Unison asks Darlington Council why "senior managers get pay rises and bin men pay cuts"

The Advertiser Series: FAIR TREATMENT: Darlington councillor Bill Dixon said staff regrades and downgrades have happened across the board at the council FAIR TREATMENT: Darlington councillor Bill Dixon said staff regrades and downgrades have happened across the board at the council

UNISON has criticised Darlington Borough Council for what it believes is preferential treatment for senior management over pay and pensions.

Speaking at a cabinet meeting this week, Dawn Taylor, assistant branch secretary of the union's Darlington branch, questioned the economics behind council’s plan to partner with the town’s Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG).

The partnership is aimed at achieving a more efficient approach towards health service provision in the borough but Ms Taylor said the council’s projected savings of between £4.9m and £10.8m on an expenditure of £200m was “vague”.

She added: “The only certainty seems to be that two senior managers will get a pay rise of £8,652 per annum, taking their pay to £92.652.

“Also, a director is being allowed to take early retirement in two years time at a cost to the council of £60,000.

“The early release of pension without reduction is possible for any member of staff who is in the Local Government pension scheme, however, our experience is that the council usually refuses such requests.

“We expect the council to act consistently.”

However, council leader Bill Dixon has denied any bias towards senior management positions.

Ms Taylor said the council’s proposal to increase two managers’ wages seemed to “contrast sharply” with its attitude to its StreetScene staff, many of whose jobs are being downgraded leading to wage cuts.

She added: “Why do senior management get big pay rises and bin men pay cuts?”

Conservative group leader, Heather Scott also questioned why the council did not make it clear that StreetScene jobs would be cut after the fortnightly bin collections were introduced.

She said that although scrutiny committee members were made aware of restructuring proposals, they were told that surplus staff would be redeployed rather than lose their jobs or be downgraded.

Council leader Bill Dixon responded: “As far as we were aware, at the time we re-structured StreetScene we knew there would be a need to alter terms and conditions; this inevitably means that some staff would be graded down and some would be graded up.”

Speaking to The Northern Echo today (Wednesday, July 2) Cllr Dixon denied that the council was biased towards protecting executive positions.

He said: “Hundreds of staff have been downgraded and regraded – predominantly downgraded.

“How do people think we make the savings we have to make?

“Local government is largely a people business and any significant saving isn’t going to come from the deployment of a new IT system, it is going to come from reductions in staff, regrettably.”

Cllr Dixon pointed out that the number of senior managers and directors at the authority had dropped and that senior managers had not had a pay rise for about five years.

He added: “They might earn more, but they have a lot more responsibility as well; people are rewarded on the basis of the risk and responsibility that the job carries.”

Comments (65)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:13am Thu 3 Jul 14

RealLivin says...

“How do people think we make the savings we have to make?"
We think you would cut the cost of running the council, unless a person can come in and turn our streets into gold they are not worth £100,000 or more, Managers on £80,000 dont need a pay rise and those on lower wages should get the higher % pay rise, a 10% pay rise on £100 is only £10 a 5% pay rise on £1000 is £50, so who actually gets the better payrise

“Local government is largely a people business and any significant saving isn’t going to come from the deployment of a new IT system, it is going to come from reductions in staff, regrettably.”

Agreed so get rid of the staff who think they do and keep the staff that actually do. Administration is an inhouse cost so you can manage your work and work force a good IT system will automate most of this and keep running costs low (installing it and getting it right is another matter all together) but IT systems and Administration will not actually get the job done, that is cleaning the streets, fixing the roads, etc.

These admin wages are supposed to be the standard for this type of job, in the private sector this may be acceptable but in the public sector we want value for money and we are not getting it because nobody is worth that sort of money and if we cant attract some one to the job for less we should do what was always done, train and promote from within, ie some one who has been in the service for years and knows what needs doing and how to get it done. If it were a people business they would look after their people and not treat them like some thing left on the pavement that we no longer have any one to clean up.
“How do people think we make the savings we have to make?" We think you would cut the cost of running the council, unless a person can come in and turn our streets into gold they are not worth £100,000 or more, Managers on £80,000 dont need a pay rise and those on lower wages should get the higher % pay rise, a 10% pay rise on £100 is only £10 a 5% pay rise on £1000 is £50, so who actually gets the better payrise “Local government is largely a people business and any significant saving isn’t going to come from the deployment of a new IT system, it is going to come from reductions in staff, regrettably.” Agreed so get rid of the staff who think they do and keep the staff that actually do. Administration is an inhouse cost so you can manage your work and work force a good IT system will automate most of this and keep running costs low (installing it and getting it right is another matter all together) but IT systems and Administration will not actually get the job done, that is cleaning the streets, fixing the roads, etc. These admin wages are supposed to be the standard for this type of job, in the private sector this may be acceptable but in the public sector we want value for money and we are not getting it because nobody is worth that sort of money and if we cant attract some one to the job for less we should do what was always done, train and promote from within, ie some one who has been in the service for years and knows what needs doing and how to get it done. If it were a people business they would look after their people and not treat them like some thing left on the pavement that we no longer have any one to clean up. RealLivin
  • Score: 54

9:54am Thu 3 Jul 14

DarloXman says...

Very valid question!

Someone, who of course did not mean it, said "we're all in this together!"

Well perhaps credit is due to our Labour Council rulers as they've never said this! At least they are honest and are not pretending that it's going to be fair to all! Reminds me of Animal Farm - and I know who Napoleon and the rest of the pigs are!
Very valid question! Someone, who of course did not mean it, said "we're all in this together!" Well perhaps credit is due to our Labour Council rulers as they've never said this! At least they are honest and are not pretending that it's going to be fair to all! Reminds me of Animal Farm - and I know who Napoleon and the rest of the pigs are! DarloXman
  • Score: 23

9:58am Thu 3 Jul 14

jabdc5, the land that's still trying to recover from the last tory government. says...

bullsh*t Bill strikes again
bullsh*t Bill strikes again jabdc5, the land that's still trying to recover from the last tory government.
  • Score: 23

10:11am Thu 3 Jul 14

sarahd says...

Oh my word. I only comment on here occasionally but I actually can't believe what I have just read.

He said: “Hundreds of staff have been downgraded and regraded – predominantly downgraded.
“How do people think we make the savings we have to make?

How about not giving someone a pay rise of nearly 10 grand. I am absolutely gobsmacked. This is a full time wage for most people. So he's saying that basically they have a lot of responsibility and are worth it. I'm not saying they are or aren't (however I do have my own thoughts on it) but surely no one is worth 100k a year. There are very few private companies who's owners get that much but the council can spend other people's money very well. It's not just that there is one person on this, what about the numerous other people on 50k+ per year. Assistant managers on 70k. You can find the list here:

http://www.darlingto
n.gov.uk/dar_public/
Documents/_Resources
/HRM/Workforce_Info/
Council_officers_ear
ning_over_50K_web_up
date1.pdf

9 assistant directors on 72-84k and 5 other positions on over 100k
Oh my word. I only comment on here occasionally but I actually can't believe what I have just read. He said: “Hundreds of staff have been downgraded and regraded – predominantly downgraded. “How do people think we make the savings we have to make? How about not giving someone a pay rise of nearly 10 grand. I am absolutely gobsmacked. This is a full time wage for most people. So he's saying that basically they have a lot of responsibility and are worth it. I'm not saying they are or aren't (however I do have my own thoughts on it) but surely no one is worth 100k a year. There are very few private companies who's owners get that much but the council can spend other people's money very well. It's not just that there is one person on this, what about the numerous other people on 50k+ per year. Assistant managers on 70k. You can find the list here: http://www.darlingto n.gov.uk/dar_public/ Documents/_Resources /HRM/Workforce_Info/ Council_officers_ear ning_over_50K_web_up date1.pdf 9 assistant directors on 72-84k and 5 other positions on over 100k sarahd
  • Score: 55

10:30am Thu 3 Jul 14

LUSTARD says...

risk and responsibility, does that mean the senior management on a large salary can be sued if he/ she fluffs the job, like having to redo all the pointing of the market cobbles, the lack of cement in the dolphin centre brickwork, the rip off cost of the main south park gates, really really nice gates tho, and splendid new fencing, i wish i had some nice gates like them, lol.
risk and responsibility, does that mean the senior management on a large salary can be sued if he/ she fluffs the job, like having to redo all the pointing of the market cobbles, the lack of cement in the dolphin centre brickwork, the rip off cost of the main south park gates, really really nice gates tho, and splendid new fencing, i wish i had some nice gates like them, lol. LUSTARD
  • Score: 34

10:30am Thu 3 Jul 14

marilyn49 says...

The above comments are spot on. Snouts in the trough before the council goes bankrupt? How do they sleep at night...oh yes, comfortably, knowing that they have a nice nest egg.
The above comments are spot on. Snouts in the trough before the council goes bankrupt? How do they sleep at night...oh yes, comfortably, knowing that they have a nice nest egg. marilyn49
  • Score: 40

10:32am Thu 3 Jul 14

LUSTARD says...

sarahd wrote:
Oh my word. I only comment on here occasionally but I actually can't believe what I have just read.

He said: “Hundreds of staff have been downgraded and regraded – predominantly downgraded.
“How do people think we make the savings we have to make?

How about not giving someone a pay rise of nearly 10 grand. I am absolutely gobsmacked. This is a full time wage for most people. So he's saying that basically they have a lot of responsibility and are worth it. I'm not saying they are or aren't (however I do have my own thoughts on it) but surely no one is worth 100k a year. There are very few private companies who's owners get that much but the council can spend other people's money very well. It's not just that there is one person on this, what about the numerous other people on 50k+ per year. Assistant managers on 70k. You can find the list here:

http://www.darlingto

n.gov.uk/dar_public/

Documents/_Resources

/HRM/Workforce_Info/

Council_officers_ear

ning_over_50K_web_up

date1.pdf

9 assistant directors on 72-84k and 5 other positions on over 100k
very well put sally
[quote][p][bold]sarahd[/bold] wrote: Oh my word. I only comment on here occasionally but I actually can't believe what I have just read. He said: “Hundreds of staff have been downgraded and regraded – predominantly downgraded. “How do people think we make the savings we have to make? How about not giving someone a pay rise of nearly 10 grand. I am absolutely gobsmacked. This is a full time wage for most people. So he's saying that basically they have a lot of responsibility and are worth it. I'm not saying they are or aren't (however I do have my own thoughts on it) but surely no one is worth 100k a year. There are very few private companies who's owners get that much but the council can spend other people's money very well. It's not just that there is one person on this, what about the numerous other people on 50k+ per year. Assistant managers on 70k. You can find the list here: http://www.darlingto n.gov.uk/dar_public/ Documents/_Resources /HRM/Workforce_Info/ Council_officers_ear ning_over_50K_web_up date1.pdf 9 assistant directors on 72-84k and 5 other positions on over 100k[/p][/quote]very well put sally LUSTARD
  • Score: 40

10:34am Thu 3 Jul 14

LUSTARD says...

marilyn49 wrote:
The above comments are spot on. Snouts in the trough before the council goes bankrupt? How do they sleep at night...oh yes, comfortably, knowing that they have a nice nest egg.
12 pints and a bong, i bet
[quote][p][bold]marilyn49[/bold] wrote: The above comments are spot on. Snouts in the trough before the council goes bankrupt? How do they sleep at night...oh yes, comfortably, knowing that they have a nice nest egg.[/p][/quote]12 pints and a bong, i bet LUSTARD
  • Score: 27

10:43am Thu 3 Jul 14

Jaga says...

