Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
The Future of the Council’s Waltham Forest Direct Shops Appendix 10
Trade Union letters and responses
Cherry Tree House
Waltham Forest Town Hall Grounds
Forest Road
Walthamstow, E17 4JF
Branch Secretary: Dave Knight
Tel: 0208 496 4703
Email: [email protected]
Branch Administrators: 0208 496 4703
Email: [email protected]
Fax: 0208 531 1715
Dear Mr Petrie Re: Council Reorganisation Phase 5 UNISON continues to be opposed to the cuts and we are rather perplexed at the zeal with which the cuts are being pursued. The Council is demonstrating little in the way of reluctance and management have emphasised that they believe Waltham Forest is leading on the cuts programme. It almost feels as if we are in a race to see who makes the most cuts quickest. Once again we are seeing vital front line services being axed and a trend towards employing more consultants as a response to the cuts in senior management. UNISON believes that the overall savings projected will be eaten away by the hidden costs that we believe will arise from these proposals. Adult Social care NELFT Ferguson Centre UNISON met with members at the Ferguson centre to consult them on the proposals in phase 5. A list of questions were drawn up following the meeting and forwarded to their management for a response. Management have informed UNISON that they are still consulting service users and councillors on 4 different options for restructuring the day services and the report will not be going to Cabinet until 11th May 2011. UNISON cannot properly consult with our members until there is a proposal for us to consult staff on. At the moment the proposed structure is not clear. UNISON therefore feel that the staff consultation should start again when the proposal is finalised. Finance Cashiers
The proposal in phase 5 for cashiers is to delete 2.4 FTE cashier posts in the cashier team and 1 FTE scale 4-6 finance officer post in the reconciliation team and to create 2.4 FTE sc. 5 Finance officer posts. This is a reduction of 1 FTE front line post. This group of staff have been undergoing restructuring in one form or another for many years. This particular group of staff were last moved and restructured when the cash office at Church Hill was closed restricting options for service users to the Town Hall. The latest restructure will remove even more services from the front line. The staffs have put in an alternative proposal outlining the top heavy management structure and a proposal for further savings which has been rejected. This is yet a further attack on our diminishing public facing staff.
Residents First WFD Shops The proposal to close the WFD shops in Leyton, Leytonstone and Chingford will make accessibility to our services more difficult, particularly for the more vulnerable Waltham Forest residents. The shops provide a local and accessible service to all Council services and their loss will be keenly felt by service users. Service users have not been involved in any consultation regarding the closures. UNISON members are concerned that the projected savings of £244,000 will not be achieved as it does not take into account the costs of the buildings. We understand that some of the premises are leased and will still require funds to maintain. Management have said the buildings will be put to alternative use, but UNISON has no evidence of this and is concerned that the shops will remain empty and will be a further blight on the borough‟s high streets. Corporate Senior Management Structure Unison have noted that at the same time that the Council is consulting on proposals contained in phase 5 of the Council Reorganisation it has already sought to externalise substantial areas of work that the existing Arts and Events Team have been responsible for in the form of festival and events to mark the Olympic year. In particular the post of Head of Arts and Events would have anticipated a high level of involvement in organising and facilitating events associated with the Olympic Games but they are included in the tender document. As this consultation process began, that part of the post‟s duties were bundled up as a package and put out to tender. As late as 7th December 2012 the Culture and Leisure Management Team were advised that “2011 budget-sport and arts are protected and moving towards the Olympics” (taken from staff meeting minutes) providing the stability and resources
to meet the challenges associated with delivery of an expanded programme of events in 2012. This indicates a clear understanding that the Arts and Events Service were to continue to be responsible for the boroughs Olympic cultural programme. UNISON believes that there are substantial and other hidden costs involved with this ill conceived rush to externalise Arts and Events responsibilities. The projected savings in respect the Head of Arts and Events are hard to justify when there is a projected spend in the Council‟s own tender documents indicating that, “the estimated value for the events work will range from £800,000 to £1.5 million. Therefore the estimated value of this event management contract is £100,000 to £150,000”. It is also hard to justify when a previous set of consultants contracted to consult the public on the current arts and events service concluded that, “In terms of engagement, residents are interested in localised and family, community events. The festivals are a strong part of what Waltham Forest does well and these can provide excellent opportunities to let people try new activities.”
