Thursday, 29 November 2018

Napo at Work in the South West 18

As usual, thanks go to the reader for forwarding the following:-

Napo SSW Branch report 26

November 18
Dear Napo members,

It has been a little while since my last branch report although thanks to Denice James for keeping us informed in the interim this summer.

There have been a lot of developments and ongoing issues with few resolutions. To help make this report easier to reference I have added a content list. I will keep the detail short as there is too much going on across the Working Links controlled territories. Recent dispute meetings in Cardiff saw revelations that Aurelius were due to meet the MOJ. Either keep floating the failing and broken Working Links or to pull the plug. I suspect the MOJ will have done a deal, whereby they pay to continue funding up to the new proposed contract periods. It is known that Aurelius have two debenture notices served on Working Links to ensure they are first in the scrum if and when Working Links finally fold.

1 MSC call centres and the return to 1-1.
2 Building Confidence - Probation consultation.
3 1% Pay contractual pay increase
4 Travel ban
5 Unpaid work
6 HMIP
7 The Certification Officer issues Peros v Napo

Minimum Service Contacts.

It has all started to unravel faster for CRC contractors since the Parliamentary Report about the national probation scandal which, we have all endured to date. From that we saw the recent directions and contract variations to all CRCs to return to some meaningful work in the restoration of one to one working. Already there are talks nationally of the Working Links way to find a few loopholes in that new direction. That said, we understand these sorts of re negotiations are inevitable but at the short sides meeting NAPO are clear we want to see a return to proper offender focused working. SSW branch have made it clear that we support all we can to adapt current staffing and processes to ensure DDC at least achieve this. However, the unions are absolute that all terms and conditions will be protected and voluntary engagement to change staff roles will prevail from the flawed current call centre model.

NAPO SSW criticised this direction from the start and lodged the dispute that has run for 2 years or so. We have vindication for the SSW branch, steadfast rejection of the Working Links failing model. The Recent direction from MOJ is back to some form of case management that requires one to one working with the person. This is long overdue and a real smack to the dissolution of years of expertise being dumped by private interest.

In turn talks have opened up for the minimum service contacts (MSC). We are in agreement to support the process of expressions of interest as the first step to recruit staff properly to adapt, develop, or return to familiar ways of working with people than what we have seen under the so-called innovation of privatised working and their call centre coverall. The problems yet to be resolved will include staff locations, numbers of staff, the backlog of cases, immediate take up of new cases, and training - all compounded by an organisation that has shrunk to a fraction with too much work. No agreement to date on caseloads and weightings, yet they carry on regardless.

2 Building confidence probation consultation.

In September Napo SSW submitted a large contribution from the branch on the consultation questionnaire. The MOJ put out a number of questions, not all of which are relevant for a consultation period, then half way through changed the game by adding questions. It would have been smarter to extend the period too. In any case, I could not imagine anyone would be supporting the continued splitting of the service. Most people contributing to the survey will easily work out it is a ploy. It may be to provide the MOJ with evidence to undermine the PAC report.

The full submission by the branch has been circulated and we wait to see what affect if any there might be. It was clear the plan was to influence the new contract not to stop the same errors. The current decline across all standards is breath-taking.

Sadly, though this has a link to the NPS Pay deal. Running through the argument for NEVER paying equal rates for staff in CRCs or parity is this little gem from the PAC report.

PAC

107. Section 4 of the Offender Management Act 2007 provides that “the giving of assistance to any court in determining the appropriate sentence to pass, or making any other decision, in respect of a person charged with or convicted of an offence” is reserved to “a probation trust or other public body”.189 In practice this means that only the National Probation Service, and not Community Rehabilitation Companies, can submit pre-sentence reports (see footnote for definition) and provide advice to the courts.190 The NPS has a dedicated team of report writers servicing the courts.191

This disconnect from the officers of the court argument actually removes many of the cornerstone arguments that used to be part of the pay structure ownership.

When we see the new contracts, I doubt it will build any confidence anywhere after the last 4 years of the spiral fast ride to the bottom. Reduction of this contract out two years early cannot come soon enough but the real fears and concerns we have include the probation senior management and the difficulties they have faced in the contract years of working under the sheer excessive ebullience of the privateers. (We do not hear much of that talking up now).

