The human cost of out-sourcing: Justice for the 33

Some of the 33 sacked workers outside Wembley Central today

A demonstration was held today outside Wembley Central station for 33 agency workers employed by Railpeople who were given notice of the termination of their contracts just before Christmas. The agency deployed them in the Wembley Central Group on various duties for London Underground.  The workers had achieved  7 100% consecutive Customer Service marks during the Olympics and now their Olympic 'legacy' is loss of their jobs.

They were turned down for alternative permanent jobs with London Underground (doing the same kind of thing they were doing on short-term, zero hours, no pension contracts). Instead they employed people who hadn't doen the jobs before.  HT apparently told them that although they were good enough to do the jobs as agency staff they weren't good enough to work directly for London Underground.

When London Underground took control of the stations north of Queens Park in 2008 that the casualisation of the job, particularly the use of agency workers, lead to a dispute as a result of which LU assured the RMT that the use of agency staff would be temporary, lasting a maximum of six months. Some of the workers have been with Trainpeople agency for five years!

The RMT has taken up their case and are demanding that all LU trained station staff working for Trainpeople agency should be transferred over to LU without having to apply for the job,

Bob Crow of the RMT made an impassioned speech putting the sackings in the context of privatisation and austerity, Navin Shah AM  cited equality (all the 33 are members of ethnic minorities) as the big issue and promised to take the case up with London Underground, TfL and the Major, and Councillor Nana Asante from Harrow pledged her support.

However the speech that stayed with me was from one of the workers who spoke movingly about the real impact on her and the sense of bewilderment she felt.

Brent Council to act on London Living Wage

London Citizens as well as the Green Party have supported a London Living Wage

 A report going before the next Brent Executive recommends the following actions:

That the Executive agrees to the Council seeking Accreditation as a London Living Wage Employer.

That the Executive agrees to the take positive steps to review its existing contracts over a three year period on a case by case basis to wherever possible apply LLW criteria.

That Social Care  contracts are examined with the London Living Wage Foundation and other LLW Boroughs to explore the application of LLW.

That the Executive agrees that Officers should act to promote the application of the LLW to schools, businesses and other organisations within Brent.

The Executive agrees that subject to Finance, Procurement and Legal advice officers seek to apply the LLW consideration when tendering

A further recommendation states:

That Members note the comments of the Deputy Director of Finance regarding the potential cost of applying LLW.

A dispute between Muhammed Butt and Gareth Daniel over the affordability of  paying the London Living Wage is widely believed to have contributed to the latter's demise.   Directly employed Brent staff and agency workers employed by the Council will all be on the London Living Wage by October this year. Problems arise over out-sourced staff such as social carers and those employed by schools.

Governing bodies, rather than the council, make school employment decisions so the council will seek to influence schools rather than direct them. Potential legal difficulties are also likely in terms of the council's duty to seek 'best value' in terms of procurement and they would need to demonstrate that paying the London Living Wage would enhance the service. This might be an issue in the huge public realm contract that was advertised before Christmas covering waste collection recycling  street cleaning and parks maintenance. The sole award criteria is 'the most economic tender' which suggests low wages LINK

The report makes a persuasive case for paying the London Living Wage which has been a campaigning aim of the Green Party since its inception in 2005 but which in 2011 was only paid by a handful of London Councils. The Green Party also supports a national living wage.

Income is one of the key determinants of building in individual and community resilience to these unprecedented economic circumstances. Brent is described as a ‘low income’ Borough and its’ patterns of occupations have been in sectors where pay is lower than average. By signing up to the London Living Wage the Council can by its actions show commitment and Leadership to lift the incomes of both its residents and people who work for it.

The main benefits which have been so far experienced by both Public and Private Sectors in applying the London Living Wage have been:

• lower staff turnover

• improved productivity

• lower sickness absence

In addition by applying and extending London Living Wage the Council would be in a position to help encourage employers who pay low wages to set a minimum pay rate that enables employees to provide the essentials of life. It will also fit squarely with the Councils vision and values and promote the recruitment and retention of a high quality workforce to deliver for the Council and its Communities.

I welcome the Council's move but regret that this is in the context of  the overall cuts in council jobs (with more to come) and the imposition of flexible working on council staff.

For doubters about the efficacy of the policy this report from the BBC may help change your mind. It is argued that paying the Living Wage could actually save £2bn: LINK

Demonstration at Wembley Central Station Monday on behalf of sacked agency workers

RMT members will be demonstrating outside Wembley Central Station on Monday January 7th at 1pm. The demonstration is on behalf of 33 agency workers who were sacked just before Christmas. Tomorrow morning at 0650 the LBC breakfast show on 97.3 FM will be highlighting the campaign.

The 33  Trainspeople Agency workers had been employed on LUL contracts for the past 5 years According to the RMT they were denied applying for jobs that were available on LUL despite the agency workers regulations expressly forbidding this.

The RMT forecast a noisy and vibrant demonstration.

