Showing posts with label LIVERPOOL CARE CRISIS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label LIVERPOOL CARE CRISIS. Show all posts

Friday, 13 June 2008

LIVERPOOL CITY COUNCIL CHIEF EXECUTIVE COLIN HILTON BREAKS HIS OWN POLICIES AND COSTS LIVERPOOL £1/4 MILLION

TONY PARRISH HAS DONE IT AGAIN!

HIS LATEST LEAK COMES DIRECT FROM COLIN HILTON'S OFFICE


At a time when liverpool city council have to close down front line services, close elderly homes, sack homecarers, give our housing stock away, make another thousand council workers redundant and make savings of £62 Milion, Colin Hilton the man who has been charged with making these savings, spends £1/4 Million on a head hunting mission that is against the standing orders of the same Liverpool City Council, that we the people of Liverpool, pay him to uphold!



See below for the full story courtesey of LIVERPOOL SUBCULTURE

Thursday, June 12, 2008

Just when you thought it had all gone quiet....another leaked report on Colin Cover Up

Chief executive Colin Cover Up has repeatedly broken the city council's own rules to appoint squads of headhunters - at a staggering cost to council taxpayers of more than £500,000.

That's the damning conclusion of an internal audit report into the appointment of Executive recruitment agencies, which has been leaked from a meeting of Cover Up's own Executive Management Team.

And it also warns that the city council may have acted illegally in their appointment procedure for a new City Solicitor, because it broke the council's own rules.

(Illegally appointing the top legal eagle, eh? You couldn't make this stuff up! eds)

The report accuses Cover Up, aka the £250,000-a-year Mr Hilton, CBE, and his team of highly paid Executive Directors, of breaking the council's own rules in engaging agencies to fill top positions.

It tells how the city council has engaged two recruitment agencies Veredus and Gatenby Sanderson since April 2006 at a mind-boggling cost of £445,000.

Veredus were originally taken on to handle the appointment of two senior positions in the Regeneration portfolio.

The leaked report says:
"But it appears that another portfolio has used their services without following the quotation procedures. In 2006/7 a total of £208K was paid to Veredus with £39K being paid to them in 2007/8."

(What? The worst council in the country forked out a quarter of a million quid to headhunters to fill just three posts? Are they certifiably insane? eds)
The leaked report says that Gatenby Sanderson were also taken on to recruit four 'executive positions', but:

"they have been used to fill at least one additional position for which quotation procedures were not followed. Having spent £53K on Gatenby Sanderson in 2006/7, a futher £145K was spent in 2007/8."

(This is mind-blowing. Are they totally out of control and above their own law? eds)

Hilton again failed to obey proper procedures when he appointed yet another recruitment agency, Rockpools to handle the appointment of a new City Solicitor (in a failed attempt to replace Ken Unworthy - but that's another story, eds)

The cost of that has yet to emerge but easily takes the total bill past half a million smackeroos....

The picture painted by the report is of Cover Up lolloping around the Municipal Buildings doling out public money here there and everywhere, without so much as a by-your-leave.

And breaking every council rule in the book into the bargain.

Presumably the Fireman was on a freebie in Las Vegas at the time, or making a speech about how things have got so much better in the last ten years?

The council's Standing Orders say that for expenditure below £100,000, three separate quotes need to be obtained.

Hilton routinely ignored this and gave away contracts to recruitment agencies without following established rules and procedures.

We wonder how many other contracts he has given away and to whom?

The internal report says that the 'three quotes' rule must be obeyed except in emergencies, or where competitive prices cannot be obtained.

It adds:

"In such circumstances it is the Head of Corporate Procurement who decides whether the procurement can be made, not the the Chief Officer (Cover Up)."

In other words, Cover Up old fruit, you exceeded your authority well and truly - do not overstep the mark again. Shades of the evil Sir Diddy, aka Sir David Henshaw.

(Editor's Note: What should happen now, of course, is that Hilton should summon himself to his own office in the Municipal Buildings and read himself a letter, from himself, suspending himself from duty, pending an investigation into these 'procurement irregularities.'

