Joined: Dec 22 2001 Posts: 27757 Location: In rocket surgery
JerryChicken wrote:There is a lot of conflicting information appearing in the press over G4S as can be seen in the history of this thread - in this report http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/jul/14/london-2012-olympic-security-g4s their CEO re-states the position that his company may lose up to £50m on their contract because of penalties while David Cameron blusters in with a statement that companies who fail in their commitments will be persued for refunds and penalties, while seemingly unaware that earlier in the week the Independant reported that the G4S contract did not include penalty clauses but seemed to be structured in a supermarket-style procurement procedure where the Olympic organisers can pay-as-you-go from shelves full of trained security staff.
That is appalling. I used to work a company that managed contracted out services that included penalty fines for not meeting deadlines for issues, down to even the speed at which small maintenance tasks e.g. changing light bulbs, were completed. To not have than in place at the start surely has to be a conscious decision agreed via consultation with G4S. I can't see how a fully trained and experienced group of lawyers would have overlooked this possibility on a contract worth £300m. This means that the government officials who agreed to this at the time must have been aware that this aspect of the contract may not be fulfilled. In which case you are talking willful negligence, a gross misconduct issue in any workplace.
JerryChicken wrote:There is a lot of conflicting information appearing in the press over G4S as can be seen in the history of this thread - in this report http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/jul/14/london-2012-olympic-security-g4s their CEO re-states the position that his company may lose up to £50m on their contract because of penalties while David Cameron blusters in with a statement that companies who fail in their commitments will be persued for refunds and penalties, while seemingly unaware that earlier in the week the Independant reported that the G4S contract did not include penalty clauses but seemed to be structured in a supermarket-style procurement procedure where the Olympic organisers can pay-as-you-go from shelves full of trained security staff.
That is appalling. I used to work a company that managed contracted out services that included penalty fines for not meeting deadlines for issues, down to even the speed at which small maintenance tasks e.g. changing light bulbs, were completed. To not have than in place at the start surely has to be a conscious decision agreed via consultation with G4S. I can't see how a fully trained and experienced group of lawyers would have overlooked this possibility on a contract worth £300m. This means that the government officials who agreed to this at the time must have been aware that this aspect of the contract may not be fulfilled. In which case you are talking willful negligence, a gross misconduct issue in any workplace.
McClennan wrote:That is appalling. I used to work a company that managed contracted out services that included penalty fines for not meeting deadlines for issues, down to even the speed at which small maintenance tasks e.g. changing light bulbs, were completed. To not have than in place at the start surely has to be a conscious decision agreed via consultation with G4S. I can't see how a fully trained and experienced group of lawyers would have overlooked this possibility on a contract worth £300m. This means that the government officials who agreed to this at the time must have been aware that this aspect of the contract may not be fulfilled. In which case you are talking willful negligence, a gross misconduct issue in any workplace.
McClennan wrote:That is appalling. I used to work a company that managed contracted out services that included penalty fines for not meeting deadlines for issues, down to even the speed at which small maintenance tasks e.g. changing light bulbs, were completed. To not have than in place at the start surely has to be a conscious decision agreed via consultation with G4S. I can't see how a fully trained and experienced group of lawyers would have overlooked this possibility on a contract worth £300m. This means that the government officials who agreed to this at the time must have been aware that this aspect of the contract may not be fulfilled. In which case you are talking willful negligence, a gross misconduct issue in any workplace.
Someday everything is gonna be different, when I paint my masterpiece ---------------------------------------------------------- Online art gallery, selling original landscape artwork ---------------------------------------------------------- JerryChicken - The Blog ----------------------------------------------------------
Joined: May 10 2002 Posts: 47951 Location: Die Metropole
Sibbs Rhinos wrote:What's also worrying is they don't seem to be doing proper background checks on any of the staff who will be searching bags etc. A terrorist organisation could have it's members hired and let bombs etc into the stadiums.
Why would you expect them to do something that requires time and manpower – and thus impinges on their profits?
Indeed, as has been touched on, it's just outrageous that government hasn't scrapped the red tape and allowed them to employ without any checks whatsoever, never mind 'proper' ones. After all, we know that it's exactly that sort of red tape that is the cause of unemployment and is just holding back business and the economy.
