The details of job cuts in Children's Services

What follows is the text of a letter sent today to management in Children's Services concerning the cuts in jobs and services which are being proposed;

"Dear Phyllis,

Redundancy Consultation

I regret the unfortunate coincidence that saw the launch of consultation on a major wave of job cuts take place during the week of UNISON Conference.

I am writing with some questions, comments and observations in anticipation of a meeting this afternoon with CYPS management. I write following consultation with the GMB in particular and believe that what I say would generally have the assent of the trade union side.

Context of the Consultation

I remind you that the context of our consultation is set by the requirements of s188(2) of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 and that your officers are required to consult us “with a view to reaching agreement” about ways of;
a) avoiding dismissals;
b) reducing the number of employees to be dismissed, and;
c) mitigating the consequences of dismissals.

In order to commence this consultation you must disclose to us the information required by s188(4) of the Act (which in some cases you plainly have not done).

Overall Scale of Job Losses

Following May’s purported corporate redundancy notification it was clear that the Children and Young People’s Service (CYPS) would bear the brunt of this first wave of job losses (with a projected total of 215 post deletions).

Details of plans to reduce the number of divisions and restructure within the new divisions, deleting posts, were presented to the Trade Unions on Monday 14 June. These proposals delete even more filled posts (at least 283) as a result of deliberate managerial choices to delete more posts in order to create new posts without assimilating existing staff.

This contravenes Lambeth First’s primary objective of increasing the proportion of local people in employment

Resources and Strategy Division

156 posts are being transferred into Resources and Strategy and reduced to 116 posts. This is a net loss of 40 posts but that includes the deletion of 24 vacant posts. However other vacancies are being retained and the total number of jobs at risk is higher than these figures would suggest.

21 staff are “category A” redundant. Additionally 46 staff are in eight different “category B” generic reduction groups from which a net loss of 14 staff is proposed. Therefore it is proposed to delete 35 filled posts as well as 24 vacant posts (19 more than required to achieve a net reduction of 40).

It is clear that the quality of information provided to the trade unions not only falls short of the established norm for Council reorganisations but also still fails to comply with s188(4)(b) and (c) of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act since job titles are not provided in all instances.

Buildings and Schools for the Future Division

The “new” “BSF” Division has a net loss of 8.35 FTE posts from 44. However 7 staff are “category A” and 18 staff are in four different “category B” generic reduction groups from which a net loss of 8 staff is proposed. It is therefore proposed to deleted a total of 15 filled posts (7 more than required to achieve the proposed net reduction).

Directorate wide reduction in Business Support posts

In respect of the brief business case for these deletions it is not clear whether the total number of post deletions here is double counted in other documentation. I am assuming that this is not the case but would appreciate confirmation.

Universal Division proposals in outline

At the level of Divisional Management there appear to be proposals for the deletion of four filled posts.

School Standards and Improvement SubDivision

This area sees significant cuts, including;
• Deletion of the EMA (Ethnic Minority Achievement) team;
• Delation of the the SEN (Special Educational Needs) Literacy team;
• Deletion of the National Strategies team;
• Deletion of the “Best for All” team;
• Deletion of schools IT support;
• Reduction of School Improvement Adviser and Teaching and Learning Consultant posts.
This is described in the document as an overall reduction of “about 70” posts.

In practice this translates into the deletion of 34 posts (23 filled posts and 11 vacancies) as “Category A” (additionally 21 casually employed intepreters and translators see their roles eliminated). There are also fourteen filled posts in two generic “Category B” reduction groups from which a net loss of ten filled posts is sought (in some cases groups are described as “Category B” although only vacancies are being deleted – “Category B” vacancy deletions account for a further 7 posts reductions. The total number of post deletions is 51 posts (of which 33 are filled posts) plus the 21 casually employed staff.

Community Children SubDivision

The poorly drafted and opaque “business case” for this SubDivision will certainly give rise to a major dispute unless there is a significant change of approach from management.

This area encompasses the One O’Clock Clubs, Adventure Playgrounds and Kennington Children’s Centre (other Children’s Centres are managed by and within local schools).