Some of the senior management’s pressures were being driven to dump all they knew of best practices and to make cuts wherever told, their concerns being ignored and quelled. I can assure members that Napo is aware of many factors that encourage us to support the senior management team, as we all start looking at what the new transition arrangements are going to become. It will impact on them as much as any staff and we cannot predict what we will all face post the consultation influences. Larger areas will likely mean more rationalisation. Meaning more profits potentials.

3 1% contractual pay increase

Members will know that we have been attending some meetings with the Working Links senior management and probation senior management teams. Back as far as March we heard pledges for the timely payment of the contractual 1% to be awarded to staff but to date this has still not arrived. At our meeting in Cardiff the lead for Justice stated that the Working Links board have met and decided to pay the entitlement some 7 months late. We had thought the threat of charging the interest on the belated money might have had a part to play. However, when the arrangement was communicated in writing to the union sides the management had taken out of the increase a small number of staff who had a cost of living rise based on pay scales earlier in the year. Members will realise what a PR disaster and penny-pinching approach to staff salaries this was and what a derisory attitude from the Working Links way. In all fairness a few heavy end criticisms and some pretty fast e mails exchanged saw Dawn Blower head of justices make a case to include those staff for the entitlement than just see the lowest paid end up on a time marking lost award. All credit to Dawn Blower we had not expected her immediate intervention to resolve the latest tension and yet she managed to ensure that money is now committed to our hard-pressed staff.

4 Travel Ban

The Working Links Way has seen them order a travel ban for all staff except under some circumstances. It is fairly clear to most people in this industry what damage this will do to working relations across the organisation. The need to grab back all the essential duties based on cost just illustrates what sort of financial constraints they are trying to deliver their targets under. Some of us do not actually believe they are genuinely trying to deliver anything at all other than to get the contract taken off them. We all know that MOJ will squeeze blood from a stone to keep this flagship fiasco afloat. It is no joke when we are all aware the Working Links financial director is consulted on every expense more than 20 quid! They have ordered a zero-white goods replacement and all products that may be ordered have to be none brand names and the cheapest option. There is a tactical delay in paying staff expenses as I have received several complaints and disability related payments for staff also. Any attempts to claw back running costs only hasten the decline of the services. What happened to all the spouting and pouting of private enterprise innovation managing millions of pounds of public monies. A touch too much of the boasting self importance. Their latest planned disaster area for the SW is the removal of phones and having Skype computer calls only. Avoiding the phone bills won’t improve the services.

5 Unpaid Work

The poorest treatment and declining standards to staff is the current treatment of unpaid workers in CRC contracts. The worst documents I have ever seen are those that deride remove and strip away any employment rights. As if it is okay to ask workers to sign away lawful statutory rights. The Working Links way has seen staff in role through agency or sessional to be facing real pay reduction, no proper annual leave agreement, and zero hours no commitment. There are no disciplinary investigation protections, no employment protections and no sickness protections. It is beyond anything we have seen to date and currently they claim the unions have agreed the position since TR. For members record we will be writing to the management shortly on the issues seeking some talks and clarification. To be clear none of the unions would have agreed any such zero hours contract and nor would we, ever. We will look to ensure all those staff being turned over what are their lawful protections and to ensure we access such rights for our members interests.

On top of this, there are record numbers of stand downs, lack of work places, and van spaces for participants. Offenders on orders have no chance of being completed within 12 months. Angry stories where participants turn up for work having travelled far, who have lost pay from their work to be there only to be sent home due to lack of space. Innovation and privatised interest clearly failing to deliver any comprehensive and equitable area wide services. The public sector managed all this and was so well organised and more efficient in the past. In Torquay the CP workshop has been closed when there has been no obvious explanation. In Dorset it is reported little weekend activity and no weekend CP in Exeter. Cornwall is doing well considering the staffing issues and the very real threat to ensuring the great works in that area continue.

6 HMIP

The inspectors have started their much-awaited inquiry and no doubt after the failings of the Working Links way and models dipterous report last August in BGSW, we will be in for some interesting reading. No doubt it will be raising eyebrows, tensions and anxieties in the Working Links way although we wonder do they care anymore. Did they do anything to learn from that experience?

The writing on the wall is a reduced contract period, a working model discredited, and a lack of staff and resources to deliver anything decent. As I write this report, indications are that it is unlikely the HMIP will be ordering commendations and celebratory medals and tie pins. Sadly though, I doubt there will be little holding them to account either. We look forward to March when that report is due to be published, if not sooner, and we urge all staff to continue the policy to tell the inspectors how it really is.

