25 Jan
2006

During last week’s heavily moderated (i.e. no hard questions) webchat with Home Office ball-breaker-in-chief, Louise Casey, on the Respect Agenda, several bloggers, including Nosemonkey, noticed what looked to be a fair blatant bit of astroturfing going on involving a ‘Jimmy Devlin’, who posted this…

Jimmy Devlin: Louise, empowering communities and fully supporting tenants and residents associations to fight ASB and criminal behaviour is the best way of ensuring that the Respect message is delivered into the heart of the community and everybody will stand as one and demand respect . The problem minority will then be forced to alter their attitude and behaviour or else they will become isolated very quickly. Return power to the decent majority. Zero Tolerance and harsher sentences would be a good starting point.. Too often they are given far too many chances . They need a real shock to turn them away from crime/ASB. Families , schools and the community all have their part to play but if local people don’t take a stand and demand change , nothing will deter future ASB etc.

Perhaps the best comment on this came from Kitty Killer, who doesn’t post nearly often enough, who observed:

Softball? This was practically a handjob:

All of which begs the question, if you’re bored enough, as to who is Jimmy Devlin? Especially when idle curiousity leads you to this, from Labour’s recent exercise in communal banality - ‘Respect: Your Stories

I formed Greenbank Tenants & Residents Association in May 2003.

Implemented Home Watch and was elected by St.Helens Community Empowerment Network Panel members to represent the St.Helens Community on the CDRP.
Affiliated to the Social Landlords Crime & Nuisance Group and have become involved with Urban Forum , to lobby for major changes which I hope will help empower Communities to demand Respect from all residents in future.
Locally , we work closely with the Police and some members of Greenbank TRA carry out Speedwatch with CSOs etc.
I am also a Community Volunteer with Merseyside Police and was involved with the National Reassurance Policing Project.

We bombard the neighbourhood with newsletters explaining the benefits of dealing with ASB and send out the message that anybody who passes information to us or the Police is not a grass, but that they are helping our Community for everybody to enjoy a better quality of life free from ASB, Drugs and crime.

I really appreciate the support we receive from the police and am delighted that the Government (very ably fronted by Louise Casey) is progressing the Respect Action Plan , which can only improve the lives of often already vulnerable and disadvantaged people .

Although it may seem harsh that any person needs to be evicted , it is the best and only way to ensure that the victims and community gets some respite (they have usually suffered for years ) , although it does not help when pretty soon, the housing organisations allocate the property to another similar problematic tenant and their chaotic family members.

The Dundee project must surely be copied in every town and city across the UK to ensure that these miscreants not only receive the help they need, but also so that the communities are afforded the opportunity to regroup and engender the spirit which usually disappears when communities are under pressure .(Through fear etc.)

in my opinion, poor housing organisations use the “Homelessness” legislation as an excuse to repeatedly house problem tenants simply to ensure income from properties via housing benefit.
We experience this on a permanent basis.
A revolving door situation becomes the norm because of the allocations and lack of vetting /proper consideration by housing professionals .

If only our TRA committee could have an input in lettings,I am sure that the difference would be astonishing.

I can say that I fully support the measures announced earlier by the Prime Minister and hopefully communities like ours will see improvements in behaviour as a result.
I truly believe that “Togetherwecan” .
jimmy Devlin (Chairman) Greenbank TRA
Jimmy Devlin, St.Helens , Merseyside

Same guy? The similarities are too obvious to be coincidental, in which case Jimmy’s list of registered interests, as a member of St Helens Community Empowerment Network, run to the following:

Greenbank Tenants and Residents Association
H8 Pathways St Helens (ESF funded labour market project)
Helena Housing Allocations
St Helens forum
North West Tenants and Residents Assembly
St Helens Federation of Tenants and Residents Association
TPAS Northern Regional Committee
National Consultative forum
Social Landlord Crime & Nuisance Group
Reassurance Project (national)
Town Centre Neighbourhood Renewal Fund Group
Town Centre Key Individuals Network Group.
St Helens Crime & Disorder Reduction Partnership (Community Safety Thematic Group)

I’ll leave you to decide whether that supports the astroturfing contention or not.

4 Comments »

Hey, I said there was more to come on the subject of SCVO – that’s Sandwell Council of Voluntary Organisations and not the Scottish Council of like acronym, BTW - and I’m always as good as my word.

Now if you’ve read the last article – and if you haven’t, you’ll need to read it anyway as some of what follows won’t make a whole lot of sense if you don’t – then you’ll have noted that at one point in proceedings the organisation ended up bringing in a firm of solicitors to help out with the odd employment issue or two… or four… or five… hell I can’t remember the exact number but it was a lot…

… more than you might reasonably expect in an organisation with less than 30 employees.