I normally consider Unison to be a bunch of Tossers, but they have it right this time. The savings mentioned are indeed vague and well paid mangers should not be getting a pay rise. Bungalow Bill strikes again.
I normally consider Unison to be a bunch of Tossers, but they have it right this time. The savings mentioned are indeed vague and well paid mangers should not be getting a pay rise. Bungalow Bill strikes again. Jaga
  • Score: 51

10:59am Thu 3 Jul 14

stevegg says...

Senior managers will always look after their own interests first and formost, they will protect their positions at all costs sacrifcing all before them. They will tell you they are worth every penny and keep up the pretence that they deserve the same renumeration as those in the private sector as they work just as hard! But when anything goes wrong they accept no responsibility in reality always blaming others. Anyone who has been employed by the council and had experience of working in the private sector will know there are large numbers of back office jobs whos staff are underworked and overpaid, a considerable few with no real actual purpose, this situation has prevailed for decades until very recently. This is now reflected in the upper management with several very well paid executives who have very little to do but as always its the front line troops, the boots on the ground, the true workers that continue to suffer the brunt of cuts
Senior managers will always look after their own interests first and formost, they will protect their positions at all costs sacrifcing all before them. They will tell you they are worth every penny and keep up the pretence that they deserve the same renumeration as those in the private sector as they work just as hard! But when anything goes wrong they accept no responsibility in reality always blaming others. Anyone who has been employed by the council and had experience of working in the private sector will know there are large numbers of back office jobs whos staff are underworked and overpaid, a considerable few with no real actual purpose, this situation has prevailed for decades until very recently. This is now reflected in the upper management with several very well paid executives who have very little to do but as always its the front line troops, the boots on the ground, the true workers that continue to suffer the brunt of cuts stevegg
  • Score: 39

11:07am Thu 3 Jul 14

John Durham says...

There was a time when salaries of Town Clerks were determined by the population of the area they served. And all the staff below were paid on a relative basis to that.
But then Chief Executives were created - the top echelons left Unison and formed their own negotiating body which claimed that these executives should be paid levels akin to the private sector (carefully chosen examples of course).
Another little ploy was for Chief Execs to claim extra pay for 'loyalty'. Of course, the loyalty was based on a limited time contract so first chance these people got they were off anyway.
So now we get a situation where the Chief Exec of Darlington is paid more than the Chief Exec in any other borough in the Tees Valley - despite it being the second smallest borough.
And because of the negotiated pay deals which are better than anything Unison can get for its members, most councils are now in the situation where their chief execs and higher execs are paid ever more substantially higher salaries than the vast majority of council workers.
Local council workers, by and large, provide much better and more efficient services than people often believe but they are let down by this obviously crazy situation which disproportionately favours a few at the top to the detriment of the majority.
There was a time when salaries of Town Clerks were determined by the population of the area they served. And all the staff below were paid on a relative basis to that. But then Chief Executives were created - the top echelons left Unison and formed their own negotiating body which claimed that these executives should be paid levels akin to the private sector (carefully chosen examples of course). Another little ploy was for Chief Execs to claim extra pay for 'loyalty'. Of course, the loyalty was based on a limited time contract so first chance these people got they were off anyway. So now we get a situation where the Chief Exec of Darlington is paid more than the Chief Exec in any other borough in the Tees Valley - despite it being the second smallest borough. And because of the negotiated pay deals which are better than anything Unison can get for its members, most councils are now in the situation where their chief execs and higher execs are paid ever more substantially higher salaries than the vast majority of council workers. Local council workers, by and large, provide much better and more efficient services than people often believe but they are let down by this obviously crazy situation which disproportionately favours a few at the top to the detriment of the majority. John Durham
  • Score: 33

12:01pm Thu 3 Jul 14

hogworth says...

Same old tale with DBC higher echelons, pull the ladder up Jack I'm ok.
Same old tale with DBC higher echelons, pull the ladder up Jack I'm ok. hogworth
  • Score: 28

12:52pm Thu 3 Jul 14

loan_star says...

Waiting for Bambara to come on and defend Dixon and his mates.....
Waiting for Bambara to come on and defend Dixon and his mates..... loan_star
  • Score: 19

2:11pm Thu 3 Jul 14

temmer says...

stevegg wrote:
Senior managers will always look after their own interests first and formost, they will protect their positions at all costs sacrifcing all before them. They will tell you they are worth every penny and keep up the pretence that they deserve the same renumeration as those in the private sector as they work just as hard! But when anything goes wrong they accept no responsibility in reality always blaming others. Anyone who has been employed by the council and had experience of working in the private sector will know there are large numbers of back office jobs whos staff are underworked and overpaid, a considerable few with no real actual purpose, this situation has prevailed for decades until very recently. This is now reflected in the upper management with several very well paid executives who have very little to do but as always its the front line troops, the boots on the ground, the true workers that continue to suffer the brunt of cuts
You left a letter out of your last word there Steve
[quote][p][bold]stevegg[/bold] wrote: Senior managers will always look after their own interests first and formost, they will protect their positions at all costs sacrifcing all before them. They will tell you they are worth every penny and keep up the pretence that they deserve the same renumeration as those in the private sector as they work just as hard! But when anything goes wrong they accept no responsibility in reality always blaming others. Anyone who has been employed by the council and had experience of working in the private sector will know there are large numbers of back office jobs whos staff are underworked and overpaid, a considerable few with no real actual purpose, this situation has prevailed for decades until very recently. This is now reflected in the upper management with several very well paid executives who have very little to do but as always its the front line troops, the boots on the ground, the true workers that continue to suffer the brunt of cuts[/p][/quote]You left a letter out of your last word there Steve temmer
  • Score: 13

2:56pm Thu 3 Jul 14

oliviaden6 says...

What a question. The answer is plain to see it is far easier to oust blue collar than white collar. If that is all the Unions can ask and do then why been in a union that needs to ask that question.
The white collar leaders are looking after them selves and their own as always.
What a question. The answer is plain to see it is far easier to oust blue collar than white collar. If that is all the Unions can ask and do then why been in a union that needs to ask that question. The white collar leaders are looking after them selves and their own as always. oliviaden6
  • Score: 13

3:00pm Thu 3 Jul 14

john-kelly says...

“How do people think we make the savings we have to make?"
We think you would cut the cost of running the council, unless a person can come in and turn our streets into gold they are not worth £100,000 or more, Managers on £80,000 dont need a pay rise and those on lower wages should get the higher % pay rise, a 10% pay rise on £100 is only £10 a 5% pay rise on £1000 is £50, so who actually gets the better payrise

“Local government is largely a people business and any significant saving isn’t going to come from the deployment of a new IT system, it is going to come from reductions in staff, regrettably.”



with that sort of outlook on the future of Darlington we will fail, we need someone who can work smarter than him, do we need a mayor, or a mayors driver, car and necklace? look at the reduction in cost not people, do councillors or managers need mobile phones paid for by the council tax, what is the transport bill for the council members? it should be zero because anywhere you need to go is on a bus route., do we need part time councillors? if labour well I say labour what I should say is, if these people get back into council positions after the next local elections we are knackered stop with loyalty to the party and think of the community when you vote
“How do people think we make the savings we have to make?" We think you would cut the cost of running the council, unless a person can come in and turn our streets into gold they are not worth £100,000 or more, Managers on £80,000 dont need a pay rise and those on lower wages should get the higher % pay rise, a 10% pay rise on £100 is only £10 a 5% pay rise on £1000 is £50, so who actually gets the better payrise “Local government is largely a people business and any significant saving isn’t going to come from the deployment of a new IT system, it is going to come from reductions in staff, regrettably.” with that sort of outlook on the future of Darlington we will fail, we need someone who can work smarter than him, do we need a mayor, or a mayors driver, car and necklace? look at the reduction in cost not people, do councillors or managers need mobile phones paid for by the council tax, what is the transport bill for the council members? it should be zero because anywhere you need to go is on a bus route., do we need part time councillors? if labour well I say labour what I should say is, if these people get back into council positions after the next local elections we are knackered stop with loyalty to the party and think of the community when you vote john-kelly
  • Score: 12

4:11pm Thu 3 Jul 14

Spy Boy says...

Bill complains that some managers have not had a pay rise in 5 years. Out chief exec is supposedly one of those. To try and alleviate the suffering of this poor, underpaid person, Bill and the DBC cabinet have awarded her a huge annual bonus. This huge, though undisclosed, bonus ( So much for transparency.) was kindly paid for by the poor workers at the bottom of the pile who have had to take a pay cut. I'd like to know why the managers have not has a similar pay cut.