Information about the Trainspeople agency HERE

Brent's headaches as it tries to expand secondary school places

Brent Council is faced with increasing demand for secondary school places as the increase in primary numbers moves through the system. Unfortunately, although charged with an overall responsibility to provide school places, to a large extent it exercises 'responsibility without power' as so many Brent secondary schools have become academies or are voluntarily aided and sources of finance are not directly under the Council's control.

An extensive study has led to a report going before the Executive on January 14th which recommends expansion in some schools (subject to governing body approval) and the use of the Gwenneth Rickus Building (Centre for Staff Development) in Brentfield Road as a six forms of entry secondary school. This building which was formerly part of Sladebrook High School, is next to the Swaminarayan Independent School, and is now surplus to requirements with the facility moving to the Civic Centre in the summer.

Adding to the complexity is the fact that three secondary schools, due to parental preference, are currently operating below capacity. These are Copland, following the financial mismanagement allegations; Crest Academy Boys and Newman College. The report states that the first priority is to bring these schools up to scratch so that all their places are used.

Wembley High is ruled out of expansion because it is proposed to make this an all-through school providing places for primary as well as secondary children in line with Ark and Preston Manor. The governing body of Preston Manor have recently decided to become a Cooperative Academy although this is likely to be strongly contested by education unions. The Copland and Alperton expansions are subject to rebuilds under the government's Priority School Buildings Programme.

If this wasn't enough Gove's reforms have thrown another wild card into the game with the report stating that there are three secondary  free school proposals:

In the event that government’s grant application for 2013-14 and following years is inadequate to meet the Council’s entire demand for funding new provision, we are considering the following options:

 Free Schools: The Executive noted that the demand for new school places cannot be met only through the expansion of existing schools due to the limited availability of funding; the Council is required to promote additional ways of creating school places by pursuing the current government agenda on free schools and academies. The latest round of free school applications is being considered by the Department for Education (DfE) in the new year with an opening date of September 2014. Given that the Council is not looking to open a new secondary school at this date, it has not collaborated with any potential providers at this point. There are likely applications submitted for Brent, however. These include:

• an independent school group looking to open an 11 to 18 school in Wembley – of approximately 4 forms of entry, planning to provide Year 10 places immediately as well as Year 7.

• a parent led school in Cricklewood to address perceived lack of choice for parents in that area (6FE).

4.5 In addition an already approved free school has been looking to acquire a site in Brent and open a 6FE secondary school in September 2013.

4.6 All three of the above have said in discussion that they would aim to meet the Partnership Criteria agreed by the Executive in August 2012 but it is clear that two of them would be likely to use the freedoms available to free schools in respect of staffing and the curriculum

Note that although the Council says it has not 'collaborated with any potential providers' they appear, as oen would expect,  to have had discussions with them. The council cannot really take these into account in its present planning as decision making is with the DfE and even when some free school applications have been approved they have failed to materialise.

Clearly the arguments made against academies and free schools on the grounds that they undermine the local authority's  capacity to make clear and rational plans to meet pupil demand gain traction based on these difficulties.  Most of the proposals are given a Medium Risk category in the report with the Gwenneth Rickus proposal deemed High Risk because of potential planning issues.

The Kingsbury High proposal would result in an extremely large school with 435 pupils in each year group based on a class size of 30.

Summary of the proposals:

School	Status	Current Forms of Entry	Proposed Addition Forms of Entry	Delivery of additional forms of entry
Alperton	Academy	7.3	1	2017/18-2019/20 (PFI)
Ark	Academy	6	0
Capital City	Academy	6.5	0
Claremont	Academy	8.4	0
Convent Jesus and Mary	VA Academy	6	0
Copland	Foundation	8	1	2017/18-2019/20 (PFI)
JFS	VA	10	0
Kingsbury	Academy	10.5	4.5	2015/16-2016/17
Newman Catholic	VA Trust	5	0
Preston Manor	Foundation Trust (pending Academy)	8.4	0
Queens Park	Academy	6.7	2	2014/15
St Gregory’s RC	VA	5.9	0
The Crest Boys	Academy	4	1	September 2014
The Crest Girls	Academy	5	1	September 2014
Wembley High	Academy (proposed All-Through)	7	0
Gwenneth Rickus Building	Possible satellite of existing school	0	6	2015/16-2016/17

Misconceptions about welfare

Step on the road to music industry success with this course

Friday 25 January 2013 @ Unity Centre*

Free 2 half-day courses: a) Music Industry Overview (11.00am-1.30pm), b) Copyright & Contracts (2.30pm-5.00pm) plus c) End of course presentation/networking (6.30pm-8.30pm) for persons aged 18+

Topics covered: Music Publishing, Record Label Management, Music Industry Organisations, Income Streams; Copyright and Contracts for persons aged 18+
 
Interested? Or know someone that would be interested?
www.bizmusic.eventbrite.com    

*Unity Centre, 103 Church Road, London NW10 9EG (stations: Willesden Green or Willesden Junction (need to complete journey via buses buses 18, 260, or 266)

If you've made a new year's resolution to succeed in the music industry, this free programme of 2 short, accessible courses, plus a presentation & networking evening, will help you with the knowledge and contacts you need!

