Local News
Councils' merger bombshell
 |
| MERGER?: The offices of Malvern Hills District Council |
A RADICAL plan to merge the entire staff and services of Worcester City Council with neighbouring Malvern Hills is being considered.
A confidential Guildhall document: Malvern Hills/Worcester City Partnership - Working As One reveals details of the unprecedented proposal, which would aim to save hundreds of thousands of pounds by merging the two councils' staff into "a single workforce" under "a single unified management structure".
The document - seen by your Worcester News - makes it clear the two councils would remain as separate political bodies, each keeping its own name and individual identity.
The democratic side of the councils would be unchanged, with two individual councils of elected members making separate decisions as they do now.
But the hundreds of non-political public service staff employed by the organisations - from street-sweepers to planning officials - would be merged into a single workforce.
Local union leaders say the implications for employees could be grave, with hundreds of posts potentially lost as the councils attempt to strip away any duplication of positions.
Almost every post, from the chief executives downwards, would potentially be under threat.
The plan represents one of the more extreme options available to Worcester as it looks desperately to make savings of about £1 million following the reduction in its Government funding earlier this year.
 |
| MERGER? Worcester's Guildhall |
Conservative leader Simon Geraghty has made it clear over recent months that the council can only avoid making major cuts by sharing some of its services with other south Worcestershire councils.
Worcester's revenues and benefits department has already been merged with those of Malvern Hills and Wychavon, and other possible partnerships have also been discussed. The latest proposal, however, would signal an end to this piecemeal approach.
When asked about the document, Coun Geraghty was keen to stress that no decisions have yet been taken.
"There are a lot of reports flying around in terms of shared services," he said. "What you have there is just one of three or four different reports. I would not like to say which would be the final option.
"This is something we want to discuss with all the elected members; it is not a decision for one person or one administration. The question is how far down this road members are prepared to go. We are looking to set up a seminar next month so all the councillors can examine the full range of options."
Sharing services is seen as a realistic way forward for councils such as Worcester that are under pressure from the Government to make savings, but which have refused to take the cost-cutting step of merging with their neighbours into a large unitary authority.
Serena Croad, Conservative leader of Malvern Hills District Council, said: "This proposal is about trying to maintain both of our identities and continuing to deliver the services we do.
"We are trying to take control of our destiny and find a solution to the situation we have been put in."
Adrian Gregson, a Worcester representative of public services union Unison, said staff would be very concerned about the proposal.
"The only reason you go forward with sharing services is to save money, and you do that by getting rid of staff," he said. "Our members would rightly be concerned about something like this. And they talk about savings, but the fact is that making people redundant is not cheap."
COMMENT: Let's all take part in this vital debate
Discuss this and other political matters in the 'Politics in Worcester' section of our Your Say forums here.
7:10am Monday 12th May 2008
Print 
Email this 
CommentPosted by: King Creole, Worcester on 8:00pm Mon 12 May 08
It is difficult to see how one combined workforce can serve two political masters equally. Imagine a tory council wanting to do things one way and a socialist council wanting to do it aother way? Merger of the two authorities might work but merging the workforce but keeping separate councils will not. Stop wasting the money on review now. it will only make worse any perceived financial shortfall.
It is difficult to see how one combined workforce can serve two political masters equally. Imagine a tory council wanting to do things one way and a socialist council wanting to do it aother way? Merger of the two authorities might work but merging the workforce but keeping separate councils will not. Stop wasting the money on review now. it will only make worse any perceived financial shortfall.
Posted by: zymurgy, Worcestershire on 9:41pm Mon 12 May 08
Well, here we have two tory councils tryng to make the most of a bad job. As a non-political person, I really think that Worcester Tory's have lost the plot. MHDC Tory's never found it.
Well, here we have two tory councils tryng to make the most of a bad job. As a non-political person, I really think that Worcester Tory's have lost the plot. MHDC Tory's never found it.
What are these links for?
If you liked this article and would like to share it with others on the web who might be searching for good content we've made it easy for you to do it.
At the bottom of all articles, you'll see links to six sites. These sites - commonly called 'social bookmark' or 'social news' sites - have large communities of web users who share and rate interesting, useful and fun things on the web.
Clicking the links will automatically add the address of the story you are reading to one of these sites, letting you share it with others. Each site will ask you to register to share stories. Registration is free and once a member, you can store, recommend and search for stories that interest you.
More on Digg
More on del.icio.us
More on Furl
More on reddit
More on NowPublic/
More on Yahoo!