7 The Certification officer Peros V Napo

The substance of the case before the Certification Officer was basically straight forward. There were 4 complaints cited of breach of Napo Constitution and Disciplinary Rules by the Co-Chairs and one Vice Chair and the General Secretary. At the heart of the case was the question “are all members entitled to be dealt with in accordance with the Constitution - whatever the circumstances - or is it legitimate for Napo Officers and Officials to disregard the constitution?

The defence put forward by the Napo Barrister, supported by two lawyers, was that the issues of protecting confidentiality relating to Napo staff members meant the Constitution and Disciplinary Rules were not appropriate.

The Certification Officer was not persuaded by this argument and all 4 complaints of breach against Napo which, had been lodged by my representative, were upheld.

In her determination the Certification Officer declined to make an order against Napo making it clear her reason for not doing so was “Such an Order would, however, add nothing to the current position whereby all members are required to comply with the Constitution and Disciplinary Rules”. It is important to note that during the 12 months prior to the Hearing the Co-Chairs and Vice Chair failed to take up no less than 8 separate offers made by my representative to meet face to face on a “without prejudice” basis, in an attempt to resolve the matter. At least now, no other Napo member will ever have to experience the abuse of power to which I was subjected for over 12 months.

I thank warmly the fantastic role and skills of the lay representative acting for me, Dave Rogan. Ex Napo national rep with all the skills and intelligence to demonstrate in writing and argument everything that anyone on the NAPO officer’s team should have respected, understood, and acted properly on behalf of the membership they serve. The wonderful support of the whole Napo SSW branch executive. Great team, great people, those brave witness statements and our clever friends.

As Marx once said (Groucho, that) – ‘who would want to be in a club that would have someone like me in it.’ I have to say after the experience of that group on behalf of Napo I do have to think long and deep about that. However, and before then I am a real trade unionist and for me that comes first, whatever it takes.

Dino Peros

Napo SSW branch Chair.

41 comments:

  1. To: Branch Chairs, Vice Chairs, Secretaries, Convenors, Family Court SEC, NEC Co-Representatives

    Dear Colleague,
    Acting Vice-Chair 2018-2019

    On Friday 23rd November we received a letter from Denise Mason, Vice-Chair tendering her resignation from her Vice-Chair role with immediate effect.

    The NEC met on 27th November and considered the matter. With reference to section 9 d) of the constitution, the NEC invited nominations for an Acting Vice-Chair to take office immediately and serve until the end of the term to which Denise was elected (AGM 2019).

    NEC reps were given the chance to consider nominations and to consult and three nominations were made.

    NEC then voted by secret ballot and the result was as follows:

    David Raho London Branch 8 votes
    Jamie Overland London Branch 7 votes
    Denice James South Southwestern Branch 3 votes

    Therefore David Raho is elected as Acting Vice-Chair to serve until AGM 2019.

    I am sure members will join me in congratulating the successful candidate and also express their appreciation to the other candidates who stood for election.

    Yours sincerely
    IAN LAWRENCE
    General Secretary

    ReplyDelete
  2. Am I alone in noticing the lack of concern about why Denise has resigned? Will we be told the truth? I do wonder about this organisation....

    ReplyDelete
  3. David Raho was the obvious candidate with his extensive experience of the NEC and the broader trade union movement and values.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I thought that both Raho and Overland were from the same branch. Jamie did very well in the election and was nominated by his branch. Did the branch agree to this double nomination? A bit strange don't you think?

      Delete
    2. A question some of us will be asking in London shortly. Should it not have been given to Jamie as it has been to others in the past?

      Delete
    3. I may be wrong but I don't think that David Raho has been on the NEC prior to this. Can someone confirm or otherwise please?

      Delete
    4. I'm guessing normal process(ii above) of seeking new nominations from branches and all Union members(like we do at end of 2yr tenure) would cost and take time? It would help if clearer explanation was given members.

      Delete
    5. Wow David is an amazing magician. I think the last time he worked front line was pre OASys era. He has carved out a plush little career for himself. Hiding away in union roles, cosying up to management and now he has secured himself a role in a limp low budget version of house of (very cloak and dagger). To heck with London members as per.