Yes, we know some have taken a nice little nest egg / golden handshake to leave, but they were leaving anyway and this just pays them out where others get a pittance. Bill and Ada really don't care one little bit and nothing they say rings true. Actually, Ada seems incapable of speech. The only time I've actually heard her was when she refused to answer the question "How much was your bonus, Ada?" She managed to find her voice and step out from behind her minder long enough to tell us that it wasn't our business. Actually, Ada, I think it is. Did it buy you that nice little BMW Sports car that you are driving round in, or did you use it to build a new stable? You really need to own up to the people that you work for. We are your employers and we feel that you should take a pay cut and refuse your bonus. We don't mind you hiring on extra Bin Men and paying them a decent wage. In fact, why not resign and allow the council to hire on another 10 of them?
Bill complains that some managers have not had a pay rise in 5 years. Out chief exec is supposedly one of those. To try and alleviate the suffering of this poor, underpaid person, Bill and the DBC cabinet have awarded her a huge annual bonus. This huge, though undisclosed, bonus ( So much for transparency.) was kindly paid for by the poor workers at the bottom of the pile who have had to take a pay cut. I'd like to know why the managers have not has a similar pay cut. Yes, we know some have taken a nice little nest egg / golden handshake to leave, but they were leaving anyway and this just pays them out where others get a pittance. Bill and Ada really don't care one little bit and nothing they say rings true. Actually, Ada seems incapable of speech. The only time I've actually heard her was when she refused to answer the question "How much was your bonus, Ada?" She managed to find her voice and step out from behind her minder long enough to tell us that it wasn't our business. Actually, Ada, I think it is. Did it buy you that nice little BMW Sports car that you are driving round in, or did you use it to build a new stable? You really need to own up to the people that you work for. We are your employers and we feel that you should take a pay cut and refuse your bonus. We don't mind you hiring on extra Bin Men and paying them a decent wage. In fact, why not resign and allow the council to hire on another 10 of them? Spy Boy
  • Score: 27

5:32pm Thu 3 Jul 14

mikyman says...

Come on Bambara, where are you?
Surly you will want to defend your mate Bill against all these nasty comments!
We desperatly need a change of council in Darlo,but where is the strong opposition we can mobilise behind?
Sorry but its lacking ,thats why the council is never brought to account.
Come on Bambara, where are you? Surly you will want to defend your mate Bill against all these nasty comments! We desperatly need a change of council in Darlo,but where is the strong opposition we can mobilise behind? Sorry but its lacking ,thats why the council is never brought to account. mikyman
  • Score: 14

5:46pm Thu 3 Jul 14

Red rose lad says...

Shameless, clueless and pointless. What a bloody shambles. I'm waiting for your comments Bambara. Where are you? How can you defend this kind of inequality. It's happening throughout the public sector. There's a massive disconnect between the senior managers, the workers and the public. Even the unions are questioning the actions of this so-called Labour council. Come on people. They're just champagne socialists.
Shameless, clueless and pointless. What a bloody shambles. I'm waiting for your comments Bambara. Where are you? How can you defend this kind of inequality. It's happening throughout the public sector. There's a massive disconnect between the senior managers, the workers and the public. Even the unions are questioning the actions of this so-called Labour council. Come on people. They're just champagne socialists. Red rose lad
  • Score: 16

6:21pm Thu 3 Jul 14

DarloXman says...

More and more people are now recognising the disgusting deterioration of Darlington - all at the hands of the long reigning set of existing councillors. Bill Dixon has been on Darlington's council since 1979 (35 years!!) and Ada Burns has been Chief executive since 2005 - they must be very proud of what they have achieved during their tenure - no, not the demise of the once fine town of Darlington but the amount of cash they've extracted from the council tax payers and shifted their way! This lot have proven they're not going to change - if Darlington wants the desperately needed change then it has to vote differently in 2015 - this is our only hope!

One further point - is it just me or is Bill Dixon looking more and more like Elvis?
More and more people are now recognising the disgusting deterioration of Darlington - all at the hands of the long reigning set of existing councillors. Bill Dixon has been on Darlington's council since 1979 (35 years!!) and Ada Burns has been Chief executive since 2005 - they must be very proud of what they have achieved during their tenure - no, not the demise of the once fine town of Darlington but the amount of cash they've extracted from the council tax payers and shifted their way! This lot have proven they're not going to change - if Darlington wants the desperately needed change then it has to vote differently in 2015 - this is our only hope! One further point - is it just me or is Bill Dixon looking more and more like Elvis? DarloXman
  • Score: 18

7:13pm Thu 3 Jul 14

dm1970 says...

don't worry Bambara will be along soon, to stat us up
don't worry Bambara will be along soon, to stat us up dm1970
  • Score: 3

7:25pm Thu 3 Jul 14

Awake-in-Darlo says...

DarloXman wrote:
More and more people are now recognising the disgusting deterioration of Darlington - all at the hands of the long reigning set of existing councillors. Bill Dixon has been on Darlington's council since 1979 (35 years!!) and Ada Burns has been Chief executive since 2005 - they must be very proud of what they have achieved during their tenure - no, not the demise of the once fine town of Darlington but the amount of cash they've extracted from the council tax payers and shifted their way! This lot have proven they're not going to change - if Darlington wants the desperately needed change then it has to vote differently in 2015 - this is our only hope!

One further point - is it just me or is Bill Dixon looking more and more like Elvis?
A little less conversation , a little more action...?
Too much rhetoric and hot air in Town Hall. Misguided ideas of how to develop the town. Only action paid for by outside agencies like where they can persuade idiots to invest in retail schemes etc. Or sell the property barons some nice green sites. Look forward to cut in rubbish collection later in the year, after cuts in binmen`s wages.
Overpaid and smug.
Leave the building Elvis and take your hangers on with you.
[quote][p][bold]DarloXman[/bold] wrote: More and more people are now recognising the disgusting deterioration of Darlington - all at the hands of the long reigning set of existing councillors. Bill Dixon has been on Darlington's council since 1979 (35 years!!) and Ada Burns has been Chief executive since 2005 - they must be very proud of what they have achieved during their tenure - no, not the demise of the once fine town of Darlington but the amount of cash they've extracted from the council tax payers and shifted their way! This lot have proven they're not going to change - if Darlington wants the desperately needed change then it has to vote differently in 2015 - this is our only hope! One further point - is it just me or is Bill Dixon looking more and more like Elvis?[/p][/quote]A little less conversation , a little more action...? Too much rhetoric and hot air in Town Hall. Misguided ideas of how to develop the town. Only action paid for by outside agencies like where they can persuade idiots to invest in retail schemes etc. Or sell the property barons some nice green sites. Look forward to cut in rubbish collection later in the year, after cuts in binmen`s wages. Overpaid and smug. Leave the building Elvis and take your hangers on with you. Awake-in-Darlo
  • Score: 16

7:53pm Thu 3 Jul 14

councilboy says...

unfortunately the bin men were screwed by unison,who agreed to the pay cuts a full ten days before the consultations allegedly started.where do the low paid workers live,darlo,where do the high paid managers live.yes,outside darlo.
unfortunately the bin men were screwed by unison,who agreed to the pay cuts a full ten days before the consultations allegedly started.where do the low paid workers live,darlo,where do the high paid managers live.yes,outside darlo. councilboy
  • Score: 10

9:03pm Thu 3 Jul 14

fedup binman says...

how do you sleep at night paycuts for the low paid up to £3500 then you say its alright to award £8000 to some managers because they haven't had a pay rise in 5 years well bill in case you've forgot we the lowpaid front line staff haven't either why don't you come ad speak to the men and explain why everybody hates working for you lot never seen the moral so bad
how do you sleep at night paycuts for the low paid up to £3500 then you say its alright to award £8000 to some managers because they haven't had a pay rise in 5 years well bill in case you've forgot we the lowpaid front line staff haven't either why don't you come ad speak to the men and explain why everybody hates working for you lot never seen the moral so bad fedup binman
  • Score: 27

10:07pm Thu 3 Jul 14

Border Terrier says...

DBC should receive a visit from the Local Government Ombudsman.
Their affairs should be investigated to see if the local taxpayer is getting value for money.
DBC should receive a visit from the Local Government Ombudsman. Their affairs should be investigated to see if the local taxpayer is getting value for money. Border Terrier
  • Score: 25

10:08pm Thu 3 Jul 14

loan_star says...

dm1970 wrote:
don't worry Bambara will be along soon, to stat us up
Perhaps this thread isn't convenient for him/her to do a bit of tory bashing
[quote][p][bold]dm1970[/bold] wrote: don't worry Bambara will be along soon, to stat us up[/p][/quote]Perhaps this thread isn't convenient for him/her to do a bit of tory bashing loan_star
  • Score: 8

11:15pm Thu 3 Jul 14

behonest says...

Cllr Dixon denied that the council was biased towards protecting executive positions.
He said: “Hundreds of staff have been downgraded and regraded – predominantly downgraded."

So answer me this, Bill. Has Ada Burns, or you, or any councillor, had to take a reduction in your salary or allowances over recent years? I believe the answer is no, despite the fact you are all responsible for a much lower level of budget and therefore a much reduced level of council services. Double standards, surely?

It's just a good job for you that regardless of how badly you treat the people of Darlington, they will always vote Labour.
Cllr Dixon denied that the council was biased towards protecting executive positions. He said: “Hundreds of staff have been downgraded and regraded – predominantly downgraded." So answer me this, Bill. Has Ada Burns, or you, or any councillor, had to take a reduction in your salary or allowances over recent years? I believe the answer is no, despite the fact you are all responsible for a much lower level of budget and therefore a much reduced level of council services. Double standards, surely? It's just a good job for you that regardless of how badly you treat the people of Darlington, they will always vote Labour. behonest
  • Score: 16

11:23pm Thu 3 Jul 14

Gamechanger says...

If these chief officers came up with visionary ideas that befitted their salaries then fine. The truth is that they are yes men/women right time right place to make their way up the council ladder. Nothing to do with talent or expertise. Where are the plans? How are you going to develop the town? Do you have a clue? Earn your money or resign.
If these chief officers came up with visionary ideas that befitted their salaries then fine. The truth is that they are yes men/women right time right place to make their way up the council ladder. Nothing to do with talent or expertise. Where are the plans? How are you going to develop the town? Do you have a clue? Earn your money or resign. Gamechanger
  • Score: 9

12:29am Fri 4 Jul 14

spragger says...

Unison are off the mark as usual
Why do the Council need any of the Senior Managers & especially a Chief Exec.
Added to that the taxpayers would not miss any of 'em
Unison are off the mark as usual Why do the Council need any of the Senior Managers & especially a Chief Exec. Added to that the taxpayers would not miss any of 'em spragger
  • Score: 3

12:32am Fri 4 Jul 14

spragger says...

loan_star wrote:
Waiting for Bambara to come on and defend Dixon and his mates.....
Is not Bambara just a rehash of all the other mouthy socialists we have had to put up with?
[quote][p][bold]loan_star[/bold] wrote: Waiting for Bambara to come on and defend Dixon and his mates.....[/p][/quote]Is not Bambara just a rehash of all the other mouthy socialists we have had to put up with? spragger
  • Score: 3

12:36am Fri 4 Jul 14

Cotto9 says...

