Redundancies

[Guest]

Announcement

 

Looks like 160 to go (100 from outsourcing) but we are to suffer a large drop in spend on maintenance which has already fallen from £101m to £89m this year.

 

I feel sorry for the ones who don't want to go but have to in the end - having just been through a big downsize at work and having to sit face to face with staff and some long standing colleagues telling them they were being made compulsorily redundant was very depressing - we lost some very good people.

 

Those of us who took VR/early retirement were fortunate to get out though.

[sociable_hermit]

Last bit of asset-stripping before it gets turned into a Trust.

 

Keep the Board pay and pensions high by sacking the maintenance staff and cutting their budget, then walk away with the cash leaving a shagged canal system for someone else to look after.

 

I had thought that those in charge were angling to stay, but this smacks of rats planning to leave a sinking ship.

[Allan(nb Albert)]

Last bit of asset-stripping before it gets turned into a Trust.

 

Keep the Board pay and pensions high by sacking the maintenance staff and cutting their budget, then walk away with the cash leaving a shagged canal system for someone else to look after.

 

I had thought that those in charge were angling to stay, but this smacks of rats planning to leave a sinking ship.

 

Quite right.

 

Here are some of the comments now on Robin Evans blog.

 

 

Even Jo Gilbertson (IWA) has had a go.

 

Hopefully some other national user groups will join in.

 

One thing occurs to me. I worked out to save £10m from the payroll some 300 staff would have to go. That's about £33,000 per person. Now we are being told 60 staff to save £3.5m (I assume the other £6.5m will come out of winter works) That's almost £60,000 per person.

 

Are we being told porkies?

Edited February 15, 2011 by Allan(nb Albert)

[haggis]

Announcement

 

Looks like 160 to go (100 from outsourcing) but we are to suffer a large drop in spend on maintenance which has already fallen from £101m to £89m this year.

 

I submitted a comment suggesting that the directors either take a pay cut or make themselves redundant. I wonder if it will be printed? Or will pigs fly first?

 

haggis

[Allan(nb Albert)]

I submitted a comment suggesting that the directors either take a pay cut or make themselves redundant. I wonder if it will be printed? Or will pigs fly first?

 

haggis

 

Hi Haggis,

 

I know of three people who claim comments have not been printed. However, I suspect this is because views have been put 'strongly'. I will stick my neck out and say your comments will be printed, knowing how polite you are!

 

Directors making themselves redundant would be very costly. They should either set salary and pension based on third sector norms or resign!

 

***** Edited to add, as I know Haggis is an IWA member, that Jo Gilbertson has got it exactly right - BW directors need to signal honorable intentions (by cutting pay to third sector levels). Hopefully, other national user groups will follow this initiative.

Edited February 15, 2011 by Allan(nb Albert)

[david and julie]

I've just read this on Robin's blog - it was written by the editor.

The fact that he hasn't responded is most likely down to his work load rather than anything else. Would you rather Robin spent his time responding to comments or getting on with the running of British Waterways?

I've just asked - politely - if there's any chance Robin could volunteer some of his own time and reply because it looks like people are just being ignored.

[sueb]

Quite right.

 

Here are some of the comments now on Robin Evans blog.

 

 

Even Jo Gilbertson (IWA) has had a go.

 

Hopefully some other national user groups will join in.

 

One thing occurs to me. I worked out to save £10m from the payroll some 300 staff would have to go. That's about £33,000 per person. Now we are being told 60 staff to save £3.5m (I assume the other £6.5m will come out of winter works) That's almost £60,000 per person.

 

Are we being told porkies?

It would have been helpful to post the link to Robin Evans site rather than narrowboatworlds comments. Having said that, Nabo has been vocal on Robins blog but not advertised the fact.

Sue

[Allan(nb Albert)]

It would have been helpful to post the link to Robin Evans site rather than narrowboatworlds comments. Having said that, Nabo has been vocal on Robins blog but not advertised the fact.

Sue

 

Point taken Sue. However, national user groups as well as individuals must all come out on this issue. Where does NABO stand?

 

If anyone wishes to post a comment on Robin Evans blog, I suggest it is done via

Robin Evans second blog

after reading

Robin Evans first blog

 

I would suggest reading BW's guidelines for commenting

[Allan(nb Albert)]

I submitted a comment suggesting that the directors either take a pay cut or make themselves redundant. I wonder if it will be printed? Or will pigs fly first?