Then, in the time honoured tradition, he should strip himself of his mobile phone, blackberry and council pass; force himself to empty all the council paper clips from the pocket of his smoking jacket and then escort himself off the premises past his open-mouthed colleagues.

He should only pause on the way out, as he passes the rottweiller McElhinney's Jaguar, to quietly advise himself "not to let this drag out, in your own interests."

Then he should ban himself from talking to any of his colleagues, speaking to the media, or visiting any council premises.

He should send himself threatening letters hand-delivered by taxi-courier to his own home late at night, summon himself for medical examinations on a whim and carry out an extraordinary campaign of harassment and attempted intimidation against himself.

If Cover Up thought any of these corporate bully-boy tactics were part of an incredible abuse of power and morally indefensible, he could always start his own blog, or something, to expose those responsible - ie, himself.

But of course, none of that could possibly happen in Liverpool. It would be utterly unthinkable.

Although it would make a suitably surreal plot for our colleague, Prof Chucklebutty.)

Meanwhile, the internal leaked report concludes:

"EMT are reminded that the Contract Standing Orders apply to all officers and must not be circumvented under any circumstances."

Interesting choice of word.

The Executive Management Team are then advised to "consider their position" (some cheeky auditor's invitation for them to resign, eds) "in relation to the City Solicitor Post given that the Contract Standing Orders have not been followed in procuring the services of Rockpools."

What all this means is that Cover Up has been astonishingly reckless with public money, wasting hundreds of thousands of pounds of council taxpayers dosh and flagrantly breaking all council rules into the bargain.

And he will brazen the whole thing out with no action being taken against him by the weak and cowardly Lib Dims. Perhaps Cover Up will, however, order a leak inquiry? He has it all to do now.

So an everyday story for the city council, then.

Memo to the city council leak machine: Thanks very much for leaking this report - it confirms our worst suspicions - and we know there is more still to come. If you would care to provide further detail about the other sensational matters mentioned in previous missives, we will be happy to reproduce them here in full for our adoring public. However, can we make a special request? The latest leak passed to us was on a single A4 sheet of paper - that's the ideal length, because we are extremely busy with other matters at the moment and we can't be arsed ploughing through the usual council report gobbledegook of 97 pages of tedium. Keep the next few leaks similarly short and snappy and to the point. You can email further leaks to tonysparrishioners@hotmail.co.uk, or liverpoolsdandypat@hotmail.com, or liverpoolevilcabal@hotmail.com Any of those will get to the right people one way or another. Ta very much.

Friday, 13 July 2007

LIVERPOOL CARE CRISIS GETS EVEN WORSE!

PRIVATE CARE PROVIDERS LYNHURST HAVE TODAY GIVEN NOTICE OF LIQUIDATION, LEAVING OVER 500 VULNERABLE AND ELDERLY SERVICE USERS AT RISK!

LIVERPOOL CITY COUNCIL HAVE KNOWN FOR WEEKS THAT THIS WOULD HAPPEN YET THEY HAVE DONE NOTHING TO PREVENT IT!

350 HOME CARER STAFF FROM LIVERPOOL CITY COUNCIL WERE RECENTLY GIVEN NOTIFICATION OF REDUNDANCIES!

JUST WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON IN THIS CITY?

READ BELOW FOR TODAY'S REPORT...





Liverpool care firm collapse hits 500 patients

Jul 13 2007


by Jessica Shaughnessy, Liverpool Daily Post


A HOME care agency relied on by hundreds of Liverpool’s most vulnerable people is to go into liquidation.

Lyndhurst Home Care will shut down today, leaving more than 500 service users, mostly elderly, and 200 carers uncertain of their future.

The closure comes just weeks after the company warned that controversial changes in city council contracts would drive it out of business.

Liverpool City Council last night moved to reassure the elderly people dependent on the agency that plans were already in place to look after them.

But care industry insiders say the news spells the start of a “wake-up call” for the authority. Tearful carers, who will not be officially informed by Lyndhurst, about the redundancies until a meeting at 3pm today, last night accused company directors of keeping them in the dark.

One said: “We feel used and let down. Our future has been hanging in the balance since the new contracts were signed weeks ago.

“We were encouraged by our managers to campaign against the council and attend meetings. We stuck up for Lyndhurst.