I just can't imagine what Ada Burns does on an average day that could in any way justify £200k a year.

These outrageous wages should be capped. They would argue that their limitless talents justify their pay, but good luck finding a job in the private sector around here paying anywhere near that.
I just can't imagine what Ada Burns does on an average day that could in any way justify £200k a year. These outrageous wages should be capped. They would argue that their limitless talents justify their pay, but good luck finding a job in the private sector around here paying anywhere near that. Cotto9
  • Score: 13

3:32am Fri 4 Jul 14

pandorica says...

From what I have heard from my mother who has had dealings with Ada Burns in the work place she is a nasty, snobby trout. Certainly has no manners or respect for others who work dam hard in this town. Just look at the state of the town, roadwork's everywhere you go causing total chaos and in some places an accident waiting to happen. Empty shops in the town centre because the once vibrant market town in now turning into something I would expect to see on Shameless. Council Town Hall being modernised in places where so was just no need, and bin men having their low paid wages cut even more whilst the big wigs have their wages increased. If these were performance rated against their salary I think you would find all the top execs would have their salary decreased in line with the poor performance in the work place.

You would not see this kind of negligence and under performance in any other service without action being taken. You would not get for that matter any other country putting up with the crap from the government that this country has. Nothing will ever change because we do not stand together do get this changed, and as long as Ada Burns is power knowing the attitude she has on her, I would not hold out much hope of anything changing for the better going ahead in this town. I think a vote of no confidence should be registered against our Council and something done. Lets all stand together despite what political opinions we have, after all its for the best interest of us all that this town shines bright once again.
From what I have heard from my mother who has had dealings with Ada Burns in the work place she is a nasty, snobby trout. Certainly has no manners or respect for others who work dam hard in this town. Just look at the state of the town, roadwork's everywhere you go causing total chaos and in some places an accident waiting to happen. Empty shops in the town centre because the once vibrant market town in now turning into something I would expect to see on Shameless. Council Town Hall being modernised in places where so was just no need, and bin men having their low paid wages cut even more whilst the big wigs have their wages increased. If these were performance rated against their salary I think you would find all the top execs would have their salary decreased in line with the poor performance in the work place. You would not see this kind of negligence and under performance in any other service without action being taken. You would not get for that matter any other country putting up with the crap from the government that this country has. Nothing will ever change because we do not stand together do get this changed, and as long as Ada Burns is power knowing the attitude she has on her, I would not hold out much hope of anything changing for the better going ahead in this town. I think a vote of no confidence should be registered against our Council and something done. Lets all stand together despite what political opinions we have, after all its for the best interest of us all that this town shines bright once again. pandorica
  • Score: 19

9:25am Fri 4 Jul 14

RealLivin says...

wow comments coming int at 3:32 in the morning, pandoric, I to have heard that about Ada but as we know most people on extortionate wages dont care about others and I dont see any of these execs taking any financial penalties for not being able to do their job properly, or failing in their responsibilities, Bill if you have to pay them for taking responsibility then they are obliviously not wanting that responsibility.

And to help Bambara into this perhaps he can check the stats on this article from yesterdays echo
http://www.thenorthe
rnecho.co.uk/feature
s/leader/11317183.__
_Labour_threat_is_fr
om_Ukip___/
It basically states that contrary to popular belief, Ukip is not drawing its main electoral strength from disaffected middle-class right-wing Conservatives or eurosceptics, but from what has been perceived as a ‘neglected workingclass’, thats labour supporters or should I say ex labour supporters and with the likes of those running our council I wonder why. We all know Tories only look after themselves but the day labour stops looking after the workers it time to kick them out.

go get some stats
wow comments coming int at 3:32 in the morning, pandoric, I to have heard that about Ada but as we know most people on extortionate wages dont care about others and I dont see any of these execs taking any financial penalties for not being able to do their job properly, or failing in their responsibilities, Bill if you have to pay them for taking responsibility then they are obliviously not wanting that responsibility. And to help Bambara into this perhaps he can check the stats on this article from yesterdays echo http://www.thenorthe rnecho.co.uk/feature s/leader/11317183.__ _Labour_threat_is_fr om_Ukip___/ It basically states that contrary to popular belief, Ukip is not drawing its main electoral strength from disaffected middle-class right-wing Conservatives or eurosceptics, but from what has been perceived as a ‘neglected workingclass’, thats labour supporters or should I say ex labour supporters and with the likes of those running our council I wonder why. We all know Tories only look after themselves but the day labour stops looking after the workers it time to kick them out. go get some stats RealLivin
  • Score: 5

9:52am Fri 4 Jul 14

oliviaden6 says...

Border Terrier wrote:
DBC should receive a visit from the Local Government Ombudsman.
Their affairs should be investigated to see if the local taxpayer is getting value for money.
Agree totally if only one knew how to instigate the process and what is involved i believe the hard pressed public of Darlington would persue it.
I would like to think so anyway.
[quote][p][bold]Border Terrier[/bold] wrote: DBC should receive a visit from the Local Government Ombudsman. Their affairs should be investigated to see if the local taxpayer is getting value for money.[/p][/quote]Agree totally if only one knew how to instigate the process and what is involved i believe the hard pressed public of Darlington would persue it. I would like to think so anyway. oliviaden6
  • Score: 8

12:42pm Fri 4 Jul 14

Push it along says...

Lost the plot , just keep digging , some one should remind bill , and the gang ,that labour election ticket rides on people living standard , not cutting peoples incomes !!!!
Lost the plot , just keep digging , some one should remind bill , and the gang ,that labour election ticket rides on people living standard , not cutting peoples incomes !!!! Push it along
  • Score: 7

1:06pm Fri 4 Jul 14

BillySparks says...

Yet again the flippant, dismissive arrogant nature of the very affluent Mr Dixons comments illustrate perfectly the disconnect that now exists between himself, his council and indeed the Labour movement as a whole, and the very people they purport to represent. The very fact he and his backsliding cronies in their dark den of iniquity can so casually dismiss the concerns of many council workers over their substantial enforced pay cut, yet defend almost with pride an even greater self awarded increase to so called Senior Managers salaries is not only morally reprehensible, its vulgarity personified.
Notice also how this announcement is made a matter of weeks FOLLOWING council elections, and without so much as a murmur from our local subservient, career orientated MP.
A dis-honourable mention must also be afforded to Ms Taylor and the UNISON union without whom the council would have been unable to shaft their fee paying members so passively.
So to all the good council workers of this town affected by these unjust, heinous cuts but who's dignity remains intact, i salute you.
And to Dixon, Burns, Chapman et al who scoff from their ivory tower of decadence at the plight of the proletariate i say; somewhere there's an upturned rock awaiting it's residents return. Go home..
Yet again the flippant, dismissive arrogant nature of the very affluent Mr Dixons comments illustrate perfectly the disconnect that now exists between himself, his council and indeed the Labour movement as a whole, and the very people they purport to represent. The very fact he and his backsliding cronies in their dark den of iniquity can so casually dismiss the concerns of many council workers over their substantial enforced pay cut, yet defend almost with pride an even greater self awarded increase to so called Senior Managers salaries is not only morally reprehensible, its vulgarity personified. Notice also how this announcement is made a matter of weeks FOLLOWING council elections, and without so much as a murmur from our local subservient, career orientated MP. A dis-honourable mention must also be afforded to Ms Taylor and the UNISON union without whom the council would have been unable to shaft their fee paying members so passively. So to all the good council workers of this town affected by these unjust, heinous cuts but who's dignity remains intact, i salute you. And to Dixon, Burns, Chapman et al who scoff from their ivory tower of decadence at the plight of the proletariate i say; somewhere there's an upturned rock awaiting it's residents return. Go home.. BillySparks
  • Score: 10

2:57pm Fri 4 Jul 14

Spy Boy says...

oliviaden6 wrote:
Border Terrier wrote:
DBC should receive a visit from the Local Government Ombudsman.
Their affairs should be investigated to see if the local taxpayer is getting value for money.
Agree totally if only one knew how to instigate the process and what is involved i believe the hard pressed public of Darlington would persue it.
I would like to think so anyway.
Oh Yes! Let's do this. Private Eye may pick up on this one too. Yes, let's have a big inquiry into some of the over budget projects that they have signed up for. Many people have voiced concerns about them being corrupt, so let's actually see if its that, or simply a case of thick, arrogant people just losing the plot.

Just an aside: I know that letters have been written to much higher authorities, asking for support on this matter.
[quote][p][bold]oliviaden6[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Border Terrier[/bold] wrote: DBC should receive a visit from the Local Government Ombudsman. Their affairs should be investigated to see if the local taxpayer is getting value for money.[/p][/quote]Agree totally if only one knew how to instigate the process and what is involved i believe the hard pressed public of Darlington would persue it. I would like to think so anyway.[/p][/quote]Oh Yes! Let's do this. Private Eye may pick up on this one too. Yes, let's have a big inquiry into some of the over budget projects that they have signed up for. Many people have voiced concerns about them being corrupt, so let's actually see if its that, or simply a case of thick, arrogant people just losing the plot. Just an aside: I know that letters have been written to much higher authorities, asking for support on this matter. Spy Boy
  • Score: 6

3:04pm Fri 4 Jul 14

Spy Boy says...

pandorica wrote:
From what I have heard from my mother who has had dealings with Ada Burns in the work place she is a nasty, snobby trout. Certainly has no manners or respect for others who work dam hard in this town. Just look at the state of the town, roadwork's everywhere you go causing total chaos and in some places an accident waiting to happen. Empty shops in the town centre because the once vibrant market town in now turning into something I would expect to see on Shameless. Council Town Hall being modernised in places where so was just no need, and bin men having their low paid wages cut even more whilst the big wigs have their wages increased. If these were performance rated against their salary I think you would find all the top execs would have their salary decreased in line with the poor performance in the work place.