Standing up for the Palace walls in Wembley

Philip Grant of Wembley History Society has asked me to post the following Guest Blog:

The Palace of Industry during the Exhibition, looking up Kingsway (renamed Olympic Way in 1948) towards the Empire Stadium.
[Source: Brent Archives – Wembley History Society Collection]

 The remaining section of the Palace of Industry in Olympic Way now, with the new Civic Centre and Wembley Stadium beyond 

 Your recent item on Quintain’s planning application for a 1,350 space temporary car park near the new Civic Centre attracted my attention. When I looked at the details online, I found in the “small print” that it also involved demolishing the remaining part of the Palace of Industry, Wembley’s last remaining building from the 1924/25 British Empire Exhibition (“BEE”). As its “Listed Building” status was removed about ten years ago, this is no longer regarded as a “heritage asset” which requires special consent before it can be demolished, but I believe its external walls should be allowed to remain in place for a little longer.

My reason for this is that 2014 will see the 90th anniversary of the exhibition, for which the Palace of Industry was built as part of the world’s “First City of Concrete”. The BEE was one of the most important events in Wembley’s history, giving us the stadium and bringing millions of visitors to the area, which promoted its rapid suburban growth over the following ten years. One of the main aims of the exhibition was ‘... to enable all who owe allegiance to the British flag to meet on common ground and learn to know each other’, and on an international level the BEE was an important stepping stone on the path from the old Empire to the modern Commonwealth of independent nations. To discover more about the BEE, and many other local history subjects, visit the Brent Archives online Learning and Resources collection at LINK

Since 2010 I have been involved, as a volunteer, in discussions with Brent Museum and Archives about an exhibition and other events in 2014 to mark the BEE’s 90^th anniversary. More recently the Arts team for the new Civic Centre (currently nearing completion at the southern end of the Palace of Industry site) have become involved, and although no final plans have yet been drawn up it is likely that these events will take place. It would be a great pity if these walls, which illustrate the scale and architecture of this great exhibition, were to be lost unnecessarily just before that anniversary, when they could be enjoyed by visitors to Wembley during the summer of 2014, probably for the final time.

The Civic Centre surrounded by the proposed car park space today

Looking at the plans, it would not be necessary to demolish the remaining outside walls on the north and east sides of the Palace of Industry building to facilitate the access, lighting and all of the car parking spaces which Quintain are seeking. Only a small part of the outside walls at the north-west corner would need to be demolished, to allow access from Fulton Road. I have therefore written to Quintain and their planning agent, asking them to amend their plans so that these historic walls remain standing to their full height until they are ready to construct the proposed shopping centre which is planned for a later phase of the Wembley City redevelopment.

Paula Carney of Signet Planning has said that she will liaise with her client on this and come back to me. However, in case they are not prepared to co-operate, I have also put in an objection to the planning application, which other Wembley History Society members and people interested in our local heritage are supporting. These objections do not seek to prevent the use of the site for temporary car parking, but do seek to make consent for that parking conditional on retaining the outside walls of the Palace of Industry building until the main construction phase of work on the site is ready to go ahead.

If you would like to add your support for the walls (not physically, as their ferro-concrete construction means that they can stand up by themselves!) please go to the Brent Planning website at: LINK  then use the "Comment on this Planning Application" link.  Alternatively, please send an email, quoting the reference number 12/3361, to David Glover, the Brent Case Officer dealing with the application, at:  david.glover@brent.gov.uk . Thank you.

New Chalkhill Park hit by joy riders

Car in the park (contributed)

Residents on Chalkhill reacted with consternation when they discovered a car had been driven into the new Chalkhill Park which is still under construction.  Locals, and especially the children, have excitedly been watching the park taking shape over the last few months and plans are in progress for an opening celebration in May.

I hope that this is just a one-off act of vandalism, probably fuelled by alcohol, but perhaps a warning that the local community will need to work together to defend their new park.   I would suggest the early formation of a Friends of Chalkhill Park as a first step.

UPDATE: When I visited this morning the car  had been removed.  A workman dealing with the aftermath said 'a fair amount of damage' had been done. The car had been driven directly at construction fencing which lay twisted on the ground. Turf had been churned up and a bench and recently planted  bedding damaged.

The plans for the park involve no fencing around the perimeter but the workman said that bollards may be installed at the point of entry of the car which is opposite Wellspring Crescent.

Barnhill councillor Michael Pavey said:

I was truly saddened to see a car dumped in our beautiful new park. This goes against everything we are trying to achieve in Chalkhill. 

But I know the local community will rally against this and protect the park from further abuse. 

I warmly welcome and fully support the proposed formation of a Friends of Chalkhill Park. I look forward to working with them to celebrate and preserve this fantastic space.