employer-funded early retirement in circumstances of redundancy. The government plans to consult on possible measures in these areas in due course.

 

The government's Consultation on a Public Sector Exit Payment Cap although now closed (July 27th 2015) gives a lot of detail into the past dealings and means of getting such high payments. 

[Maverick]

Interesting read, not sure I believe it, the Council are not in the habit of granting key post holders voluntary redundancy. Doesn't make good business sense to allow a redundancy then have to pay an enhancement to someone to cover the post.

 

http://councillors.herefordshire.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=497&MId=5619&Ver=4

[gdj]

So just over 12 months ago Herefordshire Council thought that Bill Norman's role was so important that he needed to be upgraded to Assistant Director level and had to be paid more in recognition of this fact.  

 

In the interim it has emerged that there is to be an almighty battle with Amey with millions of pounds at stake - so legal expertise is going to be vital.

 

Now it seems that the position is `redundant', except for one part of the role that can go to Bill's underling.  

 

Redundancy is a minefield for councils.  Herefordshire could find itself having to include all his previous `service' years in other councils in any calculation unless his payoffs from those negated any ongoing employment rights.  Let's hope that the Hoople HR experts and the scrupulous councillors who recruited Bill were absolutely clear from the outset that they weren't going to be stung for a large contractual sum when he inevitably left after 2+ years (you need to be employed for 2 years to get redundancy so the timing of this is perfect for him to get some money and go off to find another host organism - assuming he hasn't already got one lined up).

 

Perhaps Peter Robinson has driven a hard bargain so ensure a senior manager leaving the council doesn't get more money than they are absolutely entitled to (he doesn't want Herefordshire to suffer like Bristol City council did when their finance director left a couple of years ago).

[Pete Boggs]

 

 

Redundancy is a minefield for councils.  Herefordshire could find itself having to include all his previous `service' years in other councils in any calculation unless his payoffs from those negated any ongoing employment rights.  Let's hope that the Hoople HR experts and the scrupulous councillors who recruited Bill were absolutely clear from the outset that they weren't going to be stung for a large contractual sum when he inevitably left after 2+ years (you need to be employed for 2 years to get redundancy so the timing of this is perfect for him to get some money and go off to find another host organism - assuming he hasn't already got one lined up).

 

 

He had a "career break" after being given his marching orders from Wirral. That should be suffcient to interrupt his continuity of service for redundancy purposes I'd have thought. Then again I'm no expert on employment law as practiced by HDC.  I'd be willing to bet he's had a bung though - that's what he's good at (if nothing else). I can definitely feel an FOI request coming on....

 

Anyone know who the other five managers are who are supposed to be redundant?

[GrowlTiger]

Mr Norman was made “redundant†from Torbay in the summer of 2008 and left with a payment of £31,823 plus pension payments.  He was employed the same year by Wirral Borough Council.  In 2012 along with other senior officers he was suspended whilst investigations took place.  At this time the then CEO decided to restructure the organisation.  As a result Mr Norman’s post was made “redundant†and he left Wirral in October 2012 under a compromise agreement but with no case to answer and pocketed £146,000.

 

To negotiate 3 lucrative “redundancies†in 6 years takes dedication particularly when his post in Hereford was so important his salary was increased substantially fairly recently.   I wonder in which direction the gravy train standing on platform 1 at Hereford station is aiming for now. 

 

[Denise Lloyd]

I would imagine his next opportunity will be that of consultancy.  He has set his pension up with a nice little bit in the bank.  Now I just wonder whether his leaving is coincidental with a true great leaving in the shape of Bill Tanner.  Is there some huge pile of pooh to hit the fan and is Bill Norman leaving at a very opportune moment to avoid any cross fire. Or am I a letting my very vivid imagination run away with me?  

 

Yes indeed it will be very interesting to see which others are going.

[Colin James]

Mr Norman was made “redundant” from Torbay in the summer of 2008 and left with a payment of £31,823 plus pension payments.  He was employed the same year by Wirral Borough Council.  In 2012 along with other senior officers he was suspended whilst investigations took place.  At this time the then CEO decided to restructure the organisation.  As a result Mr Norman’s post was made “redundant” and he left Wirral in October 2012 under a compromise agreement but with no case to answer and pocketed £146,000.

 

To negotiate 3 lucrative “redundancies” in 6 years takes dedication particularly when his post in Hereford was so important his salary was increased substantially fairly recently.   I wonder in which direction the gravy train standing on platform 1 at Hereford station is aiming for now. 

