Barnet council - more handwashes than Carex

I promised in my previous post to tell you the story of Nick Walkley and the Connaught workers. I think it illustrates perfectly some of the problems with Barnet council.

In September 2010 Connaught went bust. They mainly did building repairs and maintenance for local authorities. Barnet Homes had a contract with them. Once upon a time, the people working for Connaught doing building repairs had been directly employed by the council, but those workers were TUPE'd to Connaught (possibly to Barnet Homes inbetween - it gets complicated!).

TUPE'd is a trade unionist's shorthand for transferred from one employer to another. TUPE is the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations. I'll let ACAS explain:

The Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations (TUPE) protects employees' terms and conditions of employment when a business is transferred from one owner to another. Employees of the previous owner when the business changes hands automatically become employees of the new employer on the same terms and conditions. It's as if their employment contracts had originally been made with the new employer. Their continuity of service and any other rights are all preserved. Both old and new employers are required to inform and consult employees affected directly or indirectly by the transfer.

When Connaught went bust, a company called Lovell took over many of the Connaught contracts, but, for a while, it was not clear whether they wanted the contract with Barnet.

The former Connaught workers, many of them members of the Unison union, were left in limbo for several days, not knowing whether they still had a job. They received notice of redundancy, which was then withdrawn, and then reinstated, and so on, while KPMG, the liquidator, Barnet Homes and Lovell got their act together.

It was a very stressful time for the Connaught workers. Barnet Unison called for the workers and the work to be taken back inhouse - at least, for Barnet Homes to take it back. When Maggi Myland spoke to Nick Walkley about this in the lunch queue at NLBP, she was urging him to take an interest, to see what he could do to help sort things out for the ex-Connaught workers.

What was Walkley's attitude? It's nothing to do with us, the workers no longer work for Barnet council or even Barnet Homes - no matter that they were working on Barnet Homes properties. No matter that it had never been their choice to be transferred to the private sector.

Walkley's face, a picture of pure puzzlement. Me, have anything to do with the Connaught workers? In short, he washed his hands of the affair. While, from a purely legal point of view, he was correct, from a political point of view he was wrong. What happened with this contract was a matter for Barnet council.

As we know, Barnet council is planning to outsource the bulk of its services, which will mean many more council workers being TUPE'd. The example of what happened to the Connaught workers is just one reason for Barnet council workers' alarm at the prospect of being shoved into the private sector; it's why some of them are currently taking industrial action, and more of them are considering it.

Lovell did engage the former Connaught workers in the end, although a wrangle over who would pay them for some overtime they did in summer 2010 went on for a long time (it might still be going on).

Why I remembered this was the latest revelations on Barnet council's relations with MetPro. Mrs Angry has received a letter from Barnet council telling her that the council received one copy of a piece of film of residents made (illegally) by MetPro, and that they destroyed it. And that is where they think their responsibility ends. They also say MetPro assured them they had all the appropriate SIA licences - they didn't.

Barnet council thinks all the responsibility lies with the private company, not with them. Barnet council hasn't cocked up; it doesn't have a responsibility to check what contractors are up to, even when they are breaking the law.

Barnet council's upper echelons don't recognise that they need to take political responsibility, even where legal responsibility cannot be pinned on them, for errors committed on their premises, by their contractors (I use the term loosely because, as we know, they appear not to have had a contract with MetPro).

Barnet council thinks it can wash its hands of contracted-out employees? It thinks it can wash its hands of the fate of residents put at the mercy of contractors? You can take that puzzled look off your face, Nick Walkley. You're wrong, it just doesn't wash.

Connaught workers: what it means to be a wage slave

After an outrageous display of dithering by the authorities, it appears that the former Connaught workers do have a job. Barnet Unison contacted KPMG last night and learned that KPMG had not known that Lovell had agreed to take the workers on when they issued redundancy notices.

It is still a very anxious time for the workers while they wait for all their paperwork. Why should they bear the stress? Connaught went bust; KPMG are disorganised. We all know that it is not a question of a bit of paperwork to the Connaught workers: it's about their lives!

This episode highlights something that it's easy to lose sight of. In this society if people don't have a job they go hungry (unless, of course, they are rich...). You can't scratch a living from the soil anymore (thank goodness!). We can't all become small business people providing goods and services to each other. Where would we get the money to pay for them? Who would make the things we sell?

One of the aspects of wage slavery that makes it so awful is the insecurity. In the era of modern capitalism, before it was somewhat civilised by the advent of public services, we didn't work unless someone was making a profit from it. We had no control over whether we worked or not and, thus - in a world of relative plenty - whether we ate or not.

Slavish devotion to the free market as a way to run the economy, the turn to privatisation away from public services (Future Shape/easyCouncil), entails a return to more insecurity for workers, and more stress like that the Connaught workers are going through. It's a bonkers idea.

Connaught workers: do they have a job or not?