      Delete
    6. Who is David Raho please? How would I know him. Were CVs and election addresses submitted for this election and can we see them? There must be some basis on which people cast their votes, on behalf of their members.

      Delete
    7. Sounds like you need to speak to your NEC rep

      Delete
    8. All NEC reps are sworn to secrecy I am told. No wonder members don't trust the top table.

      Delete
    9. It's always been case that NEC reps can't discuss employee or National Officers' personal matters. We would not want our sickness/capability etc history to be circulated to all and sundry, if is confidential to employer.HR and rep' if you have one. NEC and Officers act as employers on behalf of mwmbers. It's not some weird cabal whatever others might like to fantasize. NEC reps are voted into post by their Branches so presumably some Napo members trust them! Sceptic members can ask to accompany a Rep as an observer to a meeting(though they can't sit in the confidential employer sessions)or they stand themselves for election. There are current vacancies in some parts of country.

      Delete
  4. Good to see Napo following its Constitution - keep it up!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As here in Napo Constitution
      9(d) " Should an officer for any reason cease to hold the office to which she or he has been elected before the
      period of office expires, the NEC shall be empowered to fill the vacancy by:
      (i) the appointment of an acting Chair or Vice-Chair,
      or;
      (ii) inviting nominations for the vacant post and conducting an election by secret ballot of all full
      members."

      Delete
    2. This is not what has happened many times in the past. It looks like David Raho has knifed the experienced Jamie Overland. Politics eh ?

      Delete
  5. Why no thanks and appreciation for Denise who has worked so hard for the union and members. I for one want to thank her for her support during a very difficult time (over a year and ongoing). She is an amazing person and representative. What a loss to our union.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Does anyone know why she resigned> it's a strange time of year to do that.

      Delete
    2. Why wasn't the position offered to Jamie? He's obviously still interested because his name went forward.

      Delete
  6. disconnect from the officers of the court argument actually removes many of the cornerstone arguments that used to be part of the pay structure ownership.

    Is the branch chair Dino Peros saying that the CRCs pay will not see any leveling or immediate parity ? It is not clear what is being said there and I want the same pay as NPS colleagues and pension is a serious concern too.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think its just Dino saying it. It is a consequence of the wording in the original OMAct drawn up by Iraq-war-friendly Charlie Falconer (inaugural Justice Sec in 2007), followed by Straw and exploited by Grayling et al to implement TR. It was Blue Labour's wardrobe option to enter the magical world of privatisation, but it backfired after they lost to the coalition govt. The simple serpents who would have drawn up the Act will have been well-aware of the loopholes and no doubt briefed a very receptive Grayling who saw his chance for glory with TR.

      I despise & have paid a high personal price for what that man has done to a range of public services. This was his triumphant brag to Parliament on 30 Oct 2013:

      CHRIS GRAYLING

      Section 3 of the 2007 Act provides a clear and unambiguous power for the Secretary of State to

      “make contractual or other arrangements with any other person for the making of the probation provision.”

      On Second Reading, the then Home Secretary said:

      “The Secretary of State, not the probation boards, will be responsible for ensuring service provision by entering into contracts with the public, private or voluntary sectors. With that burden lifted, the public sector can play to its strengths while others play to theirs.”—[Official Report, 11 December 2006; Vol. 454, c. 593.]

      I could not have described our plans better. Furthermore, on Report, the hon. Member for Bradford South (Mr Sutcliffe) said:

      “Most services will be commissioned from lead providers at area level, which will sub-contract to a range of other providers.”—[Official Report, 28 February 2007; Vol. 457, c. 960.]

      Again, that is very close to the plans before the House today. The shadow Justice Secretary must also know that in another place Baroness Scotland said that the Act

      “places the statutory duty with the Secretary of State, who then commissions the majority of services through a lead provider”.—[Official Report, House of Lords, 27 June 2007; Vol. 693, c. 639.]


      And it clearly WAS a lottery as to which organisation you ended up in:


      Politics.co.uk
      By Ian Dunt Thursday, 3 July 2014 11:25 AM

      "There were fears of chaos in the government's probation privatisation programme today, after it emerged staff had been selected to be moved to private firms by having their names picked out of a hat...

      Grayling wrote back by hand, saying: "You can raise it all you like. Selection was not done by drawing names from a hat. It was based on what the balance of work staff had been doing was."