And since then, they’ve taken it all a step further and signed up with a specialist personal and employment law consultancy, just to make certain they have everything covered.

Which on the whole is a pretty smart move on the organisation’s part…

… especially if, as I do, you know the kind of situations some of its managers were capable of getting into is left to deal with employment issues without the benefit of a solicitors in tow to keep an eye on them.

To understand exactly how, and why, I can say that we need to look at three examples of what can only be described as ’screw-ups’ when it came to dealing internally with employment issues.

Why?

Because this is an organisation whose role, in the local Voluntary Sector includes, amongst other things, capacity building other organisations, promoting good practice and generally supporting other organisations to be, and become, good employers. Whether that same organisation can claim to practice what it preaches is, therefore, a matter of public interest given that it receives public money to enable it to fulfil that role.

I might also point out, before anyone starts worrying unduly, that none of the managers who feature in these examples are actually involved in providing advice directly to local organisations. That responsibility falls to a small number of specialist officers, of which I used to be one, who actually know what they’re doing so if you’re thinking of contacting them for a bit of help, go right ahead – you’re actually in pretty safe hands as long you don’t go asking certain managers for help – you’ll get to know which ones if you read on.

No Comments »

Friday’s postbag was certainly rather more interesting than usual, as it contained a letter from my ex-employer’s solicitor concerning the article I wrote about them last week – one, which as you might guess - contained all the usual sabre-rattling you’d expect in the circumstances.

Still, its good to note that the good old Voluntary Sector grapevine remains as reliable and speedy a form of communication as ever, so it wasn’t too long before word arrived that the actual advice they’d received was that there was very little they could do about the article but that – and you’ll love this – a solicitors letter might ’scare me off’ writing anything more about them…

We’ll take a necessary pause at this point…

Read the rest of this entry »

1 Comment »

One of the questions I always hate when it comes to filling in job applications or going to interviews is the one about why you want to leave your current job.

I’m guessing that I’m no different than most people in that I invariable put something about looking to advance my career and chasing new challenges - all the usual anodyne bullshit you put, whether its true or not, so as not to look like you’re some sort of troublemaker to your prospective employer.

I can’t recall exactly what I put when applying for my current job or even whether that question was asked but if it was, then I’m pretty sure that’s more or less what I put.

The truth, as with most things in life, is rather more complicated than that. I actually left my last job because, being totally honest, I could no longer stomach working there. Because of quite a few things that were going on and which I know are still happening and which, even for a paycheck, I found increasingly impossible to tolerate.

Now I know you’re probably thinking already:

“Why not just leave it alone? After all you’ve move on. You’ve got another and you’re out of there? Get on with your life, you’ll feel better for it”

Well, you see, its not quite that simple.

My previous employer is a registered charity. One that receives, in local terms, a hell of a lot of public money each year - just over £1.2 million pounds during 2003/4 according to records lodged with the Charity Commission.

It exists, supposedly, to support other local charities, voluntary organisations and community groups and serves the area where I actually live, even though these days that’s not the area I work in. And, to be truthful, that’s more or less why I can to be working there in the first place. the thing that attracted me to the job I did more than anything else was the chance to work in my local area and with local people, helping them to help themselves. Sure, the paycheck mattered but the real motivation was to be in a position where every now and then I could do something which made a difference to the lives of local people.

Does that sound corny? I don’t know. Let’s just say that one of things which, deep down, drives me as an individual is a genuine belief in social justice - always has and almost certainly always will. I started out getting involved in local communities, community issues and, indeed, community politics as an activist, as someone who took on causes because I believed them to be the right thing to do and twenty years on, although I now work with communities as a professional that activist frame of mind remains as strong as ever.

That’s not to say I haven’t changed in twenty years, of course I have. I’m certainly not the idealistic ‘headbanger’ I once was - time and experience have taught me that ideals are all very well but out here in the real world they don;t count for much unless you put them into practical actions and that means that sometimes you have to take a more pragmatic view of the world, make compromises and push the intellectual purity of those ideals to one side in favour of solutions which may not be perfect but which offer the greatest achievable good. It’s not so much that the end justifies the means more a recognition that you have to have an end in the first place, that all the high ideals and intellectual ferocity you can muster amount to nothing is all you ever do is talk about something without ever doing anything about it.

But enough personal philosophy for the moment. Why am I talking about this at all.

Well without going into reams of detailed history, today I found out that a good friend and former colleague - the last of group of us who all worked at the same place - has been suspended… again.

This makes it, what, either the third or fourth attempt at finding a way to sack him. Why the uncertainty? Well, it depends very much on how you look at it.