"You are working for Satan." Kirkstaller
"Dare to know!" Immanuel Kant
"Do not take life too seriously. You will never get out of it alive" Elbert Hubbard
"We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars." Oscar Wilde
This afternoon's statement by Theresa "and I am not making this up" May, should be interesting. An open goal for the opposition, especially as May apparently has shares in the company that is the major shareholder in G4S
This afternoon's statement by Theresa "and I am not making this up" May, should be interesting. An open goal for the opposition, especially as May apparently has shares in the company that is the major shareholder in G4S
This afternoon's statement by Theresa "and I am not making this up" May, should be interesting. An open goal for the opposition, especially as May apparently has shares in the company that is the major shareholder in G4S
The Gtr Manchester Police Federation spokesman wasn't pulling any punches in that article nor in his radio interviews, you'd expect him to have a political bias as he is basically a union leader but he does have a very valid viewpoint in ridiculing the private sector's attempts to replicate what his police force do every day of the week.
On the other hand what do we honestly expect, with all due respect to those who applied for security guarding jobs at G4S for the period of the Olympics, here we have a situation where there is a genuine need for security and where there is the outside possibility that without security there could be attacks on various teams (hello, Munich Olympics anyone ?), and so in a meeting of senior organisers or even politicians at some time during the past seven years, somebody thought it would be adequate to use temporary, short contract employees on minimum wage, many of whom do not hold security credentials and have had to be trained (so we deduce that they've never done the job before) - and its likely that these people have come from either low paid jobs or been taken from the lines of the unemployed, its hardly surprising that many of them have failed to turn up at places of employment this morning - many of us know what its like to be living on a basic income, its quite likely that when told to report to a hotel in manchester that they couldn't afford to get there if transport wasn't available.
Some simple questions need to be asked - what are the terms of their employment and how are they being deployed to the various sites - the very least that the police do is transport their officers to sites properly, and pay them more than £8 an hour to do a serious job.
This afternoon's statement by Theresa "and I am not making this up" May, should be interesting. An open goal for the opposition, especially as May apparently has shares in the company that is the major shareholder in G4S
The Gtr Manchester Police Federation spokesman wasn't pulling any punches in that article nor in his radio interviews, you'd expect him to have a political bias as he is basically a union leader but he does have a very valid viewpoint in ridiculing the private sector's attempts to replicate what his police force do every day of the week.
On the other hand what do we honestly expect, with all due respect to those who applied for security guarding jobs at G4S for the period of the Olympics, here we have a situation where there is a genuine need for security and where there is the outside possibility that without security there could be attacks on various teams (hello, Munich Olympics anyone ?), and so in a meeting of senior organisers or even politicians at some time during the past seven years, somebody thought it would be adequate to use temporary, short contract employees on minimum wage, many of whom do not hold security credentials and have had to be trained (so we deduce that they've never done the job before) - and its likely that these people have come from either low paid jobs or been taken from the lines of the unemployed, its hardly surprising that many of them have failed to turn up at places of employment this morning - many of us know what its like to be living on a basic income, its quite likely that when told to report to a hotel in manchester that they couldn't afford to get there if transport wasn't available.
Some simple questions need to be asked - what are the terms of their employment and how are they being deployed to the various sites - the very least that the police do is transport their officers to sites properly, and pay them more than £8 an hour to do a serious job.
Someday everything is gonna be different, when I paint my masterpiece ---------------------------------------------------------- Online art gallery, selling original landscape artwork ---------------------------------------------------------- JerryChicken - The Blog ----------------------------------------------------------
Joined: May 25 2002 Posts: 37704 Location: Zummerzet, where the zoider apples grow
Dally wrote:When will our incompetent Home Secretary (yes, yet another one!) resign?
It's all Labour's fault
The older I get, the better I was
Advice is what we seek when we already know the answer - but wish we didn't
I'd rather have a full bottle in front of me than a full-frontal lobotomy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ kirkstaller wrote: "All DNA shows is that we have a common creator."
cod'ead wrote: "I have just snotted weissbier all over my keyboard & screen"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "No amount of cajolery, and no attempts at ethical or social seduction, can eradicate from my heart a deep burning hatred for the Tory Party. So far as I am concerned they are lower than vermin." - Aneurin Bevan
A report commissioned by this current government by PWC a couple of years ago showed that its normal for any economic benefits of any of the modern Olympic games to drop after the Games have finished, which makes sense really, apparently this was very noticeable after the Athens Games - if the current government hopes that any Olympic boost to the economy will continue into quarter four then they are the only ones with such a hope.
Someday everything is gonna be different, when I paint my masterpiece ---------------------------------------------------------- Online art gallery, selling original landscape artwork ---------------------------------------------------------- JerryChicken - The Blog ----------------------------------------------------------
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 71 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
