UNISON Submission to City of Edinburgh Council
Meeting 29 April 2004
Reorganisation of Social Work and Education Services
John Stevenson, Branch Secretary
Thanks for hearing us today. Can I also say that
the broad thrust of what we are saying about the issues is shared
by the British Association of Social Workers whose representative
is also here and with whom we work closely.
UNISON came to the full council on the day the
O'Brien Report into the tragic death of Caleb Ness to ask the
Council to look at all the issues involved in an atmosphere
of 'calm reflection'.
Unfortunately that did not happen and you'll perhaps
forgive us if we don't respond this morning with the same 'calm
reflection' we have shown throughout this process. Because today
our members are angry and I could not stand here in good faith
and not reflect the depth of that anger.
Since the O'Brien Report and the council's plans
for change, we have been amazed at how a demoralised workforce
has reacted. They have seen vacancies double yet they have worked
on to deliver a service despite huge caseload pressures and
more and more cases that can't be allocated but for which they
have continued to accept responsibility.
In Children & Families, they have actively
worked to improved systems, improve monitoring and learn what
lessons were there to be learned. All this has given extra work
and extra pressure at a time when child protection referrals
increased and staff resources reduced.
They did all this and got precious little credit
- and frankly they did not see their efforts matched in some
other agencies.
Criminal Justice staff have also been working
on issues raised by O'Brien. This is despite the fact that the
restrictive rules the Scottish Executive sets down for Criminal
Justice mean they are not resourced to do that. Remember too
that youth justice initiatives mean they too work with young
people and families. And they too are also working often under
intolerable workloads.
Community Care staff are just the same. The important
links for special needs children when they progress from Children
& Families services at age 16, the work with families where
parents have disabilities and the drug related work are all
as crucial to care and protection as are Children & Family
services.
They put all that work into better combining,
co-ordinating and linking their services, then saw the plan
was to split them up.
Many of us saw it as 'Back to the Future'. Way
back in 1968, the Social Work Scotland Act resulted from the
Kilbrandon Report. That report was commissioned to deal with
the problems identified everywhere of separate departments all
dealing with the same families. At that time it was Childrens
Departments, the Probation Service and a range of services for
the elderly and disabled. All of these were separate and even
where people wanted to co-operate, they were frustrated by separate
budgets, separate procedures and separate standards and expectations.
So when our members saw the council's proposal
to split them up again, they were dumfounded.
But again, despite their morale being even further
dented, they took part in the consultation.
* Not with Strikes.
* Not with overtime bans despite all the extra
hours, for many these were extra unpaid hours.
* Not with any of this, but with the 'calm reflection'
UNISON had sadly not achieved from the Council.
They responded to the consultation - over 1,000
of them as staff or team members. They responded in detail with
alternative suggestions because they knew the job and what needed
to change.
They responded via their union. A detailed response
analysing the evidence, looking at all the reports and guidance,
learning from the research and laying out a 9 point plan to
dramatically improve joint working between health, social work,
police and education.
But also emphasising the widely evidenced need
for better and closer joint working between health and children's
social work - the real lessons from inquiries. Not merger, because
inquiries don't call for that. They recognise the need for professionals
to have their own expertise with their own structures and supports
to provide the best service to the public.
Not suprisingly, because all the evidence backs
it, detailed responses from the British Association of Social
Workers, the Association of Directors of Social Work and a host
of other important groups all agreed broadly with us.
Our own senior management agreed with us until
an almost miraculous 11th hour conversion.
So, the council consulted, we all took it seriously,
we all took lots of time to research the evidence and respond
in detail.
And the council ignored it all. The consultation
was a sham.
They Scrutiny Panels listened to us and agreed
with us broadly - they were ignored too.
Then a new fifth option out was pulled out of
the hat. The merger with Housing was dumped and a Health and
Social Care Department was revealed. This was never suggested
before by the council, it was never consulted upon, the people
doing the job in health were not asked about it.
So, for at least that part, there has been no
consultation. We are almost thankful because it saved us all
the work of responding in detail just to have that ignored too.
I will just sum up the basics as our members see
it.
All the inquiries, all the reports, all the evidence
recognises that closer working between Children & Families
social work, Community Care and Criminal Justice is needed in
child protection. - The council plans to split them up.
Children & Families staff, Community Care
social workers and occupational therapists, home helps, social
care workers, child & family centres, Criminal Justice staff
all work with families and with children - but they are to be
split up.
All the evidence shows that the key working relationship
when it comes to child protection is the link with health services
- so the plan is to merge with Education.
All studies show that the age group of children
at greatest risk is under 3. So we merge with Education whose
responsibility starts at 5 or maybe a wee bit earlier at nursery.
Joint Future initiatives between Social Work and
Health, with joint teams reporting back to their own specialist
supports, are well developed. So the plan is to cut across that
and create a Health and Social Care Department.
Meanwhile, the reality on the ground doesn't change.
We don't have enough social workers, we have kids at risk with
no social workers and we can't provide the all the support services
we need in community care.
Without significant investment, that will not
change in any new structure. So the reorganisation won't fix
that. In fact all the diverted effort will make it worse.
When we are meant to have 'the eye on the ball'
especially in child protection, we are going to spend the next
two years dividing up offices, dividing up computer systems,
losing the ability to share information, splitting up administrative
support and relocating staff - if we don't just lose them altogether.
And while all that is going on, the child protection
lessons will have to be learned all over again. New procedures,
new working links, new unfamiliar systems. A good deal of the
work started before and after O'Brien will have to be started
all over again.
So let's be clear. If this reorganisation is a
response to the death of a child, all the evidence shows at
will make no difference and much suggests it will make things
worse.
If it is not a response to O'Brien, it must be
part of the Council's 2007 programme.
If it is - and if it is not an emergency response
to O'Brien - then what is the hurry? Why can't we take a step
back, put things on hold, do the research and at last listen
to the people who do the job?
That way you will have a chance of taking them
with you. At the moment there is no chance of that. They are
angry, they know things can be done better than this and they
know they are not being listened to. The worry is that for many
of them it will be the last straw and they will just go.
But what should worry us all most of all, is the
morale of those who are left.
Lord Laming said that politicians could not escape
the responsibility for their actions, for their reorganisations
and for their financial decisions when something goes wrong.
As I said earlier, our members have accepted responsibility
for unallocated work even though the responsibility lies with
the lack of resources and the needless haemorrhaging of staff.
Well, at our meeting the other night the view
was very clear. They are no longer prepared to accept that responsibility.
If this does go through today, you have a huge
job in getting your staff back onside. Whether that can happen
in the short or even medium term is doubtful.
All we can say on behalf of our members is that
we will defend them when the absolutely predictable problems
arise. And we will back them when they say 'I can't take responsibility
for this'.
It is the eleventh hour and it may be an unrealistic
demand. But we still hold firmly to the view that this is wrong
and you must think again.
