Richie1972 Posted July 14, 2008 Posted July 14, 2008 (note to the person who likes to forward my postings to the head ... this is in my own time AND NOT a posting representing the school) Ok, so everything could be all right for some ICT technicians once they get taken over by the MSP chosen by their LEA: there will always be a need for toner and mouse changers However, what about us Network Managers? No MSP is going to pay >£24000 for us to do the same, so does anyone in an already BSF'd area have any experiences of this? Will we end up being forced to quit, forced to travel to alternative areas or what? Obviously the earlier phases didn't have the MSP forced upon them, but for those that did, what was the outcome... are there any of us left in the aftermath and did it give you any career/job benefits? Although I may always seem to be totally anti-BSF if there is a light at the end of the tunnel then I'm all for embracing it. I just don't want to see all my hard work thrown away and my career with it. Have you been bogged down with "paperwork" or have your new bosses been flexible? We are very much in the dark here and it's sometimes quite scary (families to keep and bills to pay!!!!)
Grommit Posted July 14, 2008 Posted July 14, 2008 (note to the person who likes to forward my postings to the head ... this is in my own time AND NOT a posting representing the school) Ok, so everything could be all right for some ICT technicians once they get taken over by the MSP chosen by their LEA: there will always be a need for toner and mouse changers However, what about us Network Managers? No MSP is going to pay >£24000 for us to do the same, so does anyone in an already BSF'd area have any experiences of this? Will we end up being forced to quit, forced to travel to alternative areas or what? Obviously the earlier phases didn't have the MSP forced upon them, but for those that did, what was the outcome... are there any of us left in the aftermath and did it give you any career/job benefits? Although I may always seem to be totally anti-BSF if there is a light at the end of the tunnel then I'm all for embracing it. I just don't want to see all my hard work thrown away and my career with it. Have you been bogged down with "paperwork" or have your new bosses been flexible? We are very much in the dark here and it's sometimes quite scary (families to keep and bills to pay!!!!) In Hackney where RM is cutting back on the school staff Network Managers are applying for jobs in a pool.. so say 3 out of 6 will get employment.. But apart form that I doubt we will have a future as A. we wont have a Network to Manage and B. I doubt if the MSP will pay £30k+ for a toner drone So far we have heard nothing form anyone important that has been TUPED
Deaks Posted July 14, 2008 Posted July 14, 2008 Around 24K here, NM, Tuping in September. Staying at my school, protected terms and conditions, same hols, hours, place of work, admin rights to on-site servers once they go in, less preasure as I can escalate anything I like to the MSP, the buck stops with them. Being promiced training and oportunities, and getting loads of extra benefits that come with working for a large multi-national (Northgate). Better paternity/maternity, built-in life assurance, access to health schemes etc.... Will it be great for everyone? No. But I'm not gonna jump based on rumour and what people THINK it's gonna be like once the dust settles. I'm gonna stick around and do my best to make it work for my school.
Grommit Posted July 15, 2008 Posted July 15, 2008 Around 24K here, NM, Tuping in September. Staying at my school, protected terms and conditions, same hols, hours, place of work, admin rights to on-site servers once they go in, less preasure as I can escalate anything I like to the MSP, the buck stops with them. Being promiced training and oportunities, and getting loads of extra benefits that come with working for a large multi-national (Northgate). Better paternity/maternity, built-in life assurance, access to health schemes etc.... Will it be great for everyone? No. But I'm not gonna jump based on rumour and what people THINK it's gonna be like once the dust settles. I'm gonna stick around and do my best to make it work for my school. Deaks you are one of the lucky ones to have Northgate.... RM is another story...
e_g_r Posted July 15, 2008 Posted July 15, 2008 Around 24K here, NM, Tuping in September. Staying at my school, protected terms and conditions, same hols, hours, place of work, admin rights to on-site servers once they go in, less preasure as I can escalate anything I like to the MSP, the buck stops with them. Being promiced training and oportunities, and getting loads of extra benefits that come with working for a large multi-national (Northgate). Better paternity/maternity, built-in life assurance, access to health schemes etc.... Will it be great for everyone? No. But I'm not gonna jump based on rumour and what people THINK it's gonna be like once the dust settles. I'm gonna stick around and do my best to make it work for my school. Was that also the case in Northern Ireland?
