Fiona Edwards response to Jill Goble
Fiona Edwards Chief Executive of & Surrey & Borders Partnership NHS Trust dated 21st September 2006.
Subject: RE: http://justice4sabtworkers.blogspot.com
Dear Ms Goble
I am writing to acknowledge your email dated 17 September and to thank you for your thoughts which we will consider as we develop our review, which the Trust Board has not agreed to.
I shall be in contact after the Trust Board meeting and once the review has been approved regarding your comments and proposals.
Yours sincerely
Fiona Edwards
posted by simply human @ 2:09 pm
Listen to this article
2 comments
Dot This
2 Comments:
I do not understand if the Trust Board Meeting you have linked to which is on the 28th before the AGM is where the board will meet to agree the review and the reinstatement of the £3 a day charges? If it is will this be the part they do in private or in public? In other words can we attend the part where they agree or disagree to the changes?
Also I see that questions are invited from the public to the Chairman who says he will answer them at the beginning of the meeting but these questions must be sent to him in writing by Monday 25th. That means no emails I guess. Does it? If so, unless anyone can physically take questions to Leatherhead by Monday it seems we may have missed an opportunity to question the Board.
I also want to reply to the following comment which was on my letter to Fiona Edwards entry but I am putting it up here now. The comment is:
At 7:49 AM, mandy lifeboats appeal said...
Dear Jill
I think it is right to expect the management making decisions about the Garden Centre to look at the futures of the disabled workers.
I am glad that it is likely the £3 payment is to be reinstated but would like to see some commitment to valuing the workers fairly.
Whoever takes over the running of the centre should do this in a way that values the workers and acknowledges the work they have done and can continue to do. And whilst all this is being planned for, and during the changeover, the workers should be consulted with (properly) and offered employment that is beneficial for them to be offered.
Not at all sure the workers were even considered when plans were being made.
Not sure what the Richmond Fellowship is, but it sounds like it should be run by people who are keen to promote and adhere to human rights, and I would assume they would want to ensure that the workers are not overlooked or seen as a by product of what is happening.
Am keen to find out if and what progress is made to ensure the workers are not discarded whilst other agendas are being played out.
**********************************
My comment to this is that I agree entirely that the welfare and conditions for the disabled workers should be the priority consideration but it seems their best interests have been the last thing that was considered in the 'modernisation' plans. They were the only ones who ended up worse off as a result of the changes and even with the proposed review and reinstatement of their £3 a day they may still end up worse off by being re classed as volunteers. This conveniently gets around giving them employment contracts and paying the minimumn wage. I think it was a condition of the external provider takeover by Richmond Fellowship and other bidders for the contract that the £3 a day be stopped because they did not want to take on the 'liability'. Instead of seeing their job as looking after the best interests of the disabled workers they see them as liabilities that need cost cutting. This does not give me any confidence in the external providers like the Richmond Fellowship or that they will provide for the best interests of the workers. That is why I proposed to Fiona Edwards that they do not turn the garden centre over but look at alternative ways of building the business up and providing better opportunities and conditions and rights for the workers so that they are not the ones who lose out. You are definitely right that we have to keep the best interests of the disabled workers as the top priority in all these negotiations because it seems if we don't campaign and push for the disabled workers rights and protection then the bosses at SABP conveniently forget that the disabled workers have any rights at all.
Post a Comment
<< Home