“They have been planning this for days and they have not told us a thing. We have only heard rumours.”

In a legal letter written to the council days before it went under, Lyndhurst blamed recent controversial contract changes, and asked for an urgent meeting in a last ditch-bid to avoid liquidation.

The letter said: “The implications of making staff redundant will be that some 525 service users will not receive care from the company.

“This may result in life-threatening situations for those service users that have a high degree of dependency on the care provided.

“The company has attempted on a number of occasions to raise these concerns with Liverpool City Council. Despite these efforts, no constructive response has been received.

“The company wishes to avoid any liquidation proceedings and would seek to meet with LCC as a matter of urgency to try and resolve this situation.” But this week no compromise agreement was reached, and the company will now fold.

The carers and services users are now being divided between three of the city’s other care providers, Merseycare Julianne, Homecarers and Local Solutions.

Managers at the firms and council officers are said to have been working around the clock over the last three days to ensure as smooth a transition as possible.

The council says that where possible, patients will be transferred to a new company with their existing carer.

Officers were last night contacting as many carers as possible to tell them which company they will be working for from tomorrow.

Executive director of community services Tony Hunter said: “Our first priority is the safety and care of our clients.

“I am pleased that we have been able to work very closely with our other providers, who have shown great professionalism and commitment during this challenging period in agreeing to take on the additional work at extremely short notice.

“Our commitment to providing excellent services will continue throughout this transition period and the city council and its contractors will be providing advice and support, and overseeing the entire process until all of the necessary arrangements are in place.

“Every single person who receives care from Lyndhurst will be receiving a letter from the city council outlining the process and how the new arrangements will be implemented.”

The city’s home care industry warned its future was unstable after their contracts were changed.

The terms meant that carers faced a pay cut of up to 30% and in the weeks after the companies signed up, staff walked out in their droves.

But last night, one home care manager said the future would be more certain for the other companies. He said: “A major problem for all of the companies was that we were given less hours on a lower rate.

“Now the agencies left over have more hours, it means we will become more viable.”

GMB regional organiser Karen Atkinson said last night that unions and staff were still in the dark about the developments.

She said: “We asked Lyndhurst only this morning what was going on and they denied they were closing.

“The staff are very distressed. Some of them say they have not received the right wages in two weeks.”

Cllr Roz Gladden, Labour chairwoman of the Health and Social Care Select Committee, said: “This has been on the cards for weeks and the council did not listen and now there is chaos. This is no way to run a service.”

Last night, the director of Lyndhurst, Len Collins, was unavailable for comment.

* SERVICE users or carers who would like information about arrangements made for their care or future employment should call the city council’s Careline call centre on 0151 233 3019.

  • READ more news from the Liverpool Daily Post

  • Top Top

    Print this article Close window


    Thursday, 5 July 2007

    LIVERPOOL CARE CRISIS CONTINUED



    AS LIVERPOOL ELDERLY AND VULNERABLE RESIDENTS FACE MORE UPSET AND FEAR, FROM THE PROPOSED AND IMPLIMENTED CHANGES IN THE PRIVATE CARE SECTOR AND ALSO THE IN HOUSE HOME CARE SERVICE OF THE COUNCIL, HAVE MEANT ONCE AGAIN THE PEOPLE WHO RELY UPON THE CARERS AND THE SERVICES THEY PROVIDE ARE PUNISHED.Councillor Antrobus, the Liberal Democrat who voted to cut your care!


    READ BELOW FOR DETAILS OF HOW CHANGES IN THE LAW WILL ALSO HAVE A MAJOR EFFECT UPON THE VERY PEOPLE WE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE LOOKING AFTER!

    Elderly face soaring home-help charges

    By STEVE DOUGHTY - More by this author » Last updated at 00:25am on 2nd July 2007

    Comments Comments (1)

    elderly woman

    Hundreds of thousands of elderly people are paying huge charges for home help


    Hundreds of thousands of elderly people are facing steep charges for home-help, a report will say this week.

    The rate at which town halls are cutting back on meals-on-wheels and help with dressing, cleaning and shopping is increasing fast, the study has found.