Deaks Posted July 15, 2008 Posted July 15, 2008 NI is a completely different story. RM and Northgate both worked on that project and it has no connection with BSF.
Deaks Posted July 15, 2008 Posted July 15, 2008 Deaks you are one of the lucky ones to have Northgate.... RM is another story... I don't understand why or how this is. From what I've read the TUPE process and the protection it affords is built into the BSF process. Anyone losing their jobs becuase of RM coming in as the MSP should be taking it up with their LEA and Unions.
broc Posted July 15, 2008 Posted July 15, 2008 TUPE offers limited protection for terms and conditions of employment, not roles & responsibilities. Let's suppose an MSP has vacancies for 3 NMs and they TUPE across 6. The 'best' 3 will get jobs as NMs, the others will be given something else to do, maybe by offering them roles as NMs at another LA some distance away, or by employing them to work locally as 'toner drones', albeit on NM terms and conditions. After a year or so, the MSP can then decide to make the surplus NMs redundant under the ETO get-out conditions by simply saying they cannot afford to employ NMs as toner drones.
CyberNerd Posted July 15, 2008 Posted July 15, 2008 After a year or so, the MSP can then decide to make the surplus NMs redundant under the ETO get-out conditions by simply saying they cannot afford to employ NMs as toner drones. It doesn't need to be after a year or so, TUPE allows the employer to make redundancy immediately provided they have disclosed it prior to the transfer. 1
Squelch Posted July 15, 2008 Posted July 15, 2008 I work in a special school that only has 187 pupils. Northgate will be getting £128 per pupil per year. That doesn't even cover my current salary.
broc Posted July 15, 2008 Posted July 15, 2008 (edited) It doesn't need to be after a year or so, TUPE allows the employer to make redundancy immediately provided they have disclosed it prior to the transfer. True. My example was intended to illustrate that the employer could get rid of staff even after they promised to give everyone a job & honour the terms & conditions of employment. By waiting a year they can safely avoid declaring their intention to shed staff as part of the initial TUPE phase. Edited July 15, 2008 by broc
Grommit Posted July 16, 2008 Posted July 16, 2008 I don't understand why or how this is. From what I've read the TUPE process and the protection it affords is built into the BSF process. Anyone losing their jobs becuase of RM coming in as the MSP should be taking it up with their LEA and Unions. Because unlike Northgate some Managed Service Providors are not so free and easy with the Admin rights and *shock* some of them like Lewisham have server farms were an existing NM would never get access too.. And Deaks you have landed with your ass in the butter... It is well known that in Hackney whee RM is taking over there will be job losses of ICT support staff and the LEA and the unions cannot do nothing about it.. as it is agreed with the LEA
Grommit Posted July 16, 2008 Posted July 16, 2008 True. My example was intended to illustrate that the employer could get rid of staff even after they promised to give everyone a job & honour the terms & conditions of employment. By waiting a year they can safely avoid declaring their intention to shed staff as part of the initial TUPE phase. They do not have to wait for a year.. they can get rid of you within a month for econmic reasons
gremlin-01 Posted July 16, 2008 Posted July 16, 2008 Hi guys, Is anyone aware of BSF intentions in the knowsley area of liverpool?
Grommit Posted July 16, 2008 Posted July 16, 2008 Hi guys, Is anyone aware of BSF intentions in the knowsley area of liverpool? Thats RM Turf I believe..
somabc Posted July 16, 2008 Posted July 16, 2008 (edited) I see a future for NM's under BSF, hope you like queuing for bread? http://www.techspot.com/gallery/data/504/medium/8907bread_line.jpg Edited July 16, 2008 by somabc
somabc Posted July 16, 2008 Posted July 16, 2008 Excuse my ignorence but wats RM? Where have you been? RM Company Profile
gremlin-01 Posted July 16, 2008 Posted July 16, 2008 its all new to me, only been in the game for 6 months. still finding my feet.
