I don't think that they are proposed but rather projected or forecast. I assume that many will arise from efficiency savings, shared services, possibly unitary Councils (or is that dead in the water?) etc. But I guess you're right, there is a possibility that cutbacks will for many reasons have the potential to increase liabilities in the public sector.

Spoken like a yorkshire man, sup all, eat all, pay nout!!!!!

Steve,

Don't believe all you read there is an election to be fought soon.

We are all here to protect our co-workers and to defend our employers whatever industry we chose to work in.

I have had a long career in both sectors and the first hand knowledge that things are not that different.

Steve, I think you're a wee bit behind the times in your view of local authorities: "The Public Sector will have to go through culture change known as "Own Money Culture" which means "if it was your own money that you were using, would you spend it""

I've worked for an LA for nearly 6 years now, and I can assure you that the "own money culture" as you call it had been in place long before I joined. Buildings are poorly maintained and have a low standard of decor, because staff are at the bottom of the list when it comes to priorities. There certainly isn't any free tea or coffee in the office and we get absolutely nothing at xmas - no bonus, no xmas lunch, nada. Oh, I forgot, we do get an e-mail from the Chief Exec! There are many companies in the private sector who give their staff all of these things and have continued to do so through the recession.

clarel,

There are more departments than the HSE in the public sector, and we don't have any of the perks you mentioned nowadays.

If it was so good when you worked for the HSE why are you not still there milking the system?

Things have changed from the good old days but we accept things for what they are, shouldn't you?

I was thinking that too.

Its hard enough to become a trainee HSE Inspector with the HSE when you have to beat the masses in the UK so why leave when you have made it so to speak ?

There is definately a degree of privatisation of council services ( especially housing maintenance or social housing ) in scotland right now which is very good for contractors who are involved in this work but very bad for council building maintenance staff. Can't say what it is like for other council services departments though but I expect it to be very tough.

John

Clairel

I think you are missing a point here. There are very many Local authority Jobs that everyone’s Health and Safety depend on. We only have to look at the recent poor weather and the concerns over the spreading of grit, or the repairs that are now needed to the roads after the bad weather.

I too have worked in the public and private sectors. I started with my first LA over 25 years ago. I have never worked for the HSE but trust me most LA staff do not get to stay in the top hotels, get 1st class rail travel or get none contributory pensions, etc. I still know many Local Authority employees and most are hard working people. I would not like to think that my child was using play ground equipment that had not had its safety checks, going to a swimming pool that did not have sufficient life guards, be attending a school that had not had sufficient advice on asbestos management or that I had relatives who relied on local authority care staff or wardens for there well being, the list just goes on and on.

Yes the money that LA’s spend is our money, it comes from the tax’s that we all pay, but for that we expect a service and with 25000 less staff we must get less of a service.

You state that there are lots of middle management post and policy posts in HSE that could be done without, and I suspect that the same can be said of most large organisations Public and Private, but the figures quoted were not for all Public Originations, just LA’s. 25000 jobs lost will mean that some services will have to be cut and how you can know that this will not affect our health and safety, well could you please tell me where to get such a reliable crystal ball.

Brian.

Clairel,

As far as I am aware, the HSE for the last 4 to 5 years has been heavily involved in the governments "reducing regulation burden" exercise with specific targets etc --as a result of various "reviews" e.g. Hampton.


Refer to:-
http://www.hse.gov.uk/regulation/index.htm

I also would not agree with your statement that "Very few people in the HSE are actually inspectors. Many warranted inspectors transfer out of their enforcement roles at the first opportunity. Their are huge amounts of admin, middle management, top management and Policy posts that could easily be got rid of"

The HSE is a public body and publishes its staffing--refer to Table 5 in the annual report 2008/09 on page 35 for Total HSE (including HSL) staff in post by occupational group at:-http://www.hse.gov.uk/aboutus/reports/0809/ar0809.pdf


There is also HSE Staffing by Division/Directorate: 1 April 2004 - 1 April 2009 at:-
http://www.hse.gov.uk/ab...eports/0809/staffing.htm


I do not recognise that there are very few frontline inspectors as you claim.