      Perkins commented: "It was shocking to hear that many staff have been selected for transfer by having their names pulled out of a hat. It's a shambolic conclusion to a worrying process."

      Shadow justice secretary Sadiq Khan said Grayling was "plumbing new depths".

      He added: "It is an absolute disgrace and an insult to professional probation staff as well as a risk to public safety that staff are being allocated to new positions on a random lottery.

      "Chris Grayling flatly denied in the House of Commons this week that staff were allocated by lottery while the probation service was being carved up. But there’s growing evidence that’s precisely what did happen, plumbing new depths even for this government.

      "Treating the future of dedicated and experienced probation staff as if they’re no more than balls in a game of bingo is an insult to their professionalism and the importance of their work in keeping our communities safe."

      The news also confirms fears from many critics that the privatisation of probation is turning into a disaster for the Ministry of Justice."

      Delete
    2. It does raise my pulse reading this and the pain remembered. Grayling. The commentary by Dino Peros is at odds with the claims of NAPO calling for pay parity who is right here? Would this suit the public service pay reductions agenda and that means pay will never be restored until or if probation is reunited. Until then all probation officers should join the NPS than stagnate in low pay non professional CRC jobs.

      Delete
  7. God have mercy. Let's hope David Raho is more visible then he is in London. In our office he is called the invisible rep.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Brief intermission if that's ok?

    Visit https://twitter.com/CoCoAwareness

    Luke & Ryan Hart
    @CoCoAwareness
    Sharing our story of DA, coercion & control, & domestic homicide. Speakers. @WhiteRibbon_UK Ambassadors.
    @RefugeCharity Champions

    EVERYONE - that includes ALL probation staff members at all grades, NPS & CRC - should read their book & listen to their interview on BBCR4 WorldAtOne today.

    ReplyDelete
  9. It's a good thing trust me. David Raho wasn't a strong rep. Not everyone is. His skill sets are best placed else where. I now have Dean Rogers representing me and he is doing an efficient job of it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Perhaps the money we pay for the very costly time of an AGS doing a reps role is exactly what is wrong with Napo.

      Delete
    2. Having good representation is a key part of why people join the Napo Local reps are your colleagues who volunteer for training and take on the role. It is not easy work and juggling the responsibilities with the day job takes its toll. We all have ups and downs. Some areas don't have any local volunteers so those Branches have to ask for help from neighbouring branches or National reps. In my experience(30+ yrs in) the vast majority of members are immensely appreciative of rep support especially in situation where you have been suspended which is a very very isolating place. Working in Probation now is harder than any other time in my life, morale is awful. I come to this Blog less and less now because of the wretched sniping, unpleasant tone of many comments.There are also questions raised which Jim can't necessarily answer and the subject of query is under no obligation to read the Blog or be "accountable" to it either.

      Delete
  10. Can we know what is his skills set? It would be helpful.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Safe pair of hands he is one of the top tables selected.

      Delete
  11. It is important to note that during the 12 months prior to the Hearing the Co-Chairs and Vice Chair failed to take up no less than 8 separate offers made by my representative to meet face to face on a “without prejudice” basis, in an attempt to resolve the matter.

    WTF were these officers \ officials up to then? Eight opportunities yet they go to court and lose. What were the lawyers thinking what were they being told and what was their reasoning to lose a court battle. Was the barrister incompetent? If the case was so overwhelming won what was it really about.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Re election of Acting Vice Chair:-

    It never ceases to amaze me how vitriolic some commentators are prepared to be on here, and often in almost complete ignorance of any facts. To be perfectly honest it creates a very bad impression of us to the outside world and one dreads to think what the quality of interaction is like for clients of the Service.