Deaks Posted July 16, 2008 Posted July 16, 2008 Because unlike Northgate some Managed Service Providors are not so free and easy with the Admin rights and *shock* some of them like Lewisham have server farms were an existing NM would never get access too.. And Deaks you have landed with your ass in the butter... It is well known that in Hackney whee RM is taking over there will be job losses of ICT support staff and the LEA and the unions cannot do nothing about it.. as it is agreed with the LEA That's appalling! I have always had a lot of time for RM, but it's really the fault of the school heads, and the LEA for not protecting staff during the negotiations.
Grommit Posted July 16, 2008 Posted July 16, 2008 (edited) That's appalling! I have always had a lot of time for RM, but it's really the fault of the school heads, and the LEA for not protecting staff during the negotiations. Hackney I believe are losing 1/3 of their Support staff to cut the costs so RM can meet costs (as they came in very very low)and make a profit. As the bottom line is for all these companies... is to make a profit.. Edited July 16, 2008 by Grommit
Zoom7000 Posted July 16, 2008 Posted July 16, 2008 That's appalling! I have always had a lot of time for RM, but it's really the fault of the school heads, and the LEA for not protecting staff during the negotiations. You really think they care? Personally after all the crappy treatment we've had in the last few months, lack of information and avoiding answering our questions, I think it's all about money and getting the deal done!
Grommit Posted July 16, 2008 Posted July 16, 2008 You really think they care? Personally after all the crappy treatment we've had in the last few months, lack of information and avoiding answering our questions, I think it's all about money and getting the deal done! This total lack of openess towards staff is disgusting.... It's like you are cattle and are just a commodity.... not anyone relevent
conehead Posted July 17, 2008 Posted July 17, 2008 (edited) You really think they care? Personally after all the crappy treatment we've had in the last few months, lack of information and avoiding answering our questions, I think it's all about money and getting the deal done! Each party in BSF has its own agenda; therefore there will always be problems as there are inherent conflicts of interest. The MSP wants to make a profit by spending the least they can on hardware and service levels out of the bid they put in. The LEA want to claw in the Government cash and rebuild schools while it's available as it looks good politically with the voters currently. Also by Tupeing out LEA employed school based staff they reduce the Council spending and therefore less pressure on them come Council Tax rate setting time, and it means future industrial action over wages will not be their problem. The school governors and Heads want the money and new facilities, their main concern are the pupils and teachers welfare though. The fact caretaking, maintenance and ICT will be taken out of their hands is probably seen as a good thing by many. The management view about redundancies and worst conditions for those support service workers remaining will likely be a pragmatic “you can’t make an omelette without breaking eggs” Hardware prices are pretty standard and all the talk about “economies of scale” are guff when it comes to buying ICT kit. Walmart may be able to drive down prices but even if a MSP gets a good deal they will mark it up before putting it into their costs for school. Yet “economies of scale” do work if you are cutting out a middle tier of employees (network managers) and making the other technicians available across numerous sites on a call out basis. Make it chargeable after a fixed number of “free” calls a term and even more profitable. It is only by negotiation of the contract a school can ensure they get a decent level of staffing and in school support for their ICT, and that those people still employed onsite will have enough technical freedom to implement effective and flexible solutions to problems and developments as they evolve with inevitable changes in the school requirements without incurring massive new charges. Our major problem as Techs is the fact we do have a vested interest means our genuine concerns’ are just taken as scaremongering, and by keeping us in the dark it is easier to do the dirty work of making ICT more “cost effective” which means less jobs overall and worst wages and terms and conditions for many of the rest. Ironic as it is the schools, teachers and pupils that will ultimately suffer as a consequence. Edited July 17, 2008 by conehead
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now