    It means thousands of frail and vulnerable people face a growing f

    inancial struggle to live in their own homes.

    For many, the only alternative will be moving to a residential care home, where the council only pays the bill once they have exhausted residents' savings.

    The accelerating cutbacks are set out in a survey conducted by the Counsel and Care charity.

    It found that two out of three social services departments provide-free help at home to only the most dependent and disabled householders, and that the number of councils restricting free services went up by 15 per cent last year.

    Local government chiefs have themselves warned that 400,000 people will lose free help at home by 2009.

    Those who are forced to pay are charged an average of more than £160 a week, with some town halls demanding £320 - roughly the average weekly income for retired couples.

    Each local authority has its own means testing system for deciding who should receive help to live at home.

    The Daily Mail's Dignity for the Elderly campaign has exposed the pain and loss caused by the system, which forces many to go into care homes and sell their houses to meet the bills.

    Last year an influential report by former Treasury troubleshooter Sir Derek Wanless called for a major increase in Government spending on homehelp services.

    He found that those who stay in their own homes are happier and cheaper to help.

    Sir Derek accused council social services departments of trying to push the elderly into care homes in order to grab the value of their property.

    Stephen Burke, of Counsel and Care, said: "Our figures show the social care problem will not solve itself.

    "Without active intervention, the system is going to collapse as more and more people need to be cared for at home."


    WILL THIS BE ONE OF YOUR RELATIVES AFTER WAITING FOR CARE?

    SIGN THE PETITION FOR INCREASE IN BUDGETS FOR CARE, CLICK HERE

    Tuesday, 3 July 2007

    LIVERPOOL CITY ELDERLY CARE CRISIS






    Care workers’ may take legal action if wages are cut

    UNDERPAID care workers may mount a wave of legal action against Liverpool care agencies if they see a 30% pay cut, it emerged last night.

    Private care companies say they have no choice but to cut staff pay after contract changes by the city council – which unions say could drive some workers to industrial action.

    Last night, agencies said com-plicated EU employment laws which protect staff’s rights could leave them open to legal action by employees – which they fear could push them out of business.

    But the city council insisted it could not get involved in person- nel issues, and union leaders warned the buck stops with the employer.

    One care agency source said: “It could get very messy. When the changes are implemented from July 1, staff know they face big pay-cuts. Contrary to what the council might say, we work by tight profit margins. If the coun- cil pays us less, we have to pay the carers less. But the council do not pay carers, we do, so we are the ones who have to sort it out.”

    The agencies are concerned about a complicated European legislation called TUPE (Transfer of Undertakings), designed to protect employees when work is transferred to another firm. It means new employers cannot change their contract terms.

    Another senior member of staff at a city care agency said: “No-one knows for certain exactly how TUPE is going to affect us. But, after taking advice, we have been warned that when the new contracts are implemented and a lot of clients are transferred to different agencies, the staff may be entitled to go with them.

    “That would mean we would be unable to change their terms and conditions. We would have to pay what they are on now and under the new contracts it will mean we are not viable.”

    GMB regional organiser Karen Atkinson said not only could the care companies face legal action under TUPE, but they may face collective industrial action.

    She said: “The council may have implemented the changes initially, but it doesn’t necessar-ily follow that the companies have to follow through with them. They could put in more money of their own, they should talk with the unions.

    “If the staff feel strongly enough about it, they could take a legal action under TUPE. But they could also take collective action on the grounds of change of contract.”

    Executive director for social services Tony Hunter said: “Unfortunately, we just can’t get involved in staffing issues of private sector firms. The employees do not work for the council – they work for private organisations. I would certainly expect any professional and well-established company to take advice and fully investigate the implications of taking on staff from other agencies before doing so.”

    Yesterday, Wavertree MP Jane Kennedy asked the Department of Health what measures were in place to protect the income of care staff working for contract-ors commissioned by a local authority and to ensure employers did not pay less than the statutory minimum wage.

    Mrs Kennedy said: “Carers in Liverpool do a vital job and are already on low incomes. If wages are to be cut, it could spell disaster for the city.”

    jessicashaughnessy@dailypost.co.uk





    SHAMEFUL