It is possible for most organisations, irrespective whether they are public or not to keep on looking for efficiency savings, but it is grossly unfair to continually target local authorities for being inefficient.

I have worked for a local authority from 1994 to 1998 as its Building Works DLO Safety Officer and the DLO had to compete with private contractors to win tenders, therefore had to be competitive. It was by no means a "cushy job"--my first office was a portacabin. I had a car user allowance, but not a "company car". The salary was relatively lower than the private sector and although there were annual increments, the increase was not comparable to the average for the private sector. I am also aware of some private sector organisations that have wasteful practices--it is better not to stereotype/generalise without facts of the current situation.

Obviously, the tax-payers fund the public services, but continual reductions in some key front-line public services staffing are bound to have an impact on public health and safety! Although the recent heavy snowfall was a one in hindered event statistically, there was less gritting and clearing of snow due to resources available resulting in increased number of patients for hospitals etc and its impact on business.
I live in Guildford in Surrey and for the last two days of this week (Monday and Tuesday) a stretch of a major road (A 320) linking Woking with Guildford has been closed in the morning rush hour due to ice on the same stretch of road resulting in very serious vehicle accidents.

I visit our local authority regularly (on a professional basis I mean) and there's nothing left to cut. Where there was money to be saved believe me they've saved it.

The thing that really hisses me off though is this business with the pensions. Everyone to a man in the private sector has had final salary pensions closed etc but when the council staff went on strike to protect theirs I was apoplectic. Even wrote to Jeremy Vine and got me message read out lol.

Clairel,

I do not think most LA employees feel they should get a better deal than private sector counterparts, but most employees want a "fair" deal. What is a fair deal is open to so much variance and this is complicated by the factor that when there is collective bargaining, quite often extreme positions are taken, but that is not unique in public sector (although it is fair to say that a majority of public sector employees are union represented). The recent British Airways strike action that was suspended due to a court ruling is an example that even private sector employees kep on wanting unrealistic pay increases etc.

Whether it was down to bad mamangement or not having adequate resources regarding gritting and clearing roads, it is obvious that not having adequate resources played a central role--even if we take into account that this particular event was extremely severe ( one in a hundred years-for which you cannot deal by having idle equipment etc ). However, as commented by many others, there is hardly any slack in the system (despite claims of inefficiency!) so that when such events occur, not much can be done.

Previously, a lot of goodwill existed between the LA and its employees and a majority of employees did indeed go over and beyond the normal call of duty when such events occured. With the state of current relations between LA's and its employees or its partner (private) service providers, I doubt that the same amountb of goodwill exists.

The one area where there appears to be downsized are the departments that have been created to compile and supply data and statistics to Central Govt regarding all manner of targets and so on.

Thanks for the sentiment but no need to worry about me, I give as good as I get!! I'm the sort of person who speaks my mind (not just what I'm supposed to say or what's popular) so that means I have to accept the backlash I get.

Sorry about your dad :-(

Going back a few posts - gritting, Local Authorities also work on the risk probability factor, over the past 29ish years we have had 2 days of snow in the most parts of Britain. Because of this stocks were were required to be kept (J.I.T. management practices) and on the balance pf probability we had enough. This saved huge amounts of money mainly due to the fact a percntage of salt is actually lost due to "evaporation". We were caught out, but it was crucial to the country, but not possible to turn round immediately. If a private sector company runs out of a comodity we just put up with it or go elsewhere. LA's sometimes cannot do this.

The reason I know this is that I have a second hat as most LA safety Officers do, mine is concerned with emergency planning - all for the same wage!!

BTW We don't feel we should get a better deal than private sector - we do - we don't in the main work mega hours, weekends or through holidays as I had to in the private sector, what do I do with the extra 30-40 hours a week I get at home?