You would not see this kind of negligence and under performance in any other service without action being taken. You would not get for that matter any other country putting up with the crap from the government that this country has. Nothing will ever change because we do not stand together do get this changed, and as long as Ada Burns is power knowing the attitude she has on her, I would not hold out much hope of anything changing for the better going ahead in this town. I think a vote of no confidence should be registered against our Council and something done. Lets all stand together despite what political opinions we have, after all its for the best interest of us all that this town shines bright once again.
This is very good. When the council fall, as they will, she will be out on her ear and possibly be investigated. ( We can hope.) Performance has been quite unacceptable for someone on her huge salary. Poor performance has simply pegged her salary and to make up for the short fall, Bill has given her a large, undisclosed bonus. Just another sleazy episode in the ( Too ) long running soap that is Darlington Borough Council. Vote them out and give us an elected mayor for the town. An elected mayor will not cost us a penny more and we may actually get someone who can rejuvenate the town before it sinks without trace.
[quote][p][bold]pandorica[/bold] wrote: From what I have heard from my mother who has had dealings with Ada Burns in the work place she is a nasty, snobby trout. Certainly has no manners or respect for others who work dam hard in this town. Just look at the state of the town, roadwork's everywhere you go causing total chaos and in some places an accident waiting to happen. Empty shops in the town centre because the once vibrant market town in now turning into something I would expect to see on Shameless. Council Town Hall being modernised in places where so was just no need, and bin men having their low paid wages cut even more whilst the big wigs have their wages increased. If these were performance rated against their salary I think you would find all the top execs would have their salary decreased in line with the poor performance in the work place. You would not see this kind of negligence and under performance in any other service without action being taken. You would not get for that matter any other country putting up with the crap from the government that this country has. Nothing will ever change because we do not stand together do get this changed, and as long as Ada Burns is power knowing the attitude she has on her, I would not hold out much hope of anything changing for the better going ahead in this town. I think a vote of no confidence should be registered against our Council and something done. Lets all stand together despite what political opinions we have, after all its for the best interest of us all that this town shines bright once again.[/p][/quote]This is very good. When the council fall, as they will, she will be out on her ear and possibly be investigated. ( We can hope.) Performance has been quite unacceptable for someone on her huge salary. Poor performance has simply pegged her salary and to make up for the short fall, Bill has given her a large, undisclosed bonus. Just another sleazy episode in the ( Too ) long running soap that is Darlington Borough Council. Vote them out and give us an elected mayor for the town. An elected mayor will not cost us a penny more and we may actually get someone who can rejuvenate the town before it sinks without trace. Spy Boy
  • Score: 7

3:10pm Fri 4 Jul 14

Spy Boy says...

spragger wrote:
Unison are off the mark as usual
Why do the Council need any of the Senior Managers & especially a Chief Exec.
Added to that the taxpayers would not miss any of 'em
They have a new executive post now. They have just appointed an executive to support the long overdue up-grading of The Civic Theatre. Would it not have been better to put that £40K+ into the actual upgrade? The council have still got a full quota of Execs ( £X£CUTIV£S) that can't have much to do after losing about 40% of their staff, so why does one of these not cover the work?
[quote][p][bold]spragger[/bold] wrote: Unison are off the mark as usual Why do the Council need any of the Senior Managers & especially a Chief Exec. Added to that the taxpayers would not miss any of 'em[/p][/quote]They have a new executive post now. They have just appointed an executive to support the long overdue up-grading of The Civic Theatre. Would it not have been better to put that £40K+ into the actual upgrade? The council have still got a full quota of Execs ( £X£CUTIV£S) that can't have much to do after losing about 40% of their staff, so why does one of these not cover the work? Spy Boy
  • Score: 5

3:18pm Fri 4 Jul 14

Spy Boy says...

Nice piece on the news about the Council Meetings having to be recorded on video. This may show how inept they are, but you can bet that most of their little schemes are hatched behind closed doors, or in the pub. It saves on the paperwork and minutes.
Nice piece on the news about the Council Meetings having to be recorded on video. This may show how inept they are, but you can bet that most of their little schemes are hatched behind closed doors, or in the pub. It saves on the paperwork and minutes. Spy Boy
  • Score: 5

3:20pm Fri 4 Jul 14

Spy Boy says...

Elvis? More like a grumpy garden gnome.
Elvis? More like a grumpy garden gnome. Spy Boy
  • Score: 1

5:30pm Fri 4 Jul 14

spragger says...

Come to the vibrant Catterick Camp development & the futuristic Scotch Corner Designer village.
A Labour free zone & booming, with the Catterick Camp upgrade & A1 motorway work

Hard luck Darlington but you voted 'em in
Come to the vibrant Catterick Camp development & the futuristic Scotch Corner Designer village. A Labour free zone & booming, with the Catterick Camp upgrade & A1 motorway work Hard luck Darlington but you voted 'em in spragger
  • Score: 5

6:33pm Fri 4 Jul 14

Pauline Greaves says...

Why doesn't the council reduce the 2 Managers wages down from £92,000
to £60,000 a year therefore saving £64,000 a year, instead of giving them an £8,000 increase. If they don't like it there are 100 people in the jobcentre willing to take their jobs at £60,000 a year. Why does anyone need £92,000 a year to live on that is just pure greed.
Why doesn't the council reduce the 2 Managers wages down from £92,000 to £60,000 a year therefore saving £64,000 a year, instead of giving them an £8,000 increase. If they don't like it there are 100 people in the jobcentre willing to take their jobs at £60,000 a year. Why does anyone need £92,000 a year to live on that is just pure greed. Pauline Greaves
  • Score: 9

7:38pm Fri 4 Jul 14

Jonn says...

Just a thought. If DBC were Conservative run, would they freeze the pay of senior managers and executives and give the lower paid staff a pay rise?
Just a thought. If DBC were Conservative run, would they freeze the pay of senior managers and executives and give the lower paid staff a pay rise? Jonn
  • Score: 5

7:47pm Fri 4 Jul 14

loan_star says...

Jonn wrote:
Just a thought. If DBC were Conservative run, would they freeze the pay of senior managers and executives and give the lower paid staff a pay rise?
Thats not the point though is it! We have Dixon and co pleading poverty, saying how the worse off are even more worse off because of this nasty coalition and yet give massive pay rises to the hob nob types. Total hypocrisy from the so called Labour council.
I notice our resident lefty Dixon lover Bambara still hasn't passed comment on this thread and yet pops up everywhere else. I wonder why?
[quote][p][bold]Jonn[/bold] wrote: Just a thought. If DBC were Conservative run, would they freeze the pay of senior managers and executives and give the lower paid staff a pay rise?[/p][/quote]Thats not the point though is it! We have Dixon and co pleading poverty, saying how the worse off are even more worse off because of this nasty coalition and yet give massive pay rises to the hob nob types. Total hypocrisy from the so called Labour council. I notice our resident lefty Dixon lover Bambara still hasn't passed comment on this thread and yet pops up everywhere else. I wonder why? loan_star
  • Score: 7

10:22pm Fri 4 Jul 14

mikyman says...

Bambara is too busy taking photos of all those nasty illegal parkers in Darlo to make time to defend his mate puffing billy!
Bambara is too busy taking photos of all those nasty illegal parkers in Darlo to make time to defend his mate puffing billy! mikyman
  • Score: 2

11:07am Sat 5 Jul 14

DarloXman says...

Jonn wrote:
Just a thought. If DBC were Conservative run, would they freeze the pay of senior managers and executives and give the lower paid staff a pay rise?
Jonn - you are right - I doubt the Tories would do that!

But what Labour have done is reduce the pay of their poorest paid employees whilst increasing the pay of their senior managers! This is what LABOUR have done - what has this got to do with the Tories?
[quote][p][bold]Jonn[/bold] wrote: Just a thought. If DBC were Conservative run, would they freeze the pay of senior managers and executives and give the lower paid staff a pay rise?[/p][/quote]Jonn - you are right - I doubt the Tories would do that! But what Labour have done is reduce the pay of their poorest paid employees whilst increasing the pay of their senior managers! This is what LABOUR have done - what has this got to do with the Tories? DarloXman
  • Score: 8

7:28pm Sat 5 Jul 14

dave-hutton@live.co.uk says...

Always remember your just a number to these people. They sit in there meetings sipping there coffee & teas have no real idea how a council should be run. As long as they are getting there freebies Aim ok jack sod you. I recommend a vote of no conformance in the senior management of DBC
Always remember your just a number to these people. They sit in there meetings sipping there coffee & teas have no real idea how a council should be run. As long as they are getting there freebies Aim ok jack sod you. I recommend a vote of no conformance in the senior management of DBC dave-hutton@live.co.uk
  • Score: 5

8:40pm Sat 5 Jul 14

WAL666 says...

Spy Boy wrote:
Elvis? More like a grumpy garden gnome.
Sorry DarloXman got to agree with Spy Boy on this one - definitely a grumpy gnome.
[quote][p][bold]Spy Boy[/bold] wrote: Elvis? More like a grumpy garden gnome.[/p][/quote]Sorry DarloXman got to agree with Spy Boy on this one - definitely a grumpy gnome. WAL666
  • Score: 3

12:02am Sun 6 Jul 14

bambara says...

loan_star wrote:
Waiting for Bambara to come on and defend Dixon and his mates.....
You will have a long wait on this one.
While I don't have all the info to make detailed analysis. (and you know how I like to analyse the numbers) this does not feel right.

We are seeing massive cuts to the council budget, cuts to the salaries of the least well paid (and least able to afford it), and increases to the salaries of senior management.

No you won't see me defend this one. I'm with Unison on this.
[quote][p][bold]loan_star[/bold] wrote: Waiting for Bambara to come on and defend Dixon and his mates.....[/p][/quote]You will have a long wait on this one. While I don't have all the info to make detailed analysis. (and you know how I like to analyse the numbers) this does not feel right. We are seeing massive cuts to the council budget, cuts to the salaries of the least well paid (and least able to afford it), and increases to the salaries of senior management. No you won't see me defend this one. I'm with Unison on this. bambara
  • Score: 4

12:24am Sun 6 Jul 14

bambara says...

Red rose lad wrote:
Shameless, clueless and pointless. What a bloody shambles. I'm waiting for your comments Bambara. Where are you? How can you defend this kind of inequality. It's happening throughout the public sector. There's a massive disconnect between the senior managers, the workers and the public. Even the unions are questioning the actions of this so-called Labour council. Come on people. They're just champagne socialists.
I have been away working rosey boy, but don't expect me to defend these rises.
As far as my opinion on this goes the cuts to the lower paid which are the result of downgrading their jobs should also be applied to the execs. The total budget that Darlington council is responsible for, and the total number of staff which they employ have both fallen. Therefore the amount of budget and number of staff each manager is required to manage has also reduced. This should invariably lead to the job they do also being downgraded. (Assuming that the council has not got rid of a number of managers and amalgamated departments into larger groups.)
My logic says that Lower total budget & Fewer staff = Fewer managers & Lower wages for the execs.