The local papers are reporting that Connaught workers doing council house repairs for Barnet Homes, made redundant when Connaught went bust, have got their jobs back. But the picture is scandalously unclear. Yes, the unions had a meeting with Lovell, who are taking over some of the Connaught contracts, and with Barnet Homes this morning. And they were told they would be taken back on.

Some of them, Unison members, attended the lobby of the Barnet council meeting tonight. They wanted to talk about their experience. While they were there, their union rep received  notification from KPMG, the receivers, that they do not have jobs.

I don't know the situation at the moment, but they were shocked and upset to be treated in this way. Barnet Homes should take the workers back on now. It is a scandalous way to treat workers. And meantime council house repairs are going undone.


Connaught workers at the lobby of Hendon Town Hall, 14 September 2010

Connaught's bottom line: a cautionary tale for fans of Future Shape

While I was helping out with the trades council stall against cuts and privatisation in Burnt Oak on Saturday, a Connaught van pulled up at the side of the road. I waylaid the passenger as they got out. They were from Hammersmith and Fulham. They too had been sacked - by text message - last week, but quickly re-employed by Lovell, the company that has taken over Connaught's more lucrative contracts. They had a lot of sympathy for the sacked Connaught workers in Barnet.

This story tells us a lot about what it means to rely on the private sector to provide public services. Basically, Connaught's contract with Barnet, due to be ended by Barnet itself in February, is just not worth any private company's time or effort. So now the workers are idle, and the repairs are going undone. Barnet Homes is negotiating for the contract to be taken on by a new company (and the 45 workers will have their third employer in a row), but if there isn't enough clear profit in it, no company will want to take it on. The workers will still be idle, and the repairs will still be undone.

Why should much-needed public services only get done when they can make a profit for someone? It doesn't make sense. The need is there, and the people are there to do the work. Where does profit come into it? It's the public purse that will pay for it in either case. Why wouldn't we want all of our money spent on the service, instead of some of it going into private pockets?

Barnet council should have done and bring the council house repairs back inhouse. The workers can go back to repairing people's houses and Barnet residents will be getting the best value for their money.

Connaught workers sacked by conference call

Sent this morning from John Burgess, Barnet Unison secretary:

I have to report some shocking news. At 6pm last night former council workers TUPE’d first to Barnet Homes then TUPE’d to Connaught were sacked. How were they given this shocking and distressful news?

They were sacked by conference call!

That’s right. In all my time I don’t think I have heard anything so cowardly but I should not be surprised. Fremantle was a nightmare for our members but this is truly awful.

Members are still reeling from the news and we are trying to find out what can be done. In the interim we will be meeting with our members to see what support we can offer our members and their families.

I am asking for messages of support to be sent to me at john.burgess@barnetunison.org.uk

Whilst we look at some of the options I would ask Barnet Unison members to make sure they alert colleagues to what has happened and make sure you have made arrangements to come along to the lobby of the council meeting at Hendon Town Hall on Tuesday 14 September (6-7pm). We will have our Connaught members alongside us and it would be great if they could have your support.

UPDATE: I've searched the national news and found out that construction group Morgan Sindall have taken over most of the Connaught contracts, and are retaining 2,500 of the 4,400 staff. Does that mean they have decided the rest are surplus to requirements? BBC Liverpool reports a similar story to Barnet, so we can assume this is happening the length and breadth of the country.

Connaught collapse - Back to the Future Shape?

Barnet council is currently embarking on a mass privatisation drive (Future Shape aka easyCouncil); they want to stop direct employment of council workers and farm them and service delivery out to arms length companies such as Barnet Homes and to multinationals such as... Connaught.

Oops. Connaught, the firm that has the contract for council house repairs in Barnet, among other places, is going bust. What will happen to Connaught's local workforce (once TUPE'd over to Barnet Homes and then again to Connaught)? Hopefully, they will be brought back into the Barnet fold.

It's a worrying time for the Connaught workers, annoying for Barnet's council tenants, who have only an emergency repairs service (as I understand it), and alarming for all Barnet residents who care to think about it: privatising services is no guarantee of a reliable, cheap service, yet Barnet's Tories present it as the answer to all our prayers.

In fact, the Connaught story shows Future Shape happening in reverse, no bad thing!

Connaught contract shows dangers of Barnet easyCouncil

News that Barnet council is ending its contract with Connaught for repairs to council homes does not come as a surprise. The company is in financial trouble and has been falling behind on repairs. Council tenants hve been paying the price for the difficulties experienced by a private company. And Barnet residents collectively have to bear the difficulties that follow the council ending the contract.

Connaught workers themselves were first transfered to Barnet Homes and then to Connaught when repairs were outsourced. They have been moved from pillar to post. Needless to say, their jobs have only got harder as they have moved further away from direct council employment. Now, at least, they hope to come back closer to inhouse, and be transfered back to Barnet Homes.

The Connaught saga shows the dangers of adopting the easyCouncil outscourcing model. As far as possible, we should keep services provided inhouse, where they can be accountable to Barnet residents, and all the money spent on them goes into providing a good service, not the profits of a private company.

Read the Times series report here.