 

haggis

The pigs have flown

[haggis]

The pigs have flown

 

Surprise, surprise! Don't suppose the BW board will take any notice though. I first made this suggestion at the open session with a BW director at the IWA Festival in Redhill. The audience liked the suggestion but not the top table :-). I remember being disapointed that day as Sally Ash didn't appear as I had looked forward to meeting this person who had been saying "not nice" things about me to others, some of whom were my friends and relayed the info back to me.

I just can't understand how the present board, almost without exception think they are doing a wonderful job and that the waterways have never been better.

 

haggis

Edited February 16, 2011 by haggis

[Albion]

Surprise, surprise! Don't suppose the BW board will take any notice though. I first made this suggestion at the open session with a BW director at the IWA Festival in Redhill. The audience liked the suggestion but not the top table :-). I remember being disapointed that day as Sally Ash didn't appear as I had looked forward to meeting this person who had been saying "not nice" things about me to others, some of whom were my friends and relayed the info back to me.

I just can't understand how the present board, almost without exception think they are doing a wonderful job and that the waterways have never been better.

 

haggis

 

Ha, because when you view the situation through rose tinted spectacles, all looks well and you can award yourself another (self regulated) target related bonus!!!!! Your bosses in Defra are probably convinced that you're a good guy too so everything in the garden is lovely.

Roger

Edited February 16, 2011 by Albion

[haggis]

Ha, because when you view the situation through rose tinted spectacles, all looks well and you can award yourself another (self regulated) target related bonus!!!!! Your bosses in Defra are probably convinced that you're a good guy too so everything in the garden is lovely.

Roger

 

Time to have another word in my MPs ear.... Although he represents a Scottish constituency, I do my best to keep him informed about what he should know about the canals down south. He is actually a member of our little canal society so he knows a fair bit about the subject already. He has no influence up here about the future of the Scottsh canals but we are fortunate that the Scottish Government Departments , Members of Parliament, BW Scotland and the users are in broad agreement about where we are going and we all speak to one another. Easier to do in a wee country, I expect.

 

Haggis

[Spesh]

 

One thing occurs to me. I worked out to save £10m from the payroll some 300 staff would have to go. That's about £33,000 per person. Now we are being told 60 staff to save £3.5m (I assume the other £6.5m will come out of winter works) That's almost £60,000 per person.

 

Are we being told porkies?

 

Probably not. The cost of employing someone is generally reckoned to be somewhere between 40-100% of salary plus the salary. You've got to include employer's NI, pension contributions, consumables, insurance costs etc etc etc. If you get rid of a posts from various levels in the organisation BW's numbers seem pretty realistic. I'm not sure a £10m saving equating to 300 jobs is realistic though, did you consider non-salary costs when working that out?

[mayalld]

Probably not. The cost of employing someone is generally reckoned to be somewhere between 40-100% of salary plus the salary. You've got to include employer's NI, pension contributions, consumables, insurance costs etc etc etc. If you get rid of a posts from various levels in the organisation BW's numbers seem pretty realistic. I'm not sure a £10m saving equating to 300 jobs is realistic though, did you consider non-salary costs when working that out?

 

And don't forget the cost of redundancy payments.

[Allan(nb Albert)]

Probably not. The cost of employing someone is generally reckoned to be somewhere between 40-100% of salary plus the salary. You've got to include employer's NI, pension contributions, consumables, insurance costs etc etc etc. If you get rid of a posts from various levels in the organisation BW's numbers seem pretty realistic. I'm not sure a £10m saving equating to 300 jobs is realistic though, did you consider non-salary costs when working that out?

 

It was worked out from total payroll cost (which would include employers NI and pension) contribution (figures supplied by BW under FoI act).

 

However, I have just reworked the figures for office staff only and it now looks more reasonable.

 

BTW a few years back BW were saying that they needed to spend £35m a year on major works just to keep the system from falling into disrepair. In the first year of the NWC it is going to be just over £10m.

 

How is the £17m contribution in ten years time due to being a charity address that?

Edited February 16, 2011 by Allan(nb Albert)

[Mick and Maggie]

Like it or not, one of the biggest stumbling blocks to progress is peoples perception of the pay packets of the top nine. If a person feels at odds with what they see as fat cats. Volunteering to keep the cats in cream will not happen.

 

Those individuals at the top can lead by setting an example or they can continue to draw large pay checks. Continue in role as other staff are made redundant.

 

Mick and Mags - volunteers waiting for the right leadership signals.