    I'm finding the quality of contributions have dropped significantly and does nothing for my desire to keep putting effort into something that increasingly just delivers personal abuse. Please, before posting, reflect on how it would make you feel to be on the receiving end, then press send.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you Jim. Whatever one's views about all the nominees it looks as if this election process followed the Constitution. I think David might have been a NEC rep pre-TR? Even if not, in order to be elected as a current NEC rep he would have had to submit a CV and a personal statement. He has contributed to this Blog previously too I think. He will only be in role until next AGM; Others wishing to stand can do so (July time?). I wonder if David being a CRC employee would have been a consideration for those at NEC who voted for him as there's been a previous majority of NPS staff holding Officer positions. I don't know about the other nominees places of work Denice and Jamie

      Delete
  13. The facts seem clear on this one Jim. Despite the fact that members voted earlier in the year and that Jamie Pverland narrowly missed out on election he was not offered the role. Despite a clear precedent having been set on this with Chas Berry. On top of that, a member who has never written an election statement to members or previously stood for national election has put himself forward and been voted in by such a small margin his own vote would have been the casting one. I can’t be the only one here who thinks that if Mr Overland hadn’t brought the emergency motion to AGM, he would probably have woken up a Vice Chair this morning. Also it well known that David and Dean are friends, so does David have a track record of asking difficult but important questions, can he be relied upon to apply correct scrutiny. All questions we have to assume the NEC asked before voting him in.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Its absolutely right to challenge & demand scrutiny of the union's adherence or otherwise to rules & regs & constitution, but the personal unpleasantness has no place on here.

      Delete
    2. I am told a few people made a few key points but the tide of the manipulations were overwhelming.

      Delete
    3. "tide of the manipulations" ? What does this mean please?

      Delete
  14. While you are all naval gazing about your union woes, how about sparing a thought for those who have to do UPW being driven round in illegal unroadworthy vans with doors falling off etc. Being asked to fill in feedback sheets only for the to be binned/shredded back at the office. Also mixing no risk offenders with hardcore ex prison gangbangers, putting staff of UPW charities at risk etc etc. Try asking WLinks why they embezzle the traveling expenses money those offenders who live outside the area and who are entitled to it but dont get it!! Isn't that fraud? Isnt fraud an offence?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Does not the Health and safety at work legislation share out responsibility so that employees can legitimately decline to use dangerous equipment including road vehicles - which are presumably also covered by vehicle condition legislation?

      Delete
  15. Anyone had a look at Interserves share price today? It's looking pretty dire at just over 28p and falling fast.

    'Getafix

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Worrying news from Investors Chronicle:

      "A survey of 250 contractors by the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) found only 2 per cent of respondents thought service quality was the determining factor in winning contracts, while 60 per cent thought a low initial bid price was most important. This poses a significant problem. It leaves groups bidding for non-specialised work such as facilities management on wafer-thin margins, exposing them to unexpected costs such as a rise in the minimum wage or an increase in pension auto-enrolment contributions. To combat this, major outsourcers have little choice but to sell off non-core divisions or contracts in favour of more specialised work where they can command a higher rate. Unfortunately, as the businesses restructure, many are forced to book losses on disposals which, in some cases, damages profits. Whether these improvements will actually deliver in the long term is far from guaranteed as well.

      But the public sector’s appetite for outsourcing doesn't appear to be shrinking. In fact, research from outsourcing specialist Arvato Bertelsmann found that, after a slow start, public sector outsourcing rose 39 per cent year no year in the first half of 2018, before recording its highest level since 2016 in the third quarter of the year. And while Chancellor Philip Hammond announced in his recent budget speech that the government would abolish the use of both PFI and PF2 private finance initiatives (PFI) for future government projects, spending levels show the public sector isn't ending its love affair with outsourcing."

      "Of all the companies, Interserve has been hardest hit in recent weeks. Its shares began to fall when joint-venture partner Renewi (RWI) revealed Interserve had failed to meet agreed payment terms on the majority of its recent bills. Then Interserve raised its full-year net debt forecasts to £625m-£650m from previous estimates of £610m, effectively putting the value of that debt over 12 times the group's market capitalisation."

      Delete
  16. I must emphasise these two elements of the above:

    "A survey of 250 contractors by the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) found only 2 per cent of respondents thought service quality was the determining factor in winning contracts, while 60 per cent thought a low initial bid price was most important."

    "public sector outsourcing rose 39 per cent year on year in the first half of 2018, before recording its highest level since 2016 in the third quarter of the year."

    This merely proves the argument that this government is beyond feckless; its criminally irresponsible & bankrupting the public purse by persisting in giving public money away to companies who are, in their own words, NOT interested in quality of service delivery but are simply keen to fleece the government - and ultimately the taxpayer - of every last penny.

    ReplyDelete
  17. What does it mean? Interserv's share price has dropped below 30 pence for the first time. What does it mean? If the backstop is always the taxpayer, what does it mean?

    ReplyDelete