Within this area three PO9 posts, one PO6 and one PO4 are directly assimilated into new posts. Otherwise in the One O’Clock Clubs and Adventure Play all posts are deleted – even though sufficient posts are being created that no redundancies are financially necessary. Between these two areas this amounts to the deletion (as “Category A”) of 79 posts (of which 65 are filled posts).

At Kennington Children’s Centre the posts of 9 staff are deleted as Category A (8 of which are filled) (some posts here are part time so the FTE figures are 6.28 FTE posts (5.28 filled). Additionally 9 staff are in a “Category B” generic reduction group from which 7 filled posts are amongst the 10 posts being deleted.

Across the Community Children SubDivision there are therefore a total of 80 filled posts being deleted. At the same time 84 new posts are being created. If anyone in CYPS management thinks that it is acceptable to assimilate only the senior managers whilst making eighty unnecessary redundancies of low paid staff then they are in for a rude awakening.

Education Strategy and Planning SubDivision

This small SubDivision takes on some of the functions of the current “Building Schools for the Future” Division. 3 posts (2 filled) are deleted as “Category A” and 1 new post is created.

Targeted Division Proposals in outline

At Divisional Management level there are three “Category A” deletions and three senior staff affected by the deletion of two posts in a “Category B” generic reduction group within the overall framework of the reduction from nine to five posts at this senior level.

Change Management and TAC SubDivision

The information provided for this area fails to indicate in many cases the numbers of new posts. There has been a total failure to comply with s188 in respect of this SubDivision.

Inclusion Services SubDivision

There are significant staffing reductions in this area. 23 posts are deleted as Category A (of which 20 are filled) and a total of 41 staff are in 8 different “Category B” generic reduction groups from which there is a net loss of 11 filled posts (as well as 3 vacancies). The total reduction in posts is therefore 37 posts (31 filled posts).

Specialist Youth Services SubDivision

In addition to the direct impact of job losses the management document itself highlights the risk of excessive workloads in this area. Two posts are deleted as “Category A” (one of which is filled) and 27 staff are in “Category B” generic reduction groups from which a net loss of six filled posts and three vacancies are sought. The overall loss is of 11 posts (7 of which are filled posts).

Community Youth Services SubDivision

23 posts are deleted as “Category A” (17 of which are filled posts) and 21 staff are in two “Category B” generic reduction groups from which a net loss of 16 filled posts are sought. Therefore the total reduction in posts is 39 (33 of which are filled). The larger generic reduction group is of full time youth support workers (a reduction from 23 down to 8) which is accompanied by an increase in the number of part time youth support workers from 21 to 36. There are also 15.5 FTE other new posts in the structure. (Overall the net reduction in posts is only 15.5, from 104 FTE to 88.5 FTE).

Conclusion

I conclude that we will need intensive and extensive consultation Division by Division and SubDivision by SubDivision – but conducted at Directorate level in order to challenge rigorously proposals from local managers which are tending to increase rather than reduce the number of redundancy dismissals. These consultations must take place with a view to reaching agreement about ways of reducing the number of dismissals.

Further questions and observations

In all the above cases the trade unions need far better quality information in order to contribute meaningfully. In particular we need to see documents with lists of names rather than only initials, in line with the Council’s normal established practice. Obviously those lists would be confidential and would be used only to enable trade unions to contact affected members.

The following additional points have been raised with the trade union side by the GMB arising from consultation with their members and I take this opportunity to pass them on;

• When were the new job descriptions evaulated and by whom? What are the scores?
• Term time only employees cannot be consulted during periods when they are not contracted to work and therefore the consultation period should be extended by the school closure period.
• Agency workers have been recruited this month in PDC
• Amended proposals have been issued to staffs in the Park Campus in the last week and the trade unions have not been advised
• Some staff do not have access to a PC e.g. 1 O’clock clubs
• Consultation starting on different days up to 7 days apart
• Members have advised us of a shortage of consultation packs at some meetings.

I look forward to continuing this discussion this afternoon.

Please note that UNISON reserves our position in respect of s189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 and also to declare a trade dispute with the Council about this matter.

Best wishes,

Jon Rogers"

Following this afternoon's meeting it has been agreed that we will meet weekly to consult on the proposed redundancies.

Watch this space...