UNISON is concerned that the “immediate review” indicated in consultation papers means that other staff employed in this area will be under threat once the contract for their work is implemented. We do not know whether the tender included possible TUPE arrangements or not. Unison wish the raise the particular concern that the post of Arts Events and Halls is proposed for deletion and there appears to be no opportunity for the Officer in post to be considered for assimilation/ redeployment in to the proposed post of Initiatives and Events Manager. We are aware that there is an existing post within Greenspace titled “Initiatives Manager” and it would appear that it is favoured simply to transfer the significant responsibilities of the Head of Arts Events and Halls to that post where the Halls Service is proposed to report to Facilities Management. Indeed in advance of the conclusion of the consultation period the Council has proceeded to tender out the management and delivery of an expanded Olympic Cultural events programme and the officer to whom bids are sent is the Initiatives Manager located in Environment Directorate. Yours sincerely Dave Knight Branch Secretary
Dave Knight Branch Secretary Unison Dear Dave UNISON response to Council Reorganisation Phase 5 Thank you for your undated letter received on 17th February 2011 regarding the above. I am able to provide the following responses, using your paragraph headings. A number of my comments remain the same as in my response to you from Phase 3 General Comments I note UNISON‟s opposition to the cuts being proposed but these are being made to assist the Council fulfil its priority of setting a budget within the finances available to it. For this Council you are reminded that the budget gap is currently £65 million by 2014/5. As with phase 3 this phase primarily deals with government grants that will end or dramatically reduce as at 1st April 2011. The Council will continue to review the situation and has already highlighted to you where monies have been confirmed the „To Be‟ structure have had posts added. These will be duly amended for the Cabinet report
Adult Social Care - Ferguson Centre Following the queries you have raised I can confirm that the proposed vacant posts for deletion in Phase 5 will be processed. We will consult with you further regarding the new model proposed as a result of this current consultation. However this will then be about implementation. You should respond regarding the options of models within this process if you have any contributions to make. Finance – Cashiers As you have been informed, since the proposal through staff moves this is now proposed as a deletion of a vacant post. Residents First – WFD Shops The Council acknowledges that the shop closures will have some effect on the way that residents access council services. There is a large amount of work taking place across the organisation to mitigate any adverse impact and transform and improve customer access as part of the corporate 'One Contact' programme. The priority, of course, will be to ensure that our most vulnerable residents will not suffer any reduction in the level of service that is provided to them. Although the public have not been involved in the proposal to close the three WFD shops, there will be a series of public engagement activities taking place if a Cabinet decision is taken in April to close the shops. This will enable us to take
into account the views of customers with regard the approach they would like us to take in planning future services. It is too early in the decision making process to have finalised potential alternative uses for the shops. However, due to the location and condition of the units there are a number of interested parties for them which will be explored further. All units are in shopping parades and there is also demand from retailers in each location. Alternative uses will be finalised in order (as far as possible) to dovetail in timing terms should any unit be closed. The council is very conscious of the holding costs of vacant premises and seeks to minimise this wherever possible. Corporate – Senior Management Structure. The Olympic year programme is outside and additional to the Council‟s annual events programme. It consists of a number, to be determined, of major, high profile activities that will only take place in Olympic year. This discrete programme is being cliented separately by officers within Environment and Regeneration. The tender does not include TUPE arrangements as the Olympic year programme is a new additional, programme and consists of a one-off commission. There are therefore no existing staff that perform work associated with it. The current events programme and staff that deliver it will undergo review as identified in the restructuring report. Yours sincerely Martin Esom Chief Executive Copy to: Carolyn Simpson, Unite Moshe Ash, GMB Christine Street, Unison
Stuart Petrie, Senior HR Business Partner David Evans, Transformation Director
GMB Submission: Phase 5
The GMB are still concerned with the speed at which the council are moving forward with cuts to our services. The Union still believes that the Impact of these cuts has not been fully accessed, none more so than in the proposal to close 3 WFD shops as part of this Phase. We outline our comments and observations on the consequences of this proposal below: The Benefit Assessment Officers (AO‟s) across the 4 Shops see approx. 800 customers per week. Additionally, there are approximately 300 pieces of evidence or correspondences relating to Housing/Council Tax benefit that are dropped off at the shops by those unable/unwilling to wait too that will need working on later. This can increase to well over 1000 seen and 350 plus drop-offs at peak weeks of the year e.g. around April. All 4 shops work at capacity for the bulk of the time with each shop staffed in relation to expected demand from Benefit claimants. Waiting times to see an AO of 15-30mins is typical and 1-2hours at peak times of the day/week (although 3 hour waits have been known at its busiest). Most claims are assessed and queries dealt with at 1st point of contact avoiding unnecessary visits/contact thereby cutting processing costs in the long term. The E17 shop accounts for approx 340 seen per week and an additional 100 customers visiting to drop-off. Around 460 customers therefore are seen at the E10, E11 and E4 shops with 200 customers visiting to drop off documents. If the 3 smaller (although still significantly busy in relation their size) shops were to shut, 660 potential customers per week (150% more than visit WFD E17 currently) would have to find alternative ways to address their Benefit claims. This would be even more during busy times of year and the bulk are more than likely to opt to visit WFD E17. WFD E17 has 14 Benefit Assessment Officers attached and struggle to contain current demand hence have the longest wait times out of all shops. Even with proposals to increase to18 staff (a 28% increase) there would be difficulty to cope with such an overwhelming potential increase in footfall. In addition to this diminishing staff capacity to see customers, the „Waiting‟ area at WFD E17 is often crowded with all seats taken at peak times. It is hard to see where additional customers would wait without removal of partitioned offices used by other services such as Work-net, Councillors etc. The office would also have to fit in 4 extra AO‟s and 3 extra WFD staff under Phase 4 and 5 proposals. How will it cope with another 100 plus Benefit customers per day? Let‟s not forget that most chose to come at peak times despite our best efforts to publicise the best times to visit.
