BSF Thread, BSF + TUPE = RM in United Kingdom (UK) Specific Forums; We are in the BSF process at the minute (can't specify which school/college or borough because there may be someone ...
30th July 2009, 09:16 PM #1
BSF + TUPE = RM
We are in the BSF process at the minute (can't specify which school/college or borough because there may be someone spying out there)
The given choices for us were:
Stay in the 'institution' and become an IT Technician/Teaching Assistant (obscure and dubious new role)
Join RM and being tuped over and remain a TECHNICIAN, not something else which is a non-technical job.
So, if RM have any cons, which I'm sure they have, at least I won't end up being buggered/bullied (and possibly raped) by those lovely students.
Any ideas you fellow techies?
30th July 2009, 09:36 PM #2
I want too know something.
When you find out your school has optted to go over to a ICT Managed Service, do any of you go see the head and say WHY?
Sorry just want to know if anyone fights back thats all.
30th July 2009, 09:38 PM #3
Personally, from those options I'd choose the TUPE. Technician/TA means someone who plugs mice back in and then goes back to showing little Johnnie how to make the words bigger on t'computer.
RM are meant to be one of the better organisations to work for from what I've heard so you may as well try to get promoted through the ranks with them or have a pleasent job whilst you seek new employment.
This of course assumes that you are currently a technician and not someone in charge of managing a 10 man team and project managing major projects in between reverse-engineering Server 2008 'because you can'. In this instance neither job is likely to fulfill you so you should jump ship now.
30th July 2009, 09:40 PM #4
It's not as simple as that. The managed service is generally tied in with the new build (the bit the school wants) and there is also a hefty financial incentive allowing them to have the shiniest of new kit.
Originally Posted by IanT
The school also has to prove that the managed service would be a retrograde step that would lower the standard of ICT in the school. AFAIK, only one school has successfully opted out of the managed service.
30th July 2009, 09:44 PM #5
The School heads decided to go to the managed service a long time ago. Did we, ICT Support Team, have any say in the negotiations? NO, because when the BSF deal is signed, RM (or whichever company) takes over the IT resources automatically.
30th July 2009, 09:46 PM #6
You're right, RIC...We, techies, have no better option
30th July 2009, 09:55 PM #7
put a bit of spit and polish on that there cv lad.
Originally Posted by DerekandClive
30th July 2009, 10:08 PM #8
Oddly when you speak to people who have or still work for RM they don't have a bad word for them.
30th July 2009, 10:19 PM #9
I have no experience working for RM, but know a few that do. As a systems manager of a fairly large high school, there isn't much further I can go if I stay in education. RM offer a reasonable corporate ladder to climb.
For me, it wouldn't nessasarily be a bad thing if RM came in. However I'm not sure it would be a good thing for the schools network.
30th July 2009, 10:36 PM #10
Okays, just my last school, they are moving into a new building next year (as an academy) and they are going to be having there own in-house IT.
31st July 2009, 09:58 AM #11
Academies have a lot more autonomy, and historically have received their funding via a different route from BSF schools.
Originally Posted by IanT
If they are not part of a BSF program they can do what they want. If they are tied to BSF (as some are) then they can be tied into the ICT deal too. If their sponsors have deep pockets, as a BSF Academy they can choose to opt out of the managed service & lose the funding, currently standing at £1450 per student.
Non-Academy BSF schools also have the choice of opting out, but generally cannot afford to decline this level of funding.
31st July 2009, 10:21 AM #12
If you cut away the fear, uncertainty & doubt regarding job security, job satisfaction etc resulting from being transferred from a school to a managed service then there may be good career opportunities that would not exist otherwise.
The downside is that for many, they may be joining a treadmill where onsite technicians will be driven by a job 'queue' prioritised by a call centre where every minute counts because of the threat of financial penalties imposed upon the MSPs when repair times are exceeded. These penalties will have been agreed by the LA & LEP as Key Performance Indicators (KPI) and will govern repair times for key components such as desktops, laptops, servers, switches etc.
Most repairs will involve swap-out as it is quicker, so no more time spending hours trying to avoid losing someones data on a laptop that has crashed; just swap it for a new one, send the old one off for re-imaging - job done, too bad about the data loss & onto the next job on the queue.....
Technical staff working for the MSP onsite may no longer have time for discussion or offer advice to staff who happen to meet them in the corridor, as it will impact upon their current task & threaten their individual performance management goals of meeting repair times....
SMT will no longer be able to re-prioritise the technicians work without first agreeing with the call centre to waive the KPI penalties for whatever tasks sit at a higher priority (bigger penalty) in the work queue.
I am sure I am painting a rather bleak picture right now, I am sure it won't be as bad as I fear... will it?
3 Thanks to broc:
bossman (23rd September 2009), Landi (27th October 2009), stu1892 (14th September 2009)
23rd September 2009, 10:51 AM #13
- Rep Power
I think you are over-estimating the influence heads have in the BSF process - they are pretty much rail-roaded by the Council project team and PFS and in many cases end up with a school design they didn't even choose as their vote counts for almost nothing.
Originally Posted by DerekandClive
I've seen many heads crushed by BSF as they have put their heart and soul into the process and developed with their favoured bidder what they think is a great school only for them to end up with the council choosing another bidder whose design is pants and then the head gets it in the neck from his staff, pupils and parents.
If you want to influence the process get involved yourself with the council project team etc and don't just whinge at your head.
23rd September 2009, 10:59 AM #14
I think you have summed it all up pretty accurately..... apart from the last point.....
Originally Posted by ROBOCOP
In my experience LA BSF teams rapidly find ways of excluding people who really understand school ICT from the bidding/design process because they keep on coming up with problems & issues........
Thanks to broc from:
bossman (23rd September 2009)
23rd September 2009, 12:36 PM #15
- Rep Power
As you saythe local ICT guys 'keep coming up with problems & issues' - if they offered positive suggestions and solutions they would probably be more welcomed by the LA BSF team instead of being seen as negative akward moaning b*ggers! They often don't do themsleves any favours during the bidding process and then wonder why they are marginalised when they TUPE over to the successful bidder who they have slagged off and undermined for the past couple of years!
Originally Posted by broc
Last Post: 30th June 2009, 01:04 PM
Last Post: 1st June 2009, 12:55 PM
Last Post: 19th August 2008, 06:58 PM
Last Post: 15th July 2008, 06:43 PM
Last Post: 26th October 2007, 12:41 AM
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Tags for this Thread