 

 

This is unbelievable! Why was he suspended from Wirral?

[Denise Lloyd]

 

Torbay and Wirral Council Whistle Blowing, Workplace ...

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/

 

 

That will take you  to some of it. Naturally there is loads more on this gentleman.  I assume it is HC's take on employing the best of the best.

 

 

[tommysmith]

Bill Spanner, not Tanner.

Hereford Times is an over priced rag, full of adverts, in my opinion.

[Maverick]

This is unbelievable! Why was he suspended from Wirral?

 

 

Bill Norman left Wirral but not before he threatened whistleblower Martin Moreton. (See link)

 

http://www.wirralglobe.co.uk/news/4860416.Wirral_Council_whistleblower_Martin_Morton___I_d_do_it_all_again__because_it_s_the_RIGHT_thing_to_do_/

 

He then moves to Herefordshire Council and does the same thing again, some people never learn...

 

Bill Normans response to a complaint under the Whistleblowing Policy into the conduct of one of the Councils Senior Officers.

 

Extract from email:

 

Based on what you and I have discussed, the appropriate next step would be for me to arrange for the issues that you have raised to be independently investigated in accordance with the Whistleblowing or Grievance Policies. This investigation would determine if disciplinary action should be taken against any or all persons involved. The investigation would be completely impartial and would need to look at both sides and all parties involved. For example, it would look into the issues that were raised, and your motivation, as well as how these were handled. It would also look into the conduct of the management team, as well as yourself, and it may or may not recommend disciplinary action against any person.

 

So if you're threatened by a Senior Officer and you blow the Whistle you will not be protected you'll be investigated!

 

Motivation for bringing this to your attention would be 'don't like to be threatened' simples!

 

Not sure Mr Norman likes Whistleblowers and protecting Senior Officers who threaten disabled people is becoming a pattern...

[Ubique]

Job Swap ?

 

From Coventry Telegraph

 

 

Coventry City Council’s top solicitor has left the organisation for personal reasons in the midst of a lengthy legal battle with the owners of Coventry City FC.

 

Christine Forde, the council’s assistant director for legal and democratic services and monitoring officer, has left the local authority on the 31st August and the full council will today vote to delegate powers to a temporary replacement.

[Bill Thomas]

Job Swap ?

 

From Coventry Telegraph

 

 

Coventry City Council’s top solicitor has left the organisation for personal reasons in the midst of a lengthy legal battle with the owners of Coventry City FC.

 

Christine Forde, the council’s assistant director for legal and democratic services and monitoring officer, has left the local authority on the 31st August and the full council will today vote to delegate powers to a temporary replacement.

 

You don't miss much do you ha ha this is very interesting stuff. 

[Denise Lloyd]

Ms Forde has played a key role in the ongoing Ricoh Arena legal dispute betweenCoventry City FC owners Sisu and the council.

A city council spokesperson said: "We can confirm that Christine Forde, the assistant director for legal and democratic services and monitoring officer has decided to move on from the authority for personal reasons and left the council on 31st August, 2015.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Very observant Mr Ubique but I would say Ms Forde would not want to get herself embroiled in yet another Council with a lawsuit or 2 hanging over them
 

[Denise Lloyd]

Another observation if the equivalent of the HT in Coventry considered it necessary to report that their Council's solicitor had left the building why has the HT not yet reported Bill Norman's departure.  Wake up Hereford Times!

[Pete Boggs]

Another observation if the equivalent of the HT in Coventry considered it necessary to report that their Council's solicitor had left the building why has the HT not yet reported Bill Norman's departure.  Wake up Hereford Times!

Now that Bill Tanner has gone we can expect lots of stories about cats up trees and not much else.

 

The fact that a man who spent his career colluding in, and covering up, wrongdoing has been allowed to trouser yet another hefty bung and ride off into the sunset is nothing short of a disgrace.

[Chris Chappell]

I have just sent in to the Leader of Council, a question about the number of redundancies, the cost to the council, the financial savings etc. also how many Assistant Directors and Heads of Service have been made redundant in the last six months!. I also want to know what he believes is the effect these redundancies are having on service delivery. Council meets on Friday so we will not have the answers until then.

 

I am looking forward to the visit this week of the Care Quality Commision. There is a public meeting tomorrow evening, councillors on the Health & Social Care Scrutiny Committee meet them tomorrow afternoon. So if you have a concern which you do not think is being addressed by Health or Social Services, now is the time to come forward and report it.