GMB Submission: Phase 5
It‟s likely there will be a significant increase in WFD visitors to the E17 shop for their various services, as a result of the closure program. Additionally new online Housing Applications will increase this demand for WFD. This is on top of Work-net, Pension Credit, Market Inspectors, and other service user visitors. The Housing Benefits officers have previous experience of running the Benefits front facing service from one site when it operated exclusively from Juniper House, before WFD was conceived. Most people who there at the time would agree it was a very unsatisfactory customer and officer experience. Very long queues were common, even before the building opened to the public at 8.30am. Officer advice to customers was often to start queuing outside the building before 8.00am in order to guarantee being seen. The office was closed to the public regularly due to overcrowding and this was in a purpose built waiting area larger than the waiting area at WFD E17. Wait times could often reach 2-3 hours plus and many were turned away if overcrowded. Threats, abuse and occasional assaults happened much more often than we have experienced since the shops opened and replaced this regime. There was also a full-time security guard employed and 8ft high glass screens shielding the officers at Juniper House. It‟s also worth considering that the Benefits caseload was around 25,000 claimants when Juniper House serviced the public. It is now at 33,000 (75% larger) and with real prospects of it increasing further. The current economic climate does appear to be having a detrimental effect on the lives on our residents and claimants. Staff are reporting more incidents of arguments, abuse and threats at the shops by increasingly frustrated claimants. If we were to operate from one site, the inevitable increase in wait times and overcrowding coupled with upcoming and quite serious restrictions and cuts to benefit amounts we pay (outlined in the original Phase 4 document) will lead to an increase in confrontations, abuse, threats and regrettably assaults on staff. Together with a lack of security measures at the shops, it gives us real Health & Safety and staff welfare concerns. The GMB want to know how has the council planned for this increased capacity at WFD E17. Has the council performed a risk assessment with all Health and Safety and fire hazard risks considered? The GMB has made its priority over the last 3 years to engage the council in being pro-active and doing full impact assessment‟s relating to any proposals. Again, it seems here that although risks may have been identified, there has been no provision in remedying them. The loss of these shops to a significant proportion of the boroughs population has not been given proper weight with potentially well over 30,000 visits to the
GMB Submission: Phase 5
3 threatened shops for Benefit reasons alone. Many will be at best inconvenienced, but other more vulnerable residents seriously disadvantaged in making and maintaining their claims with potential overpayments and costs incurred correctly unreported changes at a later date. This is in addition to significant revenue streams brought in by other WFD services. The cost of chasing arrears on these alone must surely prove to be a concern. The borough is effectively saying the only way to make a claim or report a change is by computer or by queuing endlessly at an overcrowded shop, should it be open when you arrive. Similarly, making a payment for Council Tax, Housing Application or access other services It‟s currently in vogue for Waltham Forest to use the term “Residents First”. This in no way puts the residents of our borough, especially the old and vulnerable, before the need to make savings. If WFD E17 has to shut its doors due to overcrowding, like it did regularly at Juniper House, what happens to Work -net, Pension Service, market inspectors‟ etc customers? Who will physically police the closed door, letting people in and out? What will be the policy if turned away, overflow or disaffected customers turn up at Juniper House or Cedar-wood House (that has HB officers attached to Housing)? Neither are set up to deal with „drop-in‟ customers. Where are the impact assessment‟s for all the above considerations? The proposals have attempted to mitigate impact on customers whilst acknowledging there maybe problems. However we feel that some consideration should go to of staff welfare and health and safety issues as well. Various measures have been proposed to mitigate the closure of the shops. The GMB do not believe that the Council has demonstrated that there are sufficient resources to properly address these measures.
