THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE....

Below are comments posted by the people of Liverpool on the care workers dispute...

Stanford88 said...
Congratulations on attracting so many comments Tony.

It's good to be able to tell others of the way council is treating us.

I will certainly post news and comments to it !

Guess what? – more bad news !

I bumped in to one of the ex office staff where I work today. She said our company had lost a few of the areas that we are working in because of the new contract and this would affect my blocks.

It appears that I have to go and work for another new care agency if I want to stay with my service users.

What are the council trying to do to me?

What are the council trying to do to the people I look after?

Are they deliberately trying to upset us?

Are they deliberately picking on us?

First of all, a 30% pay cut, secondly, IF I manager to stay a carer, I will have to transfer to another care agency because of toopee to stay with my service users?

I don’t want to change agency.

I am happy with my wages, I am happy with service users, I am happy with the agency I work for.

Are all these changes for the good?

If so perhaps Curly, Larry and Mo (AKA Antrobus, Hunter and Brazil) be able to tell me how?

I have served this city as a loyal carer for a number of years (on less money than them).

I think I am entitled to some explanation.

PS I am a council tax payer - so I am demanding an answer...

Tepec said...

I am a social care manager.

I just can't believe where they are coming from on this one.

How can they disrupt so many vulnerable people?

Thursday, May 31, 2007 11:45:00 AM

TAX PAYER said...

Yes and I am DEMANDING to know what the hell they are up to.

I am also a tax payer. I object to my hard earning money being used to feather the nests of Social Services and P.C.T. managers also the allowances for so called 'Coucillors'.

YOU need to take some Counsel yourselves.

These are very vulnerable Liverpool Citizens and care staff you are putting at risk.

People you are not even fit to wipe there boots.

GIVE US THE ANSWERS YOU FACELESS PEOPLE instead of pocketing MY MONEY yourselves.

Thursday, May 31, 2007 12:15:00 PM

Carol said...

So very very sad. Oh! to be elderly. Nobody cares.

Thursday, May 31, 2007 5:24:00 PM

Pete said...

If you want to save money to have more to spend on yourself and Jollies to Cannes and elsewhere who do you pick on?....... The elderly and children they can't hit back.Thats about the level we have sunk to in Liverpool.

Thursday, May 31, 2007 9:08:00 PM

Anonymous said...

"Never before have so many been taken for so much and left with so little."

Thursday, May 31, 2007 9:56:00 PM

SURPRISE, SURPRISE! City council rapped for hushing things up!

For immediate release

Press release

Date: 11 May 2007

Liverpool City Council criticised for Freedom of Information handling

The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has criticised Liverpool City Council over its handling of requests under the Freedom of Information Act.
In a letter to Chief Executive, Colin Hilton, the ICO cites a catalogue of failings by the council to meet the requirements of the Act and outlines what the council needs to do to improve its performance.
According to the Information Commissioner’s Office the council does not have
adequate procedures in place to deal with freedom of information requests and
failed, on a number of occasions, to provide the ICO with the information required to investigate a complaint under the Act.
A practice recommendation issued by the ICO highlights the council’s ‘symptomatic poor practice in handling freedom of information requests’ and criticises the council’s failure to provide adequate advice and assistance to individuals requesting information under the Act.
The ICO will continue to monitor the council’s information request handling
procedures and performance and will assess its progress against the ICO’s
recommendations in 6 months.
Last year the ICO prosecuted Liverpool City Council for breaching the Data
Protection Act after it failed to provide an individual with their health records held by the Council, despite several warning from the ICO.

ENDS
If you need more information, please contact the Information Commissioner’s press office on 020 7025 7580 or visit the website at: www.ico.gov.uk
Notes to Editors
1. The Information Commissioner promotes public access to official information and protects personal information. The ICO is an independent body with specific responsibilities set out in the Data Protection Act 1998, the Freedom of Information Act 2000, Environmental Information Regulations 2004 and Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations 2003.
2. For more information about the Information Commissioner’s Office subscribe to our enewsletter at www.ico.gov.uk
3. For a copy of the Practice Recommendation issued to Liverpool City Council please go to http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/library/freedom_of_information/notices/liverpool_city
_council_practice_recommendation.pdf

FEATHERS FLY OVER BALD LEGAL EAGLE

Liverpool city council's bald legal eagle has been left in a flap after he was snubbed for the job of City Solicitor.

Boring bureaucrat Michael Kenworthy, whose hair is as thin as his legal acumen, has been publicly humiliated by the council's decision not to appoint him to the job.

Kenworthy had been Acting City Solicitor since Graeme Careerist left last year after his disgraceful toadying to greedy Henshaw.

Creer's card was marked when he repeatedly snitched about the ruling Lib Dem group's plans to discipline Henshaw over his attempted coup d'etat.

So Creer then moved to a comfy job with Weightmans amid suggestions that he had used his council position to secure the job.

Step forward his No 2, Kenworthy, who had languished unnoticed and unimpressive in the wings of the Municipal Buildings for years.

The bald legal eagle decided to try and distinguish his chances by beginning his long, costly and ultimately doomed hunt for the legendary Tony Parrish.

This failed to endear him to anyone (except the cabal, ed) and only underlined his gross ineptitude for the top job.

Both the ruling Lib Dem group and Labour opposition were united in their low opinion of his skills, ability and judgement and have been determined to ensure he did not get the job.

The continuing saga over Bill Davies and his multi-million law suit over the Henshaw-inspired mess over Chavasse Park (another chicken coming home to roost, ed) only emphasises Ken(un)worthy's feebleness.

But his boss, the smiling assassin Hasitall, has seized the opportunity offered by the vacuum to suggest that the city council now try and buy in its legal expertise from surrounding firms in, for example, nearby Sefton. (Where Hasitall's mates live, ed).

Is Hasitall now trying to fix up another one of his well-heeled Tory mates with a lucrative council contract? Only time will tell.

Meanwhile Kenworthy continues with his hunt for TP (they seek him here, they seek him there, ed)

Or as one of our correspondents has wittily remarked: "The hunt for Tony Parrish reminds me very much of one of Elmer Fudd's hunting expeditions: 'Shhhhhhhh, be vewy vewy quiet; I'm hunting wabbits here.'"