THE gulf that has opened up between the controlling Labour group on Warrington Borough Council and the Town Hall unions widened further after scrutiny bosses refused to accept a “call-in” of the controversial decision to hand over leisure, library and cultural services to new not-for-profit organisations.
Labour members of the Economy and Resources Overview and Scrutiny committee decided the call-in was not valid – clearing the way for the decision to be implemented.
The decision outraged officials of the UNISON and GMB unions, who claim they were not consulted about the proposals.
In a joint statement, issued after the committee’s meeting, the two unions said: “We watched in amazement as Labour councillors John Kerr-Brown, Faisal Rashid, Tony Higgins, Geoff Settle and Dan Price all voted unanimously not to question management on allegations that they failed to consult with the Trade Unions to outsource over 500 staff in to a not for profit charitable organisation.
“It would appear the only consideration Labour committee councillors have is to prioritise their position and to this end they are comfortable with no resistance to instructions from the executive even when the consequences for Warrington will potentially be catastrophic.”
UNISON joint secretary Jason Horan appeared before the committee as a witness for Liberal Democrat Cllr Kevin Reynolds (left), who had called-in the controversial decision.
Mr Horan told the committee management had failed to consult with the unions, 
despite promises to do so.
GMB secretary Bob Pinnock said it was clear the matter was “done and dusted” before the committee meeting even started.
Cllr Reynolds said he had hoped to produce two members of staff as witnesses, but they had both contacted him saying they were fearful of “reprisals and bullying” should they attend the meeting.
He said a report submitted to the executive on setting up not-for-profit organisations had been flawed. It gave three different figures for the number of full-time-equivalent employees who would be outsourced – 280, 220 and 202. This meant the total number of individuals affected could be 500, 600 or 700.
Loyal and dedicated staff were worried because they had only heard of the proposals on the grapevine.
“The doors have been slammed shut on the Trade Unions, the staff and the residents of Warrington,” he said.
Cllr Kate Hannon (right), executive member for leisure, community and culture, said: “We were confident ahead of the scrutiny call-in that the executive board’s decision to establish not for profit distributing organisations (NPDOs) or trusts for leisure and wellbeing and libraries and cultural services had been taken in accordance with all the proper principles of decision-making.
“We had ample evidence to share with the overview and scrutiny committee of the work that has been going on since 2009 under the previous administration to explore new ways of delivering leisure and cultural services in Warrington.
“This Labour administration had carefully examined the business case before making its recommendations to pursue the trust option.
“I was quite prepared to refute the allegation that the service had failed to consult appropriately, and to do so backed up with hard facts and evidence. I am therefore pleased that the scrutiny committee members recognised the lack of substance to the opposition challenge and voted against hearing such a flimsy case.
“Now that the democratic process has affirmed our decision, my focus and that of the whole team working on this scheme will be to ensure a smooth and well-managed transition to the new arrangements. We have always committed to fully involve the staff and trade unions in discussion and consultation about the future shape of the business, at the right time and in the right way. Our priority is to work together to create affordable, high quality services that deliver what our customers want.”
Gulf widens between unions and Labour
1111 Comments
Share.
About Author
Gary Skentelbery
Experienced journalist for more than 40 years. Managing Director of magazine publishing group with three in-house titles and on-line daily newspaper for Warrington. Experienced writer, photographer, PR consultant and media expert having written for local, regional and national newspapers. Specialties: PR, media, social networking, photographer, networking, advertising, sales, media crisis management. Chair of Warrington Healthwatch Director Warrington Chamber of Commerce Patron Tim Parry Johnathan Ball Foundation for Peace. Trustee Warrington Disability Partnership. Former Chairman of Warrington Town FC.
11 Comments
There is consultation, and there is consultation. When did the council ever sit down with a group of interested parties and discuss the proposals? Or is it a case of “we know best, this is how it is”?
It might be the best way forward, but you take the employees with you. That way, it it is less painful and takes away the worry of (yet again) wondering whether they have a job or not.
You reap what you sow.
Exactly, SS. Did we ever think that the result would be any different? When an item is called in it has to be scrutinised by a body that has not been involved in the previous decision. On this occasion the decision has been looked at by a body that has a majority of Labour Councillors on it!!! What a transparent way of consultation. What a way to treat the worforce! Can someone set up a petition on “Facebook” asking what the residents think of this decision. It be it will signed by a few residents, don’t you.
