CCS Management Redundancy Consultation – Trade Union/Staff response.

The proposals to further reduce the Customer Services, Arts, Museums & Events and Leisure & Sports Facilities management teams is of serious concern because the proposals are being brought for consideration as part of a three year management savings (cuts) budget process and these particular Services were the first to be restructured as part of that savings process.

There has been no meaningful discussion with staff about workload or future capacity issues and there seems to have been no consideration in these proposals regarding succession planning or Cross Service Reviews.  We continue to have serious concerns about age discrimination, unfair selection for redundancy, capacity and workplace stress.  The management of these Services is now at its critical mass.

It is unreasonable to make further cuts in Services that have already seen serious reductions to management structures.  We were advised at the time (early 2013) that the Departments other management structures would be reviewed later to achieve the remaining proposed savings.

The integration savings (cuts) decisions are also currently severely reducing both staff numbers and the quality of service delivery within the proposed new structures; the transition to a post cuts Service is a process which is only part complete, almost a year of restructuring has still to take place with undoubtedly a continued period of disruption before this settles into the new service delivery model.

We believe the appropriate solution at this time is to carry out a thorough Service Review of the management structures in the department to identify a fit-for-purpose management structure that will be able to competently deliver services for the foreseeable future.  For example, the Housing function which has transferred to the department was not subject to any Review by P&E or CCS.  The Review should also consider the management structures in all of the organisations commissioned by the CCS Department to provide services, as there is likely to be a duplication of management functions which could be reduced without an impact on service delivery or quality.  We are also concerned about management structures that seem to have no service delivery value in these “external” areas – particularly in the Arts functions where at least five external management posts are funded along with a Chamber of the Arts group.  These appear to have been both unnecessary and also unfairly protected.

Another matter which needs further consideration before any redundancies are proposed should be Savings Options outcomes which have previously been decided for Political reasons but which could make substantial savings and may even improve services if they are given full and proper consideration, eg; Arms Length External Organisations or reducing community grants.   Changes to these Political decisions could remove the need for this 3 year savings (cuts) proposal which we believe will adversely affect the Department.

Where the Service Review process has been used to consider savings the outcomes have ensured that ongoing fit-for-purpose Services are continuing to be delivered by the Council.