SCC rehiring loads of staff it made redundant

Sheffield council have rehired "Droves" of staff they made redundant with large pay offs.

These people are being rehired as agency staff doing basically the same job as they did before . Now although their original jobs no longer officially exist , obviously a slight change in their job titles has meant the council has got around employment laws .

What a waste of tax payers money yet again fronm SCC.

http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/sheffield-council-rehiring-droves-of-staff-it-made-redundant-1-6968594

But they are now agency staff who the council can get rid of at any time and they have neither the employment rights or pose the burden a full time employee might. It may make perfect sense when you look at the figures. This is just as common in the private sector, so no real news.

But they are now agency staff who the council can get rid of at any time and they have neither the employment rights or pose the burden a full time employee might. It may make perfect sense when you look at the figures. This is just as common in the private sector, so no real news.

Im sure the council tax payers of sheffield will think its news that their money is being wasted on redundancy pay for staff who reappear , in the same job as agency staff shortly after.

This is just as common in the private sector, so no real news.

I'd say it's that common in the private sector that it could be described as standard practice.

I thought several users were always complaining the council should be operated more like a commercial business?

Im sure the council tax payers of sheffield will think its news that their money is being wasted on redundancy pay for staff who reappear , in the same job as agency staff shortly after.

Seriously you do not understand what is being said and its unlikely you are comparing like with like. It may make perfect economic sense to do this and will save the council tax payer money in the future. It seems you dont understand the difference of employing a full time member of staff and the obligations/ expense compared with employing someone as an agency worker.

Couldnt really careless if it makes economic sense or not, it doesnt make moral sense.

A council using agency staff or zero hour contracts to effectively bypass employment rules is not the kind of country we should be living in, its a backwards step for workers and a supposed civilised society.

I'd say it's that common in the private sector that it could be described as standard practice.

 

I thought several users were always complaining the council should be operated more like a commercial business?

I would say it is common practice in the Private sector. I myself was made redundant from a massive International Company, and set on again as a

an outside contractor. Carrying out work for them as and when required

Am amazed Mr Private Enterprise Penistone999 disapproves of the system

Surely they are spending more money by paying the agency fees on top of the workers wage?

Couldnt really careless if it makes economic sense or not, it doesnt make moral sense.

 

A council using agency staff or zero hour contracts to effectively bypass employment rules is not the kind of country we should be living in, its a backwards step for workers and a supposed civilised society.

Why should a council have to only use its own staff if it doesnt need full time permanent ones? What about its duty to try and manage the money and services it provides in the best interests of the tax payer? Whether you care about economics or not its still soemthing they have to deal with. If the money saved helps them provide more services then good for them.

Not sure how you square the circle if you dont have any interest in economics. Where would you be getting the extra money from? More tax?

---------- Post added 24-11-2014 at 17:04 ----------

Surely they are spending more money by paying the agency fees on top of the workers wage?

You would have to see the figures. In the short term agency staff may cost more (depends on terms), but they get the advantage of flexibility and when they dont need them then they dont have to pay. One of the big things they may be worried about is the continuing liability over pensions.

Until you see the figures then its hard to say. the article doesnt provide enough insight, but i cant see how this is much different from how businesses work and the Council as an employer conducts its business. Not sure how many they employ now but in the last 30 years many departments have been transferred out of direct council employ to the private sector. How many did they employ in the 60s and 70s? Tens of thousands? Times change.

Why should a council have to only use its own staff if it doesnt need full time permanent ones? What about its duty to try and manage the money and services it provides in the best interests of the tax payer? Whether you care about economics or not its still soemthing they have to deal with. If the money saved helps them provide more services then good for them.

 

Not sure how you square the circle if you dont have any interest in economics. Where would you be getting the extra money from? More tax?

 

---------- Post added 24-11-2014 at 17:04 ----------

 

 

You would have to see the figures. In the short term agency staff may cost more (depends on terms), but they get the advantage of flexibility and when they dont need them then they dont have to pay. One of the big things they may be worried about is the continuing liability over pensions.

 

Until you see the figures then its hard to say. the article doesnt provide enough insight, but i cant see how this is much different from how businesses work and the Council as an employer conducts its business. Not sure how many they employ now but in the last 30 years many departments have been transferred out of direct council employ to the private sector. How many did they employ in the 60s and 70s? Tens of thousands? Times change.

Where does it say i have no interest in economics????

If they are re-hiring staff through an agency common sense would tell you that they do need those staff. The council should have a duty to use moral employment practices. We cant say if any money has actually been saved or not, i havnt seen any reliable figures and certianly havnt seen any more services provided as you suggest.

The increased wealth inequality in our country shows who needs to pay more tax.

Such employment practices are a major contributing reason why people dont recieve a living wage and why people cant afford to buy there own homes.

It is interesting to see just how much of the work "council workers"used to do is now done by outsourcing, many times it is the ex council staff doing the work.

"Major contracts

We have a number of major strategic contracts. These are carefully managed in order to get best value from them and are often longer term than standard contracts.

In an effort to be more transparent about how we work as a business you can find greater detail about each of these below.

Kier KAPS

Kier Services

Capita

Veolia

Amey

Howden House (PFI)

Taylor Shaw"

https://www.sheffield.gov.uk/business-economy/contracts/scc/major-contracts.html

Whether it's standard practice or not those employees are still being treated like dirt.