You see, in roughly the last 18 months or so, Stuart - that being his name - has:

- been suspended for five months on ‘charges’ of gross misconduct brought by the organisation’s Chief Executive which, in the end, amounted to a couple of minor discrepancies on his time sheets for which he still got a written warning. After all it would have been highly embarrasing for the CEO to have suspended him for so long and come out of it with nothing.

- returned to work after that suspension only for a new employee who’d come into post while he off to start more or less trying to goad him in an altercation in order to get him fired. Whether you count that one as an attempt by the organization to get shot of him depends on whether your believe this other guy, who ended up getting fired himself in the end, pulled this stunt off his own back or was put up to it by the same CEO who tried, and failed, to sack Stu the first time around.

- staved off another attempt to hit him with as disciplinary after a newly employed manager secretly wrote a ‘report’ about him - at the behest of the CEO (I know, repetitive isn’t it) - which basically slated him left right and centre. That one ended up going nowhere because he found a copy of the report and an accompanying e-mail which more or less said - paraphrasing heavily - ‘Hi, here’s the report you asked for… Oh, and don’t forget to put forward my request for pay rise’. Oh, and I mustn’t forget that because he works on a project which has its own steering group - for want of better word - they also tried to enlist that group in shafting him by holding a meeting with one of them and showing them this cooked up report… without success fortunately.

And, of course, he’s now suspended for the second time while an ‘investigation’ is carried out into an allegation of ‘bullying’ against him - which is an interesting turn of events in itself in so far as both times that Stu made formal complaints of being bullied himself, once following his first suspension and the second time when he found out about the manager’s report, on neither of those occasions was the alleged perpetrator suspended while an investigation was conducted.

And all this going on in a voluntary organisation which, supposedly, should be providing leadership by example to the rest of the local voluntary sector and actively promoting ‘good practice’.

Now getting back to a bit more personal philosophy for a moment, there are few things in life I loathe with a greater degree of passion than bullies - and Stu, for all that he can be pretty forthright in his opinions is no bully. The CEO of this place… well, you make you own mind up, although I guess you know what I think. The one thing to note however is while I’ve never been one to pick a fight on my own account, I’ve also never been one to walk away from a fight when someone starts picking on a friend.

Revenge? As should be obvious there’s quite a lot about this organisation and the ways its been operating that I don’t like and some of that dislike is obviously personal - but no there is a more important point to all this and one of particular relevance to a political blog.

You see, for some time the government has been looking at where voluntary organisations might step in to take over some of the delivery of public services.

Now there are a number of ways you can look at that. You can accentuate the positives - some voluntary organisations can tend to be a little closer to the user groups than their public sector counterparts and they can also, in some cases, get into work that the public sector can’t due to people’s mistrust of anything that smacks of ‘government’ even on a local basis.

You could also take the far more cynical view that this all just a search for a more socially and especially politically acceptable form of privatisation than simple turning the delivery of public services over to the private sector.

Either way, the one thing you need to be sure of is that if and when services go over to being delivered by voluntary organisations, those services are going to run properly and remain accountable to the public. It all, as with so many other things, comes down to a question of trust.

And that’s the political point to be made here.

In talking openly about some of the things I’ve seen and experienced, first hand, over the last 2-3 years - and actually very little of it is going to be about employment or on the ‘workers v bosses’ level and much more about how public money is being used, or in some cases not used, by this particular organisation - where I hope to get to is not just to illustrate some of things that can and do go seriously wrong in the Voluntary Sector but also, when push comes to shove, how little real accountability there can sometimes be within some charities.

Just to give you a snippet or two of where I’m going, some of things I will be covering include the question of this organisation having directly received more than £500,000 in public funding over the last three years for a project which has delivered nothing of consequence - other than substantial sums of money into its own coffers - and also how, on gaining control of the full local budget for this same project, which ran to getting on for £600,000 in the last year alone, the first thing this organisation did was cut back the part of programme which actually gave grants to other local groups by £200,000.

You see, this really isn’t just about a friend getting a hard time with his employer - oh, and just for the record, he’s certainly not aware of this post and has not asked me to intervene in his current situation, just so there’s no doubt on that score. That’s just the final straw, the one that’s brought me to the point where I can no longer ignore what been going on and let others sort out the mess. The one led me to think:

Fuck it. It’s time to blow all this out into the open, tell the truth and let people reach their own conclusions.

Oh, almost forgot. The name of this organisation?

Sandwell Council of Voluntary Organisations - I’d point you to their website if I could, but they even managed to fuck that up after I left.

Oh, and in case anyone from there should pop by and see this - trust me, I’m not going to be saying anything that I can’t prove to be true, so don’t you get thinking you can make any noises about libel, y’hear.

6 Comments »