JOBS LOSSES: Union hits out at council (From Oxford Mail)
Get involved: send your photos, videos, news & views by texting OXFORD NEWS to 80360 or email us
JOBS LOSSES: Union hits out at council
8:07pm Thursday 2nd July 2009 in
FIVE hundred jobs are being axed by Oxfordshire County Council.
The council announced today it was planning to make savings of £90m in its budgets over the next five years — with a tenth of its 5,000 staff to go.
While a spokesman said it hoped to “focus on natural staff turnover and managing vacancies”, he admitted there would be redundancies.
It is not known yet where the cuts will hit, but the figure does not include school staff.
The county is blaming an expected loss of money coming from central Government because of the recession and the bail-out of the banks.
Only last week the Tory-run administration at County Hall pledged to freeze council tax rises for the next three years if David Cameron won the General Election next year.
Council leader Keith Mitchell would not speak directly to the Oxford Mail tonight, but in a statement issued via the council’s press office, he said he stood by the pledge, saying it was one of his top priorities.
He said: “Times are hard for Oxfordshire residents as well as organisations and our position is we want to keep as much money in people’s pockets as we can.
“We wouldn’t want to try and set a council tax increase more than 2.5 per cent. It’s about how low we can get it.”
But Mark Fysh, of the union Unison, attacked the council for its use of consultants and interim workers, which he said cost the authority £12m a year.
Mr Mitchell said he wanted “to make a leaner, better organisation” but pledged to protect front-line services.
He said: “Obviously local government nationally and here in Oxfordshire would rather not be in this position, but we’re being responsible with residents’ money and protecting their services in the worst national economic climate in generations.
“This is a five-year plan. We can review matters as we set our budgets each year and, if the financial picture nationally improves, we can react accordingly.”
But an unhappy Mr Fysh said: “This is a Conservative council already supposed to be lean and mean. I would not want to see any redundancies, quite frankly.
“Where we would like to see the cuts is in the cost of consultants and interim workers the council uses.
“What do you want? Do you want proper service or do you want to pay consultants?
“We are here to serve the public and so are the politicians. It’s about time they did.”
tshepherd@oxfordmail.co.uk
Comments(16)
Lizabelle
says...
11:34pm Thu 2 Jul 09
Unfortunately there is a widespread myth that local government is overstaffed, whereas the truth is that it is only overstaffed with unnecessary senior administrators, mostly resulting from the present "Labour" government's obsession with bean-counting. It seems to me that Keith Mitchell and his companions have little interest in providing proper services. Their concern is to cut Council tax in order to gain votes. Most cuts are done as invisibly as possible; a favourite trick is to cut a backroom service and simply add its duties to an existing department with no additional funding or personnel.
Regrettably many people in this country expect to receive public services, but don't want to pay for them. Few seem even to know which services are provided by District/City as opposed to County. But they are still desperate to believe policitians who say they can provide everything without actually charging anyone a few pounds more. When local government finally collapses under the strain the public might actually regret the lack of so much it didn't even know it had. But by that time it will be too late.
And no, I am not a local government employee.
Abingdon Neil
says...
8:29am Fri 3 Jul 09
The County will not be able to cut 10% of its workforce without there being an impact on services.
This is a politically motivated move by the Tories and, assuming they haven't come up with a plan like this in just a few weeks, they should have been open about it in the elections.
(And I am also not a local government employee)
cheradenine
says...
8:44am Fri 3 Jul 09
What it does show is the following (after above inflation council tax rises):
2004/2005:
Income: £801m
Employee Costs: £394m
Other operating costs: £349m
2008/2009:
Income: £899m
Employee Costs: £501m
Other operating costs: £351m
So - operating costs barely budge, employee costs go up by more than the increase in income - over 28%!
If you work in the private sector, and your employers' income goes down as they hit hard times, you can expect redundancies. I'm not sure I understand why the council feels it ought to be immune.
LadyPenelope
says...
8:53am Fri 3 Jul 09
This is not me speculating, I'm hearing this from council workers!!
bagsie
says...
9:40am Fri 3 Jul 09
bagsie
says...
9:42am Fri 3 Jul 09
Concerned one
says...
10:17am Fri 3 Jul 09
Concerned one
says...
10:43am Fri 3 Jul 09
should read: I have friends in the private sector....
Old zimner
says...
11:17am Fri 3 Jul 09
Oxford resident
says...
2:23pm Fri 3 Jul 09
Oxford resident
says...
2:23pm Fri 3 Jul 09
Oxford resident
says...
2:24pm Fri 3 Jul 09
Oxford resident
says...
2:24pm Fri 3 Jul 09
Mynard
says...
5:09pm Fri 3 Jul 09
cheradenine wrote:The difference, cheradenine, is that private firms get rid of staff when their goods and services aren't in demand by the public, their income drops, and their current staffing levels aren't necessary. The services provided by local government have never been in greater demand, the workload of County Councils has increased to a level which would make them spectacular profits if they were allowed to operate on a true business model (i.e. charging directly for each item of service provision), but instead they're forced to do all this extra work for no payback. I do find it interesting that people who would never dream of walking into a pub and saying "Pint of best, mate, and I'm not paying you more than 50p", nevertheless scream blue murder if asked to pay a realistic price for the public services they use.
Sadly, the public accounts don't state the staffing levels (As they do with the city council, and you can clearly see the huge growth there). What it does show is the following (after above inflation council tax rises): 2004/2005: Income: £801m Employee Costs: £394m Other operating costs: £349m 2008/2009: Income: £899m Employee Costs: £501m Other operating costs: £351m So - operating costs barely budge, employee costs go up by more than the increase in income - over 28%! If you work in the private sector, and your employers' income goes down as they hit hard times, you can expect redundancies. I'm not sure I understand why the council feels it ought to be immune.
HughdeGree
says...
10:53pm Sun 12 Jul 09
More News stories
- Hollywood star’s homeward cause
- Dead worker is named
- Writer revisits his very special street
- Student flat plan should be rejected
- Teens get a taste of Africa
- UPDATE: 100,000 homes and businesses affected by power cut
- Teenager shows his gratitude to lifesavers
- Prolific burglar jailed for three years
- UPDATE: Reports power coming back but still problems
- Power cut hits the county
Most popular
Local Information
Enter your postcode, town or place name
LadyPenelope says...
9:53pm Thu 2 Jul 09