Jobs bombshell as 800 face chop

SERIOUS step . . . Councillor Lynne Thompson

1 More Image(s) In Gallery

‘We need to save £45m - there are no easy answers’

EIGHT hundred council jobs could be axed to help save save £45 million.

Liberal Democrat chiefs have announced the bombshell — around eight pert cent of all 9,880 jobs — just days after they refused to “confirm or deny” claims of cuts by Labour.
Others posts could also be replaced with private sector jobs if the council decides to provide less services itself.

A notice was issued yesterday (October 7) listing all posts that are under review. This signalled the start of a 90-day consultation process.

Staff and trade unions are being briefed on initial proposals.

The earliest that any compulsory job losses will be announced is January.

Of the 800 jobs across the council a possible 670 could come from people, communities and societies (social services).

Another 60 are from economy, places and skills (environment and regeneration); 60 from performance, services and capacity (which includes finance, HR and partnership working) and six from the assistant chief executive’s directorate (communications, district partnerships and cohesion).

Councillor Lynne Thompson, cabinet member for performance and value for public money, said: “This is a very serious step and one that we do not take lightly, but it is also unavoidable as we face up to the well-documented financial pressures affecting the budgets of every single UK local authority.

“The simple facts are that we need to find £25m in savings for the financial year 2011/12 – plus a projected further £20m in 2012/13 – and there are no easy answers.

“These initial proposals are an opening basis for discussion and we want to engage in a meaningful dialogue with staff and trade unions. This is not a series of final decisions — those will only be taken after the 90-day consultation period.

“Each proposed reduction will be considered against criteria that include an assessment of how crucial a post is, what it delivers, and how readily its loss can be absorbed or compensated for.

“In the past, most staff leavers have been voluntary and we are again actively seeking ways to avoid compulsory redundancies.

“A wide-ranging review is also ongoing which looks at other ways to reduce costs, such as income fees, procurement, accommodation and asset management, and minimising the level of temporary/agency staff we use. The solutions may also involve buying in services instead of providing them, so some posts will be replaced with private sector jobs.

“These are testing times but we must remain fair and consistent in our decisions, and mindful to minimise the impact these reductions will have on service users across the borough.”

Earlier this week the Liberal Democrats insisted that no budget proposals had been drawn up and accused Labour of upsetting staff in order to play party politics.

Labour leader Councillor Jim McMahon said that the majority of cuts would hit staff working with vulnerable people.

He added: “It is a difficult time for all councils. The scale of the cuts that the coalition government are announcing are giving councils no option but to make cuts.

“But I do question the local coalition’s approach to this. If you look at the cuts, a lot of them are questionable about how achievable they are. By a long way the focus is on reducing adult social care. You have got to question the impact on front-line staff who look after the most vulnerable people in the borough.

“I do not see how we can avoid that, but there are other ways you can go first like reducing senior executive pay, reducing the number of senior manager across the board and also looking at the size of the communication department which has 18 members of staff.

“Rather than just swiping from the sidelines, we are putting forward a fully-costed alternative budget that will give people the chance between the cuts proposed and out proposals.”

Tony Harrison, branch secretary of the National Union of Teachers added: “Not only will the cuts decimate the lives of hundreds of council workers, they will also have a devastating impact on essential services to the Oldham community.

“Cutting jobs will damage the economy and increase the deficit. Cutting public services hits the most vulnerable hardest such as the poor, the sick, the young and the elderly.”