SS and CTP – I formally gave the Osc on Tuesday the opportunity to go out to the wider public. A 12 week consultation period has started linked to estates – the start of a policy which how I see the selling off buildings. Also the Budget process starts so why not go out to the town then – Labour Councillors sat on their hands, I think to protect Cllr Kate Hannon. The report has lack of detail – they can’t even decide if 280 -220 or 202 FTE posts are to go. They say that the MTFP is being followed – well that said no more than 181 FTE posts to go across all council departments not at worest 280 in one department. It was very shameful to watch councillors rubber stamp the Executive Board. I asked Cllr Kate Hannon was she content with the report – did she take entire responsibilty and was she happy that her fellow Labour Exe Board had read the report – she said YES.
Why was the critical friend rochdale Councils request of an extra £400K saving not disclosed on top of the £19M??? Why was it the Pricewaterhouse Cooper didn’t interview Cllr K Hannon why they spoke with all senior officers from the CEO down???? More so they don’t even know how much money will be need to plug the pension gap – is it £6.4M -£7.8M or more??? Its not about better services its about tax avoidance and outsourcing 500 plus hardworking loyal staff.
Kevin, the policy was first started in 2009 under the Lib-Con town hall coalition and has progressed until now, and because it was a good policy the Labour administration has carried it through. At no point is it reported that you felt so angry about the Trust when you where in power, but now in opposition you decide to voice your opinion. I must say it’s slightly hypocritical accusing this administration of lacking consultation, when your party tried to sell off Walton Hall. Also when you state selling off of buildings, that is just political scaremonging. The Trust will be wholly owned by the council, and as stated in the report the trust will be renting the properties. You also failed to comment that the audit commission independently supports trusts. I hope in future you inform the people of Warrington about the whole policy.
Dan, you are not serious? Just typical that when Labour finds themselves in a hole, they start looking for someone else to blame. Your administration DOES lack consultation, thats not a hypocritical thing for Kevin Reynolds to say. So answer the questions please: why did you decide this call-in was not valid? Were you protecting Kate Hannon? Why not consult with Warrington people? Any comments on the “gulf” between your Party and the Trade Unions? Do YOU support the Trade Unions, Dan? Why didn’t you make sure THEY were consulted? Instead of trying your best to come out with political soundbites, Dan, why not stand up and tell us what is really going on at this council? Your reply just makes it look like you are shaken by being named in this report as one of the ‘nodding dogs’ and are trying to jump (badly) to your own defence.
Another nodding dog statement Dan, it isn’t about whether the decision to explore the benefi of or merit in alternative delivery models is in question. This is about meaningfull transparent consultation with all stakeholders.The call in was specific to this point and once again councillors were instructed ( just as they were in respect of an instruction from Brian Mayer not to respond to Councill employees Trade Unions or Members of the Public in respect of an unprecidented attack on terms and conditions by a labour administration David Cameron would be proud of) to defend a port folio holder being led by officers decision who I would add are not even resident to Warrington and when the reality of theire incompetence is recognised no doubt they will move to pastures new (if they haven’t already made arrangements) with the blessing and of course compromised pay off of this administration.
Well done Trade Unions for naming and shaming the nodding dogs of a disfunctional political party.I hope in the future the electorate realises the truth and cosequence of a Labour administration
“Pricewaterhouse Cooper didn’t interview Cllr K Hannon…they spoke with all senior officers from the CEO down????” Sounds all too familiar for Warrington doesn’t it? Round here, political punch ups seem to take prioity over inclusive consultation, reasoned debate and informed decision making.
I can see people have questions but are reluctant to put their names on the forum. By all means email me directly at [email protected]. Or call me on 07909001401 Not Impressed, Pitbull and B mused I look forward to hearing from you.
Consultation,WBC style, email sent out 14/10/11 to inform staff involved that there would be meetings held at Pyramid Fri 14/10/11, Sat 15/10/11, Mon 17/10/11. Each meeting lasted approximatley one hour. Whose in a rush then! To use your words,” I hope in future you inform the people of Warrington about the whole policy.”
Will someone explain what, ” Why was the critical friend rochdale Councils request of an extra £400K saving not disclosed on top of the £19M???” is all about please.