I will say that if 20-30 people chose to join the labour party and went along to the selection meeting you could change the makeup of the council far easier than by marking an X in the local election. The vote for who represents a local ward is never likely to attract more than a couple of dozen people to a party meeting unless things have changed dramatically in the 20 years since I left the party in disgust at the lurch to the right under Blair.
[quote][p][bold]Red rose lad[/bold] wrote: Shameless, clueless and pointless. What a bloody shambles. I'm waiting for your comments Bambara. Where are you? How can you defend this kind of inequality. It's happening throughout the public sector. There's a massive disconnect between the senior managers, the workers and the public. Even the unions are questioning the actions of this so-called Labour council. Come on people. They're just champagne socialists.[/p][/quote]I have been away working rosey boy, but don't expect me to defend these rises. As far as my opinion on this goes the cuts to the lower paid which are the result of downgrading their jobs should also be applied to the execs. The total budget that Darlington council is responsible for, and the total number of staff which they employ have both fallen. Therefore the amount of budget and number of staff each manager is required to manage has also reduced. This should invariably lead to the job they do also being downgraded. (Assuming that the council has not got rid of a number of managers and amalgamated departments into larger groups.) My logic says that Lower total budget & Fewer staff = Fewer managers & Lower wages for the execs. I will say that if 20-30 people chose to join the labour party and went along to the selection meeting you could change the makeup of the council far easier than by marking an X in the local election. The vote for who represents a local ward is never likely to attract more than a couple of dozen people to a party meeting unless things have changed dramatically in the 20 years since I left the party in disgust at the lurch to the right under Blair. bambara
  • Score: 3

12:29am Sun 6 Jul 14

bambara says...

RealLivin wrote:
wow comments coming int at 3:32 in the morning, pandoric, I to have heard that about Ada but as we know most people on extortionate wages dont care about others and I dont see any of these execs taking any financial penalties for not being able to do their job properly, or failing in their responsibilities, Bill if you have to pay them for taking responsibility then they are obliviously not wanting that responsibility.

And to help Bambara into this perhaps he can check the stats on this article from yesterdays echo
http://www.thenorthe

rnecho.co.uk/feature

s/leader/11317183.__

_Labour_threat_is_fr

om_Ukip___/
It basically states that contrary to popular belief, Ukip is not drawing its main electoral strength from disaffected middle-class right-wing Conservatives or eurosceptics, but from what has been perceived as a ‘neglected workingclass’, thats labour supporters or should I say ex labour supporters and with the likes of those running our council I wonder why. We all know Tories only look after themselves but the day labour stops looking after the workers it time to kick them out.

go get some stats
I've got plenty of stats thanks, they show that the UKIP vote is made up of a mix of right wing Tories and disaffected older male Labour voters. Largely the UKIP vote is both male and over 50. A significant percentage of it is racist, and very right wing.
The difference in the north of England is that there are very few Tories to draw support from so a higher percentage here are the disaffected Labour supporters.
[quote][p][bold]RealLivin[/bold] wrote: wow comments coming int at 3:32 in the morning, pandoric, I to have heard that about Ada but as we know most people on extortionate wages dont care about others and I dont see any of these execs taking any financial penalties for not being able to do their job properly, or failing in their responsibilities, Bill if you have to pay them for taking responsibility then they are obliviously not wanting that responsibility. And to help Bambara into this perhaps he can check the stats on this article from yesterdays echo http://www.thenorthe rnecho.co.uk/feature s/leader/11317183.__ _Labour_threat_is_fr om_Ukip___/ It basically states that contrary to popular belief, Ukip is not drawing its main electoral strength from disaffected middle-class right-wing Conservatives or eurosceptics, but from what has been perceived as a ‘neglected workingclass’, thats labour supporters or should I say ex labour supporters and with the likes of those running our council I wonder why. We all know Tories only look after themselves but the day labour stops looking after the workers it time to kick them out. go get some stats[/p][/quote]I've got plenty of stats thanks, they show that the UKIP vote is made up of a mix of right wing Tories and disaffected older male Labour voters. Largely the UKIP vote is both male and over 50. A significant percentage of it is racist, and very right wing. The difference in the north of England is that there are very few Tories to draw support from so a higher percentage here are the disaffected Labour supporters. bambara
  • Score: 2

8:22am Sun 6 Jul 14

Red rose lad says...

bambara wrote:
Red rose lad wrote:
Shameless, clueless and pointless. What a bloody shambles. I'm waiting for your comments Bambara. Where are you? How can you defend this kind of inequality. It's happening throughout the public sector. There's a massive disconnect between the senior managers, the workers and the public. Even the unions are questioning the actions of this so-called Labour council. Come on people. They're just champagne socialists.
I have been away working rosey boy, but don't expect me to defend these rises.
As far as my opinion on this goes the cuts to the lower paid which are the result of downgrading their jobs should also be applied to the execs. The total budget that Darlington council is responsible for, and the total number of staff which they employ have both fallen. Therefore the amount of budget and number of staff each manager is required to manage has also reduced. This should invariably lead to the job they do also being downgraded. (Assuming that the council has not got rid of a number of managers and amalgamated departments into larger groups.)
My logic says that Lower total budget & Fewer staff = Fewer managers & Lower wages for the execs.

I will say that if 20-30 people chose to join the labour party and went along to the selection meeting you could change the makeup of the council far easier than by marking an X in the local election. The vote for who represents a local ward is never likely to attract more than a couple of dozen people to a party meeting unless things have changed dramatically in the 20 years since I left the party in disgust at the lurch to the right under Blair.
Welcome back Bambi. From your answer it would seem that you may not be a lost cause after all. You can't defend the indefensible and any right minded individual can see that this lot are just looking after themselves. I'm not sure that I agree with your logic that the only way to change the Council is to join the Muppet Show and do it from within. Surely you only get to select another Muppet that way. Anyway, I'm glad you're back and I'll keep working on your salvation.
[quote][p][bold]bambara[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Red rose lad[/bold] wrote: Shameless, clueless and pointless. What a bloody shambles. I'm waiting for your comments Bambara. Where are you? How can you defend this kind of inequality. It's happening throughout the public sector. There's a massive disconnect between the senior managers, the workers and the public. Even the unions are questioning the actions of this so-called Labour council. Come on people. They're just champagne socialists.[/p][/quote]I have been away working rosey boy, but don't expect me to defend these rises. As far as my opinion on this goes the cuts to the lower paid which are the result of downgrading their jobs should also be applied to the execs. The total budget that Darlington council is responsible for, and the total number of staff which they employ have both fallen. Therefore the amount of budget and number of staff each manager is required to manage has also reduced. This should invariably lead to the job they do also being downgraded. (Assuming that the council has not got rid of a number of managers and amalgamated departments into larger groups.) My logic says that Lower total budget & Fewer staff = Fewer managers & Lower wages for the execs. I will say that if 20-30 people chose to join the labour party and went along to the selection meeting you could change the makeup of the council far easier than by marking an X in the local election. The vote for who represents a local ward is never likely to attract more than a couple of dozen people to a party meeting unless things have changed dramatically in the 20 years since I left the party in disgust at the lurch to the right under Blair.[/p][/quote]Welcome back Bambi. From your answer it would seem that you may not be a lost cause after all. You can't defend the indefensible and any right minded individual can see that this lot are just looking after themselves. I'm not sure that I agree with your logic that the only way to change the Council is to join the Muppet Show and do it from within. Surely you only get to select another Muppet that way. Anyway, I'm glad you're back and I'll keep working on your salvation. Red rose lad
  • Score: 2

11:43am Sun 6 Jul 14

LUSTARD says...

bambara wrote:
Red rose lad wrote:
Shameless, clueless and pointless. What a bloody shambles. I'm waiting for your comments Bambara. Where are you? How can you defend this kind of inequality. It's happening throughout the public sector. There's a massive disconnect between the senior managers, the workers and the public. Even the unions are questioning the actions of this so-called Labour council. Come on people. They're just champagne socialists.
I have been away working rosey boy, but don't expect me to defend these rises.
As far as my opinion on this goes the cuts to the lower paid which are the result of downgrading their jobs should also be applied to the execs. The total budget that Darlington council is responsible for, and the total number of staff which they employ have both fallen. Therefore the amount of budget and number of staff each manager is required to manage has also reduced. This should invariably lead to the job they do also being downgraded. (Assuming that the council has not got rid of a number of managers and amalgamated departments into larger groups.)
My logic says that Lower total budget & Fewer staff = Fewer managers & Lower wages for the execs.

I will say that if 20-30 people chose to join the labour party and went along to the selection meeting you could change the makeup of the council far easier than by marking an X in the local election. The vote for who represents a local ward is never likely to attract more than a couple of dozen people to a party meeting unless things have changed dramatically in the 20 years since I left the party in disgust at the lurch to the right under Blair.
AHH, THATS WHY SOME PEOPLE WITH CERTAIN CONNECTIONS HAVE JOINED THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY,
[quote][p][bold]bambara[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Red rose lad[/bold] wrote: Shameless, clueless and pointless. What a bloody shambles. I'm waiting for your comments Bambara. Where are you? How can you defend this kind of inequality. It's happening throughout the public sector. There's a massive disconnect between the senior managers, the workers and the public. Even the unions are questioning the actions of this so-called Labour council. Come on people. They're just champagne socialists.[/p][/quote]I have been away working rosey boy, but don't expect me to defend these rises. As far as my opinion on this goes the cuts to the lower paid which are the result of downgrading their jobs should also be applied to the execs. The total budget that Darlington council is responsible for, and the total number of staff which they employ have both fallen. Therefore the amount of budget and number of staff each manager is required to manage has also reduced. This should invariably lead to the job they do also being downgraded. (Assuming that the council has not got rid of a number of managers and amalgamated departments into larger groups.) My logic says that Lower total budget & Fewer staff = Fewer managers & Lower wages for the execs. I will say that if 20-30 people chose to join the labour party and went along to the selection meeting you could change the makeup of the council far easier than by marking an X in the local election. The vote for who represents a local ward is never likely to attract more than a couple of dozen people to a party meeting unless things have changed dramatically in the 20 years since I left the party in disgust at the lurch to the right under Blair.[/p][/quote]AHH, THATS WHY SOME PEOPLE WITH CERTAIN CONNECTIONS HAVE JOINED THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY, LUSTARD
  • Score: 3

12:22pm Sun 6 Jul 14

loan_star says...

bambara wrote:
loan_star wrote:
Waiting for Bambara to come on and defend Dixon and his mates.....
You will have a long wait on this one.
While I don't have all the info to make detailed analysis. (and you know how I like to analyse the numbers) this does not feel right.

