UNISON

the Public Service Union

Business Process Re-engineering - BPR

  Join UNISON to hear more about the changes, and what can be done to fight back.

UNISON led meeting about BPR and the Customer Service Centre (CSC)
20th September 2006

The meeting was held to allow staff to discuss their concerns and let UNISON share their knowledge of the situation. The issues will be raised by Graham Bilbe with the appropriate people e.g. at the Green Book Forum and in the UNISON Newsletter.

Key Issues Raised on BPR

Producing the Reports

• Finalising the BPR Report – The initial findings are put forward by Sam Mensah-Baah who discusses them with the Corporate Head of Service to establish how they will be implemented in the Service. Once this is done the report will be signed off and filtered to staff.

• Published BPR Reports - Staff are only seeing a summary of the final report as the detailed report is considered too harsh for staff to be reading and contains information that is considered potentially sensitive. Would it be possible to request a copy of the report under freedom of information?

• Initial Consultation – There have been concerns over the initial brevity of the process as Sam Mensah-Baah has not been interviewing all staff and as such the interpretation of a post (and assessment of time taken) is based on the assessment of individual performances. This does not take into account the varied performances within a team.

• Understanding Service Provision – The BPR is a review of the processes in place, however many of these processes are intrinsically linked to roles and there are concerns Sam Mensah-Baah has not understood the overall service provided by different areas as he has concentrated on specific areas and ignored others. Managers are spending significant time post review in giving Sam the insight into the service that was lacking when he produced the report.

• Timescales – The process of finalising the reviews has been dragged out and has not taken real account of the effects on the service morale and ability to deliver their work effectively. People have been putting their lives on hold and are suffering significant levels of stress.

• Named Staff – No final report has been seen by UNISON and there are concerns that individuals may be named rather than post titles. If individuals are named then could this cause concerns for their future prospect within WDC? However this may enable access to the original reports under freedom of information.

Implementing the Report

• Deadline for Implementation – There appears to be no continuity in the time given for services to implement the findings within the service. Some of the earliest services reviewed have until December to implement the plan, whilst others who have just received their report have been asked to action immediately.

• Provision of new service – Although Sam Mensah-Baah has put forward actions for implementation there has been little evidence produced or guidance given to services on how to provide a service under the new structure. Generalities such as ‘using a new computer package’ or ‘improved use of time’ do not actually give managers enough understanding to implement in their service.

• Deadline for Completion – Currently the plan is for all reports to be completed by December, however as some areas have yet to be interviewed the actual conclusion seems unclear.

• Management Approach – There are concerns that some managers are not effecting the implementation of the report as sensitively as is required. Some staff have come across an attitude that they should be grateful that their manager has kept them in a job, even if it is at a lower grade. NB – not all staff have experienced this attitude from managers.

Redeployment / Redundancy of Staff

• Voluntary Redundancy – Unlike previous redundancy situations the Council has not been asking for volunteers to leave, or to take early retirement. However with the changes to retirement under the age discrimination legislation this could put undue pressure on individuals to retire early when they would prefer to stay.

• Redundancy Package – WBC do run a redundancy package based upon factors such as length of service. A copy of the redundancy policy is available on the WBC website .

• Salary Protection – If you have worked for the Council for more than 2 years you will qualify for salary protection for 3 years if you are redeployed to a lower grade post. Those working less than 2 years do not qualify for protection as it is based upon the legislation for redundancy. The Government may be relaxing this so cases from a year will be at the discretion of the employer however there seems to be no current plan for WDC to review their policy yet.

• Impact on Pensions – The current scheme is based upon the best salary in the last three years of working. There are options for those whose final salary scheme will be affected by a role change as they can consider freezing their pension at the higher level, or look at staggered retirement.
• Protection of Posts – As many posts are new posts they do not qualify for the same protection of job expectations as has been in place previously. Someone needs to be in post for some time (generally two years) before they can appeal under the JE scheme that the job expectations are significantly higher than when originally appointed.

• Relocation of staff – if your post requires you to relocate to a new site and your new travelling costs amount to more than £3 extra a week you will be able to claim travel expenses for a period of four years.

• Redeployment Timescales – As the reports have been staggered there are concerns that redeployed posts will be going to members of staff from the earlier completed services, and by the time the last service has been completed there may not be suitable posts available.

• Redeployed Roles – Staff may find themselves pushed into roles that do not reflect the reason they came to work for WDC. There are concerns they may be forced to take on roles that, although commensurate with their experience, do not reflect their ambitions and interest.

• Attrition of Staff – Given the stressful and uncertain future faced in most services many staff members are looking elsewhere for jobs and leaving the Council. Concerns are raised that this puts additional pressure on services, especially in recruiting to vacant posts (where not frozen).

• Maternity Leave – Where someone goes on maternity leave during the consultation / implementation process there are legal requirements to protect their post during the period of leave and for a time after they return. These cannot be altered by BPR process.

Recruitment

• Frozen Posts – Posts for freezing are assessed by HR on a regular basis and if manager put forward a good business case for filling the post then it may not be frozen. Jobs which have been tagged for potential redeployed posts are put on a list available on the grapevine under ‘Customer Service & Staff Consultation > BPR’.

• Newly Created Posts – All new jobs should be going through the formal WDC job description process to establish the correct grade and requirements. Some new posts may be created under changes to structure in services.

• Post Grading – There are concerns that new posts are being kept as low a grade as possible to reduce costs. Once three-year salary protection has been lost there may be retention issues, as people need to leave to maintain salary levels.

• Types of Frozen Post – There are very few posts currently being held for potential redeployment and of those several are technical posts that are unsuitable for most staff at risk of redeployment e.g. Graduate Surveyor post. However there may be a proportion of technical staff that will be redeployed under future reports and posts are being held in recognition of this.

Key Issues Raised on the Customer Service Centre (CSC)

• What is the CSC? – The plan is to centralise a customer support centre in Shute End on the ground floor. This will provide all front line customer service requirements for visitors and phone calls. In addition the project will improve information provision through use of the web. A business case is being put forward in October.

• Consultation – The consultant in charge of producing the business case and assessing the need for a CSC in WDC has been straightforward and fair in his dealings with staff and Unison.

• Good Existing Service – WDC currently has recognised good customer services, however the Council would like to achieve the ‘Excellent’ rating in future assessment. Consideration will need to be made as to whether a centralised CSC would improve or reduce the chances of getting this rating.

• Example Centres – Windsor and Maidenhead have a successful centre in place, however the cost of setting this up have not produced the saving expected. Bracknell looked at moving services to a CSC but backed away from the project and is now looking at alternative services.

• Job Losses – Given the restructuring of services by BPR potential job savings will be limited as staffing levels will already have been reduced.

• Whose decision is it? – Members based upon the evidence presented will make the choice about funding and moving to a Customer Service Centre.

If you have any additional comments or issues on either BPR or the CSC please contact the UNISON Branch Secretary, Paul Bee.

Further meetings will be held by UNISON to ensure that staff feedback remains effective.

See WDC> Grapevine> Customer Service & Staff Consultation > BPR for more information from WDC, you will need to have a login to reach this site.