Union slams officer led council

ANGRY union bosses have accused Warrington Borough Council of being an “officer led” authority following a decision by the executive board to press ahead with moves to outsource adult social care
UNISON joint branch secretary Jason Horan said the council’s Labour-controlled executive board had totally ignored a request from his union to delay the move to allow further talks.
He said the council had paid £3,000 to the Association for Public Service Excellence (APSE)for an external review of the proposed business model for the out-sourced service.
APSE had mirrored concerns raised by UNISON and made recommendations the council should follow before making further decision.
But the executive board had approved officer recommendations without making any reference to the APSE report and the recommendation made within it.
Paying for the APSE report had been “a total waste of public money.”
The views of the union and of APSE had been ignored by what could only be described as “an officer-led council.”
Mr Horan said UNISON had consistently raised issues about the proposals with both officers and senior elected councillors.
But it had been clear throughout that it was “a done and dusted deal.”
He said the union had been told all along that the out-sourced service would be a staff-led mutual. But its board would consist of three members of management and one member of front line staff.
“The so-called staff led mutual will be a silent voice if managers wish to push proposals through.”
Mr Horan said there were still outstanding issues on proposals to employ new staff on lower wages than existing staff, creating a two-tier workforce. UNISON would robustly challenge this if it went ahead.
The current in-house team employs 317 staff supporting more than 600 users and runs eight services, including residential care for older people, learning disability respite accommodation, older people extra care and specialist day services.
Cllr Pat Wright (right), the council’s lead member for health, wellbeing and adult services, told the executive board that staff were broadly supportive of the proposals as they accepted a continued in-house provision would not be sustainable in the future.
The board was told consultation with service users showed they were more interested in the quality of service rather than by who provided it.
But they would have preferred it to stay in-house.