We are seeing massive cuts to the council budget, cuts to the salaries of the least well paid (and least able to afford it), and increases to the salaries of senior management.

No you won't see me defend this one. I'm with Unison on this.
Well I nearly had you down as a lost cause, at least you have the bottle to admit a Labour mistake ;)
[quote][p][bold]bambara[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loan_star[/bold] wrote: Waiting for Bambara to come on and defend Dixon and his mates.....[/p][/quote]You will have a long wait on this one. While I don't have all the info to make detailed analysis. (and you know how I like to analyse the numbers) this does not feel right. We are seeing massive cuts to the council budget, cuts to the salaries of the least well paid (and least able to afford it), and increases to the salaries of senior management. No you won't see me defend this one. I'm with Unison on this.[/p][/quote]Well I nearly had you down as a lost cause, at least you have the bottle to admit a Labour mistake ;) loan_star
  • Score: 1

12:51pm Sun 6 Jul 14

John Durham says...

Its worth pointing out that this sort of situation is far from unique to Darlington council - or to just Labour councils either. In fact, sadly, its almost the standard across the country.
Because councils cannot cut an individual workers pay they have addressed the problem of salary cuts by widespread restructuring using a scheme of job evaluations.
The beauty of this scheme (for the bosses) is that it rewards people in the structure who have staff working for them and demotes the rest. Inevitably it means those at the bottom lose pay whilst those already in higher posts gain.
And to those trying to use politics in this instance I would suggest the cause of the current problems in local government arose mainly as a result of three different Tory governments. The Heath government prior to 1974 which reorganised local government - expanding executive power in the process and linking pay to other executives in nationalised industries - the Thatcher government who in the 1980s privatised those industries and thus allowed them to pay their execs massive increases without breaking the link between their pay and Chief Execs in local authorities and which also broke up the single tier metropolitan councils such as Tyne & Wear and created 5 separate authorities all with their own Chief Execs - and finally the Major government who yet again reorganised local government in 1996 and locally, for example, got rid of Cleveland to create 4 individual boroughs all with their own Chiefs etc.
Three reorganisations by three different Tory governments which have left us with the mess local government is in today.
And if anyone thinks that the Tories have learnt their lesson on reorganisations just look at what they have done to the NHS recently - spending £3 billion in redundancy payments to staff who then have often been taken on again in the new structures - probably with higher pay.
The Tories cannot help themselves but interfere in the public sector but by and large the results have been higher costs, greater inefficiency and poorer service - for which we always end up footing the bill.
PS Its also a bit rich of Unison to complain about this situation locally when nationally they supported higher pay for top staff in local government, colluded with councils on the roll out of job evaluation schemes across authorities and have failed miserably to protect their members from losing pay or stop massive job losses.
Its worth pointing out that this sort of situation is far from unique to Darlington council - or to just Labour councils either. In fact, sadly, its almost the standard across the country. Because councils cannot cut an individual workers pay they have addressed the problem of salary cuts by widespread restructuring using a scheme of job evaluations. The beauty of this scheme (for the bosses) is that it rewards people in the structure who have staff working for them and demotes the rest. Inevitably it means those at the bottom lose pay whilst those already in higher posts gain. And to those trying to use politics in this instance I would suggest the cause of the current problems in local government arose mainly as a result of three different Tory governments. The Heath government prior to 1974 which reorganised local government - expanding executive power in the process and linking pay to other executives in nationalised industries - the Thatcher government who in the 1980s privatised those industries and thus allowed them to pay their execs massive increases without breaking the link between their pay and Chief Execs in local authorities and which also broke up the single tier metropolitan councils such as Tyne & Wear and created 5 separate authorities all with their own Chief Execs - and finally the Major government who yet again reorganised local government in 1996 and locally, for example, got rid of Cleveland to create 4 individual boroughs all with their own Chiefs etc. Three reorganisations by three different Tory governments which have left us with the mess local government is in today. And if anyone thinks that the Tories have learnt their lesson on reorganisations just look at what they have done to the NHS recently - spending £3 billion in redundancy payments to staff who then have often been taken on again in the new structures - probably with higher pay. The Tories cannot help themselves but interfere in the public sector but by and large the results have been higher costs, greater inefficiency and poorer service - for which we always end up footing the bill. PS Its also a bit rich of Unison to complain about this situation locally when nationally they supported higher pay for top staff in local government, colluded with councils on the roll out of job evaluation schemes across authorities and have failed miserably to protect their members from losing pay or stop massive job losses. John Durham
  • Score: 7

1:54pm Sun 6 Jul 14

Red rose lad says...

JD - fair points on the restructuring of local governments by the 3 tory governments but what of the 13 golden years that followed. Were they a period of serene inactivity when nothing happened. 13 years is a long enough period to make changes. There could certainly have been changes made to the banking and finance industry which would have enabled us to weather the financial storms which came later. In those 13 years, local government expanded exponentially with all manner of weird and unnecessary jobs being created which increased dependency of the electorate on the state, mainly for political reasons. You're right about the pay awards in favour of senior managers. They adjust the organisational structure in favour of their own job descriptions and you end up with top-heavy bureaucratic organisations which are dysfuntional. They are all more interested in their own survival than the functioning of the organisation. The other problem is they all think they're captains of industry. They forget that they are public servants and big themselves up comparing themselves to heads of global and multinational companies. They forget where they came from and what it was like when they were on the shop floor.
JD - fair points on the restructuring of local governments by the 3 tory governments but what of the 13 golden years that followed. Were they a period of serene inactivity when nothing happened. 13 years is a long enough period to make changes. There could certainly have been changes made to the banking and finance industry which would have enabled us to weather the financial storms which came later. In those 13 years, local government expanded exponentially with all manner of weird and unnecessary jobs being created which increased dependency of the electorate on the state, mainly for political reasons. You're right about the pay awards in favour of senior managers. They adjust the organisational structure in favour of their own job descriptions and you end up with top-heavy bureaucratic organisations which are dysfuntional. They are all more interested in their own survival than the functioning of the organisation. The other problem is they all think they're captains of industry. They forget that they are public servants and big themselves up comparing themselves to heads of global and multinational companies. They forget where they came from and what it was like when they were on the shop floor. Red rose lad
  • Score: 2

2:32pm Sun 6 Jul 14

John Durham says...

Red rose lad wrote:
JD - fair points on the restructuring of local governments by the 3 tory governments but what of the 13 golden years that followed. Were they a period of serene inactivity when nothing happened. 13 years is a long enough period to make changes. There could certainly have been changes made to the banking and finance industry which would have enabled us to weather the financial storms which came later. In those 13 years, local government expanded exponentially with all manner of weird and unnecessary jobs being created which increased dependency of the electorate on the state, mainly for political reasons. You're right about the pay awards in favour of senior managers. They adjust the organisational structure in favour of their own job descriptions and you end up with top-heavy bureaucratic organisations which are dysfuntional. They are all more interested in their own survival than the functioning of the organisation. The other problem is they all think they're captains of industry. They forget that they are public servants and big themselves up comparing themselves to heads of global and multinational companies. They forget where they came from and what it was like when they were on the shop floor.
Blair admitted in 2006 that he regretted not pushing through public service reform - definitely a weakness of policy I agree - but to be honest every time central government obsesses with local government it gets in a mess.
Mainly because they send out mixed messages. Look at this government - they came in saying they would not force any new aggregation of councils which were not wanted locally - but then recommend joint chief executives, joint working across different authorities etc.
Take the Tees Valley - 5 local authorities all with the same top heavy executive centred organisations in a space less than about 20odd miles across. Why not have one local authority, 1 chief exec etc covering the whole area.
Politics though usually defies common sense - as we all know.
[quote][p][bold]Red rose lad[/bold] wrote: JD - fair points on the restructuring of local governments by the 3 tory governments but what of the 13 golden years that followed. Were they a period of serene inactivity when nothing happened. 13 years is a long enough period to make changes. There could certainly have been changes made to the banking and finance industry which would have enabled us to weather the financial storms which came later. In those 13 years, local government expanded exponentially with all manner of weird and unnecessary jobs being created which increased dependency of the electorate on the state, mainly for political reasons. You're right about the pay awards in favour of senior managers. They adjust the organisational structure in favour of their own job descriptions and you end up with top-heavy bureaucratic organisations which are dysfuntional. They are all more interested in their own survival than the functioning of the organisation. The other problem is they all think they're captains of industry. They forget that they are public servants and big themselves up comparing themselves to heads of global and multinational companies. They forget where they came from and what it was like when they were on the shop floor.[/p][/quote]Blair admitted in 2006 that he regretted not pushing through public service reform - definitely a weakness of policy I agree - but to be honest every time central government obsesses with local government it gets in a mess. Mainly because they send out mixed messages. Look at this government - they came in saying they would not force any new aggregation of councils which were not wanted locally - but then recommend joint chief executives, joint working across different authorities etc. Take the Tees Valley - 5 local authorities all with the same top heavy executive centred organisations in a space less than about 20odd miles across. Why not have one local authority, 1 chief exec etc covering the whole area. Politics though usually defies common sense - as we all know. John Durham
  • Score: 5

6:49pm Sun 6 Jul 14

Border Terrier says...

When is this Ring road fiasco going to be finished.
With the light nights and mornings they should be working all the ours God sends to get it finished. Not 8am till 4.30pm.
When is this Ring road fiasco going to be finished. With the light nights and mornings they should be working all the ours God sends to get it finished. Not 8am till 4.30pm. Border Terrier
  • Score: 1

5:11pm Mon 7 Jul 14

theWorkerScum says...

RealLivin wrote:
“How do people think we make the savings we have to make?"
We think you would cut the cost of running the council, unless a person can come in and turn our streets into gold they are not worth £100,000 or more, Managers on £80,000 dont need a pay rise and those on lower wages should get the higher % pay rise, a 10% pay rise on £100 is only £10 a 5% pay rise on £1000 is £50, so who actually gets the better payrise

“Local government is largely a people business and any significant saving isn’t going to come from the deployment of a new IT system, it is going to come from reductions in staff, regrettably.”

