by David Skentelbery
TOWN Hall unions Unison and GMB have made a formal complaint to the chief executive of Warrington Borough Council Diana Terris over their claims they were not consulted over plans to transfer more than 500 staff to not-for-profit charitable organisations.
The two unions are calling on Mrs Terris (pictured) for an independent investigation into the facts behind officers' claims that full consultation took place.
In a joint statement, the local secretaries of the two unions, Jason Horan and Bob Pinnock, said: "Clearly the truth will only be decided and uncovered by a full and independent investigation into allegations that management blatantly disregarded meaningful consultation with the trade unions prior to seeking authority from the executive board to outsource the services.
"We look forward to the investigation and opportunity to defend our position based on the truth."
Last month, Liberal Democrat councillor Kevin Reynolds "called in" a decision by the council's executive board to outsource leisure, library and culture services to a non-profit making organisation.
Unison and GMB officers attended an overview and scrutiny committee meeting when the issue was considered - but the committee rejected the "call-in" as invalid.
In their statement, the unions said: "Despite attending the overview and scrutiny committee to support the 'call in' we watched in amazement as Labour councillors voted unanimously not to question management on allegations that they had failed to consult with the respective trade unions to outsource a whole service area."
Cllr Ian Marks, leader of the Liberal Democrat group on the borough council said his group supported the unions in trying to find a way to have the decision reviewed properly.
He said: "We asked for the executive board decision to be sent to the scrutiny committee because we shared the union view that proper consultation had not taken place.
"We were shocked that the Labour councillors on the committee brushed our joint concerns aside. Treating the request in such an arrogant manner makes a mockery of the whole scrutiny process. We support the unions in trying to find a way to have the decision reviewed properly."
A council spokesperson said: "Work on the principle of establishing Not for Profit Delivering Organisations (NPDOs) for leisure, wellbeing, libraries, lifestyles and cultural services has been underway since 2009. The issue was the subject of a detailed report to the executive board on October 17, which was then 'called-in' for scrutiny. The overview and scrutiny committee took the view in November that the executive board had taken its decisions in accordance with all the proper principles of decision-making.
"Our focus is 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 these services. We look forward to engaging with them at the appropriate time."
Follow @warringtonworld
The two unions are calling on Mrs Terris (pictured) for an independent investigation into the facts behind officers' claims that full consultation took place.In a joint statement, the local secretaries of the two unions, Jason Horan and Bob Pinnock, said: "Clearly the truth will only be decided and uncovered by a full and independent investigation into allegations that management blatantly disregarded meaningful consultation with the trade unions prior to seeking authority from the executive board to outsource the services.
"We look forward to the investigation and opportunity to defend our position based on the truth."
Last month, Liberal Democrat councillor Kevin Reynolds "called in" a decision by the council's executive board to outsource leisure, library and culture services to a non-profit making organisation.
Unison and GMB officers attended an overview and scrutiny committee meeting when the issue was considered - but the committee rejected the "call-in" as invalid.
In their statement, the unions said: "Despite attending the overview and scrutiny committee to support the 'call in' we watched in amazement as Labour councillors voted unanimously not to question management on allegations that they had failed to consult with the respective trade unions to outsource a whole service area."
Cllr Ian Marks, leader of the Liberal Democrat group on the borough council said his group supported the unions in trying to find a way to have the decision reviewed properly.
He said: "We asked for the executive board decision to be sent to the scrutiny committee because we shared the union view that proper consultation had not taken place.
"We were shocked that the Labour councillors on the committee brushed our joint concerns aside. Treating the request in such an arrogant manner makes a mockery of the whole scrutiny process. We support the unions in trying to find a way to have the decision reviewed properly."
A council spokesperson said: "Work on the principle of establishing Not for Profit Delivering Organisations (NPDOs) for leisure, wellbeing, libraries, lifestyles and cultural services has been underway since 2009. The issue was the subject of a detailed report to the executive board on October 17, which was then 'called-in' for scrutiny. The overview and scrutiny committee took the view in November that the executive board had taken its decisions in accordance with all the proper principles of decision-making.
"Our focus is 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 these services. We look forward to engaging with them at the appropriate time."
Follow @warringtonworld
Share this article
| Tweet |
11 Responses to ""We were not consulted" - unions" 
|
said this on 14 Dec 2011 11:04:30 AM BST
So, what's new. Did you expect anything other than this sort of action from WBC. They can only sell the "family silver" once. The senior Officers of WBC are becoming widely known for their arrogance towards employees and residents. The Council - who we elected - are becoming well known throughout the Town for their indifference towards its residents whilst, at the same time, they are unwilling to get a grip of of the non-elected Officers who seem to be able unrestrained to do just as they like. Don't expect to get any positive action from the CE who has treated us all with contempt and taken her 9% pay rise to pay for all her inadequacies. Dont' be hoodwinked into believing that the Scrutiny committee have done anything to allay our fears. For an independent srcrutiny must be undertaken by people who have not taken part in the original decision making process. The members of this committee were part of the political process when these decisions were taken behind closed doors. Don't be surprised that they didn't want to discuss these matters in public! What a real mess our local Council is in. Roll on May 2012 elections when we will have the chance to record or displeasure.
|
Author)|
said this on 14 Dec 2011 11:31:27 AM BST
Could not have put it better myself, Council Tax Payer! The senior Officers just run the Council, and the people we elected do nothing about it. Who runs the scrutiny committee??? Get someone independent and investigate the lot! On a charge of just being inadequate, I say.
|
|
said this on 14 Dec 2011 11:41:07 AM BST
Labour really should stop upsetting their national party's paymasters. What with this and some of their councillors promoting "big society" solutions you would think they were tories.
;-)
|
|
said this on 14 Dec 2011 10:57:36 PM BST
David Cameron would be proud of this Lot Nick
|
|
said this on 14 Dec 2011 12:37:11 PM BST
all these troubles go back to the previous administration. They appointed these bosses. They sanctioned the ridiculous pay awards and now we see the Lib-Dems as bed fellows with the Unions.
Stop playing politics with peoples livelihoods
|
|
said this on 14 Dec 2011 10:54:27 PM BST
Engage the brain before opening the mouth is a priority when commenting Warringtonian.It has been recognised and can be demonstrated as a matter of record that for the more than five years transparancy and meaningfull consultation was an established fact in Warrington.Detriment and decline has been as a direct result of Warrington under the influence of a labour administration since May. Some of us remember Warrington under a labour administration and why they were evicted from the town hall following years of Warrington being a Labour safe seat/stronghold.Nothing has changed and nothing will change as long as Warrington returns a labour administration.
|
|
said this on 15 Dec 2011 11:24:40 AM BST
Yes. We all remember the consultation and transparency with the planning scandal, the children's services scandal and the decision to award huge pay rises to senior officers. It doesn't matter who is elected in because councillors have abdicated their responsibilities to the people of this town. Warrington is run by unelected and clearly unaccountable officers, defended to the hilt by our abject bunch of councillors who think we'll ignore the main issues so long as they keep sniping away at each other.
|
|
said this on 14 Dec 2011 12:57:22 PM BST
Maybe a group of independants should be fielded in every constituency with a common goal of ridding the town of political influences....
|
|
said this on 14 Dec 2011 2:46:49 PM BST
By definition Baz, if they were a group of independents, they wouldn't actually be independent, albeit that I share your sentiments. The difficulty with local politics is that it is intrinsically linked with national politics.
|
|
said this on 15 Dec 2011 1:14:41 AM BST
Not necessarily LFA... you can have a group of independents who would work for the good of the town, have no political ambitions (remember Jo Crotty??) and do the job because they want to make a difference to their town and its people rather than their own bank balances with all the committees they seem to sit on and get a wedge for doing so.....
|
|
said this on 14 Dec 2011 2:41:44 PM BST
My understanding of local government is that it comprises of full time paid officers, whose job it is to actually run the council, and part time elected members whose job it is to set the strategy for the officers. So, in this particular case, members will have decided that a not for profit organisation is to be created to run the range of leisure services, and it is for the officers to actually go about and put that strategy in to practice. It would not be the job of elected members to do that, unless there happens to be an elected Mayor, who does the job of a Chief Executive, and therefore could go about putting the strategy in place. Now of course in this case it would not be beyond the realms of possibility that the unions were consulted, but not liking the outcome, say that the consultation was ineffective, on the other hand, management could have taken the attitude with regards to the proposed changes that the unions and the employees could either like it or lump it, and that very little time would be expended on negotiations.
|