There is limited space at Juniper House to accommodate more appointments and the additional AO‟s to see these appointments. Appointment slots are often currently almost at capacity. Even with extended hours we feel the impact of this will be minimal especially as the success rate of people actually turning up for their appointments runs at only around 60%.
Self service PC‟s at WFD E17 has been suggested. Again although do have a some impact in reducing those that wait, once the e-claim has been completed on these PC‟s they still have to see an officer to process the claim. Again the majority of callers seem not wish to use them in any case.
GMB Submission: Phase 5
We no longer offer paper forms and insist almost all applications are made online. Due to computer literacy issues, lack of computer ownership, language issues together with the length and complexity of the e-forms many opt to do this with an advisor. We see no reason why this demand will change.
There are only 2 visiting officers who also act as receptionists and have a busy visits caseload. Again it‟s difficult to see where much extra capacity will be available to visit vulnerable customers when the accessibility of being able to visit a local shop goes.
We cannot see where significant extra resources can be sourced to have a major impact on the increase in customers trying to contact by phone due to the lack of other options. In any case, currently quite a few queries are referred to the shops, by phone operators, as they have to make statements, provide evidence etc.
There is a proposal to delete scanning and indexing posts in our Post room in this phase. With the lack of sites available to see officers or drop off paperwork it will lead to many more claimants opting to send evidence, correspondence etc in by post. A smaller post/scanning team will have difficulties dealing with any significant increase in post leading to delays and error. The same Post staff also deals with Council Tax correspondence which may affect revenue collection if they get behind.
There is no formal queue system at WFD E17, with a WFD officer- floor walking to deal with people coming in- how will they cope with the influx of customers in the waiting area with a variety of queries to marshal.
Libraries have been touted as an alternative site to use PC‟s to apply for benefit or report changes. From Benefits experience at the E11 site, when we recommended waiting customers to use the library upstairs, there is often have a long wait to use their PCs and generally are very slow connections-the completion of a form on a fast connection can take 1 hour! Generally we feel this may not be a workable option without improvements to both the availability and performance of these PC‟s. Also when the e-claim has been made they will still need to provide evidence to support their claim so hasn‟t necessarily removed a visit.
In summary the GMB feel the proposal to shut the 3 shops and effectively operate the frontline benefit and WFD service from 1 site is seriously flawed. The Benefit Service were preparing for an upcoming significant increase in claimant activity and having difficult conversations with many customers as the result of the current climate and far reaching adverse changes to Benefit regulations. This was before any proposals to close 3 out of the 4 sites we provide the service from. We believe, as we‟ve outlined, there are far reaching
GMB Submission: Phase 5
and damaging outcomes from these closures that have not been properly considered, with the mitigating measures overplayed. Claimants will be significantly disadvantaged by these closures and staff overwhelmed. We also believe that the phases are being rushed through at such a speed that the impact of these proposals have not been fully thought through and provisions have not been made in case of implementation. In many cases, this is through no fault of the proposals designers, rather the pressure on them by the Council to act faster than it needs to. The Union appreciate the work that has gone into producing the original proposals was considerable there are pressures to make unpopular cuts. We warn against the proposals made in Phase 4/5 regarding WFD shops and the Benefit staff in them, and urge the council to rethink this strategy without rushing through the process, so that we do not miss an alternative that would better serve our customers, put residents first and potentially make savings in the long term by avoiding having to pay for future measures to shore up a service that will fail our customers and have an adverse effect on the welfare of the remaining staff. Additionally, the savings the council make on this proposal seem small for such a drastic change. Potentially, only 1.5 Team Leaders are at risk by withdrawing from the shops in Phase 4. The only other saving to the council are on-costs for the 3 buildings. The Chingford site is still under Long Term Lease, and LBWF own the other 2 buildings. Any funds received from a shops sale or earnings from a sub-lease will not contribute to the £65 million the council is seeking to save. This balance between service to our residents and the rewards from going through with these proposals do not equate. We urge the Council to reject the closure of the Waltham Forest Direct shops and any removal of Benefit officers. Additionally, we would like to show support for the Unison submission for Phase 5, especially the comments on Senior Management Structure. Moshe Ash - GMB Paul Adams -GMB Shop Steward (Revenues and Benefits) Richard Gull – GMB Branch Secretary Sandra Vincent – GMB Regional Officer
Waltham Forest Town Hall, Forest Road, Walthamstow, E17 4JF Moshe Ash, GMB By internal post
Ask for:
Our ref:
Your ref:
E-mail:
Direct line
Direct fax
Date:
Dear Moshe, GMB Submission to Phase 5 Proposals Thank you for your submission received on 14th January 2011 regarding the Proposals for Council Reorganisation. I am able to provide the following responses, using the headings in your submission. It is acknowledged that residents/customers currently using the three shops at Leytonstone, Leyton and Chingford will need to be accommodated in order that their needs are met. The proposals and impact assessments identify and describe the actions which we intend to take to mitigate the impact on customers. There is now a corporate working group set up to assist with the planning and implementation of changes to the service, this will include any alterations needed to accommodation and prioritisation and the potential relocation of some of the surgeries offered at the E17 shop. In relation to the numbers of customers quoted in the alternative proposal, we accept that there is going to be an increase but it is likely that these figures are inflated. On reviewing customer data for both Units there is some inadvertent double counting for benefits enquiries. It is recognised in the proposal that there will be a reduced provision for face-to-face service compared to current arrangements. This is unavoidable given the requirement to make savings. However, increased self-service using PCs in the E17 shop, where there will be assistance available from benefit officers, as well as encouraging self-service in libraries and from other locations will help mitigate this. There will also be greater use of appointments to help maintain an even level of customer demand there. In addition, the capacity of the telephone service will be increased to respond to (amongst other things)
customers who are unable to visit the E17 shop. These measures should help offset the withdrawal of the service from some shops In relation to concerns around the current layout of the E17 shop, Property Services are a member of the corporate working group and will assist with plans and the expedition of any alterations required in the E17 shop. There have been significant operational changes since benefits customers were serviced solely from Juniper House. Customers now have access to the service:
Online - via electronic forms and access to their or their tenants accounts on line
Phone - direct access to benefits officers Teleclaims - customers are able to claim benefits and report changes
over the phone Appointments - customers are given appointments in Juniper House
Additionally, working practices and processes have improved and become more streamlined. We now have improved IT links and processes with DWP through the ATLAS project and CIS prompts. We have reduced the number of customer repeat visits to the shops through the implementation of Risk Based Verification and now have a better understanding of customer needs, peaks and process flow. Customers now have a choice about how they access council services as they get the same end to end service if they contact us by telephone. This is supplemented by work done with Ascham homes, housing associations, pension service, third sector and a visiting service for those unable to access the service in any other way. We are also considering setting up a multi-service pilot at a library in the south of the borough. Staff safety is of absolute paramount importance. A full risk assessment will be carried out if this proposal is agreed. Any issues and actions resulting from the risk assessment would be implemented. Similarly, any adjustments made to the shop or current operating procedures would warrant a new assessment being carried out. In relation to the comments made with regard Juniper House (JH), the appointment service is often not at full capacity, particularly over the lunch period and after 4pm. It would be possible to extend opening hours beyond the current 9am to 5pm service to meet increased demand. Also appointments are busiest at the beginning of the week, so there is capacity at the end of the week. There is limited space to see customers however as officers are based on site they have access to their own desk to complete assessments thus freeing up interviewing space for further appointments. Resources from the 3 smaller shops can be redirected to deal with increased appointments and telephone calls.
As mentioned previously, we will continue to work with partners to encourage them to give advice and receive evidence on behalf of the benefits service to take any strain off the face to face service With regards to scanning and indexing staff, resources will be used to meet business needs and processes reengineered as required. We are investigating carrying out scanning and potentially indexing of post received in E17 shop on site. There will be a queuing system implemented at E17 shop to properly allow us to monitor volumes and waiting times In relation to the comments made about accessing services online in the libraries, new IT infrastructure and virtual servers will speed up connections. On average completion of the housing benefit form doesn‟t take an hour. It is acknowledged in this response that some customers wait in excess of an hour to see benefits officers so this option would offer them an improved level of service on busy days, so does not represent deterioration in the level of service provided. No customer will be forced to use the libraries for self service. The number of visits to customers in their homes has decreased significantly which is why the visiting officers have been covering Juniper House reception. If the need for visits increases alternative cover arrangements will be made. The proposals set out how we can make efficiency savings in both WFD and the benefits service whilst continuing to provide a good level of service to the public. Yours sincerely, Martin Esom Chief Executive Copy to: Dave Knight, Unison Carolyn Simpson, Unite Richard Gull, GMB Sandra Vincent, GMB
Stuart Petrie, Senior HR Business Partner David Evans, Transformation Director