Agreed so get rid of the staff who think they do and keep the staff that actually do. Administration is an inhouse cost so you can manage your work and work force a good IT system will automate most of this and keep running costs low (installing it and getting it right is another matter all together) but IT systems and Administration will not actually get the job done, that is cleaning the streets, fixing the roads, etc.

These admin wages are supposed to be the standard for this type of job, in the private sector this may be acceptable but in the public sector we want value for money and we are not getting it because nobody is worth that sort of money and if we cant attract some one to the job for less we should do what was always done, train and promote from within, ie some one who has been in the service for years and knows what needs doing and how to get it done. If it were a people business they would look after their people and not treat them like some thing left on the pavement that we no longer have any one to clean up.
But once we get automated refuse robots we won't need bin men.
[quote][p][bold]RealLivin[/bold] wrote: “How do people think we make the savings we have to make?" We think you would cut the cost of running the council, unless a person can come in and turn our streets into gold they are not worth £100,000 or more, Managers on £80,000 dont need a pay rise and those on lower wages should get the higher % pay rise, a 10% pay rise on £100 is only £10 a 5% pay rise on £1000 is £50, so who actually gets the better payrise “Local government is largely a people business and any significant saving isn’t going to come from the deployment of a new IT system, it is going to come from reductions in staff, regrettably.” Agreed so get rid of the staff who think they do and keep the staff that actually do. Administration is an inhouse cost so you can manage your work and work force a good IT system will automate most of this and keep running costs low (installing it and getting it right is another matter all together) but IT systems and Administration will not actually get the job done, that is cleaning the streets, fixing the roads, etc. These admin wages are supposed to be the standard for this type of job, in the private sector this may be acceptable but in the public sector we want value for money and we are not getting it because nobody is worth that sort of money and if we cant attract some one to the job for less we should do what was always done, train and promote from within, ie some one who has been in the service for years and knows what needs doing and how to get it done. If it were a people business they would look after their people and not treat them like some thing left on the pavement that we no longer have any one to clean up.[/p][/quote]But once we get automated refuse robots we won't need bin men. theWorkerScum
  • Score: 0

12:48am Tue 8 Jul 14

Spy Boy says...

DarloXman wrote:
Jonn wrote:
Just a thought. If DBC were Conservative run, would they freeze the pay of senior managers and executives and give the lower paid staff a pay rise?
Jonn - you are right - I doubt the Tories would do that!

But what Labour have done is reduce the pay of their poorest paid employees whilst increasing the pay of their senior managers! This is what LABOUR have done - what has this got to do with the Tories?
Please don't confuse this council with real Labour values. They wear the red rosette simply to get elected. I find them to be about as far from socialism as they can be.
[quote][p][bold]DarloXman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jonn[/bold] wrote: Just a thought. If DBC were Conservative run, would they freeze the pay of senior managers and executives and give the lower paid staff a pay rise?[/p][/quote]Jonn - you are right - I doubt the Tories would do that! But what Labour have done is reduce the pay of their poorest paid employees whilst increasing the pay of their senior managers! This is what LABOUR have done - what has this got to do with the Tories?[/p][/quote]Please don't confuse this council with real Labour values. They wear the red rosette simply to get elected. I find them to be about as far from socialism as they can be. Spy Boy
  • Score: 5

9:56am Tue 8 Jul 14

Push it along says...

The collapse of the refuse & recycling is due October you've heard it here first.
The collapse of the refuse & recycling is due October you've heard it here first. Push it along
  • Score: 3

9:58pm Tue 8 Jul 14

bambara says...

Red rose lad wrote:
JD - fair points on the restructuring of local governments by the 3 tory governments but what of the 13 golden years that followed. Were they a period of serene inactivity when nothing happened. 13 years is a long enough period to make changes. There could certainly have been changes made to the banking and finance industry which would have enabled us to weather the financial storms which came later. In those 13 years, local government expanded exponentially with all manner of weird and unnecessary jobs being created which increased dependency of the electorate on the state, mainly for political reasons. You're right about the pay awards in favour of senior managers. They adjust the organisational structure in favour of their own job descriptions and you end up with top-heavy bureaucratic organisations which are dysfuntional. They are all more interested in their own survival than the functioning of the organisation. The other problem is they all think they're captains of industry. They forget that they are public servants and big themselves up comparing themselves to heads of global and multinational companies. They forget where they came from and what it was like when they were on the shop floor.
"In those 13 years, local government expanded exponentially" - No it didn't the amount spent on local government as a % of GDP was basicly static. Go check the figures on the ONS.

While you are at it here are a few points to think on.
Speaking in 2009, in a speech about ‘Cutting the Cost of Politics’, David Cameron stated:
“Local government is officially the most efficient part of the public sector. Councils achieve well in excess of the sector's spending review targets, beating central government savings by a country mile."

So even the Tory PM agrees that local government is already efficient. Yet he still chose to impose huge and extremely unequal cuts to local government, far in excess of those to central government.

In July 2012, the then planning minister Bob Neill claimed: “We know councils are much better at finding efficiency savings than Whitehall. I know many are using that local knowhow to look across their whole budgets to do so”

The 2010 ‘Spending Review’ planned four years of reductions in local government spending between 2011/12 and 2014/15. Government grants to councils will have fallen by 28% over this period. But those cuts will be 10 times as severe for the most deprived areas than they are for the richest areas. Is it just a co-incidence that those deprived areas vote Labour, and the richest areas vote Tory?

Bill and Ada may well have done some stupid things, and the chief amongst them is awarding fat pay rises to execs while cutting the salries of the low paid, but this myth of a huge inefficiencies that can be cut is just that a myth. Even the Tory PM has acknowledged that.
[quote][p][bold]Red rose lad[/bold] wrote: JD - fair points on the restructuring of local governments by the 3 tory governments but what of the 13 golden years that followed. Were they a period of serene inactivity when nothing happened. 13 years is a long enough period to make changes. There could certainly have been changes made to the banking and finance industry which would have enabled us to weather the financial storms which came later. In those 13 years, local government expanded exponentially with all manner of weird and unnecessary jobs being created which increased dependency of the electorate on the state, mainly for political reasons. You're right about the pay awards in favour of senior managers. They adjust the organisational structure in favour of their own job descriptions and you end up with top-heavy bureaucratic organisations which are dysfuntional. They are all more interested in their own survival than the functioning of the organisation. The other problem is they all think they're captains of industry. They forget that they are public servants and big themselves up comparing themselves to heads of global and multinational companies. They forget where they came from and what it was like when they were on the shop floor.[/p][/quote]"In those 13 years, local government expanded exponentially" - No it didn't the amount spent on local government as a % of GDP was basicly static. Go check the figures on the ONS. While you are at it here are a few points to think on. Speaking in 2009, in a speech about ‘Cutting the Cost of Politics’, David Cameron stated: “Local government is officially the most efficient part of the public sector. Councils achieve well in excess of the sector's spending review targets, beating central government savings by a country mile." So even the Tory PM agrees that local government is already efficient. Yet he still chose to impose huge and extremely unequal cuts to local government, far in excess of those to central government. In July 2012, the then planning minister Bob Neill claimed: “We know councils are much better at finding efficiency savings than Whitehall. I know many are using that local knowhow to look across their whole budgets to do so” The 2010 ‘Spending Review’ planned four years of reductions in local government spending between 2011/12 and 2014/15. Government grants to councils will have fallen by 28% over this period. But those cuts will be 10 times as severe for the most deprived areas than they are for the richest areas. Is it just a co-incidence that those deprived areas vote Labour, and the richest areas vote Tory? Bill and Ada may well have done some stupid things, and the chief amongst them is awarding fat pay rises to execs while cutting the salries of the low paid, but this myth of a huge inefficiencies that can be cut is just that a myth. Even the Tory PM has acknowledged that. bambara
  • Score: -1

11:02pm Tue 8 Jul 14

Red rose lad says...

Bambi - just look beyond Bob Neill's words. “We know councils are much better at finding efficiency savings than Whitehall. I know many are using that local knowhow to look across their whole budgets to do so”. He's saying that they know where all the waste is and they will know best where to cut. How far does his tongue have to be in his cheek before you twig?

“Government grants to councils will have fallen by 28% over this period. But those cuts will be 10 times as severe for the most deprived areas than they are for the richest areas". Ten times? How you figure that then? Suggest you get back on Googlestat.

"Bill and Ada may well have done some stupid things, and the chief amongst them is awarding fat pay rises to execs while cutting the salries of the low paid, but this myth of a huge inefficiencies that can be cut is just that a myth". Just look at the 2 halves of that sentence. They are awarding fat pay rises to execs then you say the myth of huge inefficiencies that can be cut is just that a myth. As well as the bleeding obvious that you can't see in that sentence there are too many execs period.

Have you been out in the sun when you were away?
Bambi - just look beyond Bob Neill's words. “We know councils are much better at finding efficiency savings than Whitehall. I know many are using that local knowhow to look across their whole budgets to do so”. He's saying that they know where all the waste is and they will know best where to cut. How far does his tongue have to be in his cheek before you twig? “Government grants to councils will have fallen by 28% over this period. But those cuts will be 10 times as severe for the most deprived areas than they are for the richest areas". Ten times? How you figure that then? Suggest you get back on Googlestat. "Bill and Ada may well have done some stupid things, and the chief amongst them is awarding fat pay rises to execs while cutting the salries of the low paid, but this myth of a huge inefficiencies that can be cut is just that a myth". Just look at the 2 halves of that sentence. They are awarding fat pay rises to execs then you say the myth of huge inefficiencies that can be cut is just that a myth. As well as the bleeding obvious that you can't see in that sentence there are too many execs period. Have you been out in the sun when you were away? Red rose lad
  • Score: 3

3:54pm Thu 10 Jul 14

LUSTARD says...

Push it along wrote:
Lost the plot , just keep digging , some one should remind bill , and the gang ,that labour election ticket rides on people living standard , not cutting peoples incomes !!!!
about right
[quote][p][bold]Push it along[/bold] wrote: Lost the plot , just keep digging , some one should remind bill , and the gang ,that labour election ticket rides on people living standard , not cutting peoples incomes !!!![/p][/quote]about right LUSTARD
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree