Reed making mass redundancies
News has come in that Reed in Partnership laid off 5% of their workforce and put 10% under consultation on January 27th. As one of the biggest Pathways to Work deliverers, this is not a positive sign for the future of the provision. Given that nobody is achieving target on Pathways, companies or charities may start collapsing if the targets, payments and referrals aren't sorted out soon.
Update - Reed in Partnership have issued the following statement:
In light of the recent economic downturn, Reed in Partnership has communicated to employees the intention to undertake structural changes to the business, designed to realise cost savings and ensure it is best placed to successfully deliver current and future contracts.
This proposal is subject to consultation with employees, which is currently underway.
- 3664 reads
Comments
What does that represent in terms of actual numbers?
Hi Ahomage,
I'd imagine that Reed in Partnership has less than 1,000 staff. In absolute numbers, this is fairly small compared to the Jobcentre Plus redundancies that were going through over recent years. However, welfare-to-work is not exposed to the downturn in the same way as other industries, especially not with FND just round the corner.
Does the 300% additional capacity needed for FND mean the govt will be releasing 300% as much money, so 300% more staff will be hired?
PS. Ill give you 10-1 that serco will clean up.
Hi Kazza,
They're going to find out at the meeting tomorrow. It sounds horribly like the government is going to try and find a way to avoid this, but I don't see that it's possible without giving truly atrocious service to unemployed people. Hopefully this won't be the case.
Would be very keen to find out what is said at the meeting today?
Hi Allister,
See the note I've sent to you separately.
As mentioned in the other article, the meeting was cancelled! There'll be more updates once more happens.
Has anybody heard what's happening at Reed?
They must be at the end of their consultation and there have been no stories..
I hear their other companies like Reed Recruitment are also making redundancies and branch closures.
I had to laugh when I seen an article by their boss James Reed saying he wanted to KEEP BRITAIN WORKING, obviously this doesn't apply to Reed!!
I haven't heard anything more myself, but it's hardly surprising when a recruitment company closes branches during a recession. Any Reed-ites want to offer enlightenment?
I always used to chuckle when people said Reed had a silent G...
I wonder, Daniel, would you allow any redundant staff to adverise their tanets through these pages (a kind of reverse recruitment service)
You could anon the details but allow them to show experience and talent.
From what I hear you could have marketing, PR, BD, quality, finance, training or management from the reorganisation..strangely no directors are redundant!
I'm sure Reed's loss will be a competitors gain!!
Good suggestion silverbells. I've got an external recruitment consultant handling job ads now, as I'm a bit overwhelmed just coping with day-to-day site management. She seems keen on something like that suggestion, but I'm not sure I'll have the time and expertise to implement it soon enough to help out the Reed people. I would however point out that the industry as a whole is doubling or trebling over the next year or so. Experienced managers with evidence of successful delivery should not have trouble finding positions!
Its not just Reed under presure.
Most funding from main contracts comes when a provider achieves a job outcome and/or job retention. Given the current climate providers are losing retentions and the number of job outcomes are falling on a weekly basis. The contacts are not flexible enough to meet the challenges of such a fast moving downturn.
Some of the contracts run have been very sucessful. Many job seekers given the option would choose a provideer over attending JCP.
FND maybe around the corner but it will come to late for some.
My prediction is that providers will operate on a skeleton staffing to allow contracts to run there course until FND come into place.
Why would providers risk keeping staff when they dont know whether or not their FND bid will be sucessful? lets face it come November they will not have a problem recuiting.
I think Silverbell's suggestion most definately has merit. I know many very experienced, skilled people from the w2w industry who have recently (or not so recently) been made redundant during "streamlining" excersises undertaken by providers in preparation for fND or other contracts. It seems to be that we potentially have a pool of very talented people sitting around (and therefore not being useful in the industry) waiting. If they were able to "advertise" it might make recruitment a whole lot easier, especially as there is going to be a glut of recruitment over the next few months and surely we want to ensure that the right people get the right jobs rather than falling into the common w2w trap of recycling? We are all very aware that the industry is incestuous enough as it is. It would be great to see the candidate market opened up by the candidates themselves rather than having to rely on who they know and what agencies they are registered with.
And anonymous - you are right. Providers are running on skeleton staff, which is a shame as it means current provision suffers and they also run the risk of losing candidates by the time November rolls on. I am concerned that good people who, having been made redundant, will get tired of waiting and find work outside of the sector. To the loss of w2w. We all want reform and improvement. Thats going to be difficult if some of the best people are lost from the pool.
All good suggestions on here. I might move these comments to their own discussion topic over the weekend, as not many people will find them lurking in the Reed redundancies story!
Might it make sense to offer a professional site membership for welfare-to-work professionals, allowing them to post a CV on the site as part of a package of benefits? I'd like to improve the professional support aspect of the site services over time. There's a crying need for a membership organisation that supports (and, for that matter, gives training and qualifications to) people working in the industry.
Absolutely Daniel.
I have been in the industry for several years now, working my way up the ranks. With a few notable exceptions, I have done this sans formal training/mentoring. I always found it ironic that we were a "training and recruitment" sector and yet never seemed able to provide adequate professional development to our own staff. Its a specialised industry with unique challenges and I think there is a lot more than can (and should) be done to support those who work in it. Providers themselves have membership bodies, but there isnt anything for individuals.
The Australians have an entire qualifications framework for W2W professionals which is aimed at equipping them with knowledge and skills relevant to their job roles. Thats got to be more beneficial than generic qualifications, only 60% of which might be transferable and useful. I also believe that if more was done to allow w2w professionals to support eachother, the more generous people would be come with sharing ideas and being transparent. Which, lets be honest, is sorely needed.
PS: good idea to move this thread. It would be interesting to get some views from others.
Daniel, definately worth a look at. Even a starter fee of £25 per year or so would be worthwhile if we could keep recruitment working.
The alternative is to create a speed dating forum where candidates coud post WLTM style adverts..
"30 something non-smoker, likes walks in the rain and helping long term unemployed using objective daignostic tools and specilaist support. Looking for a prime or sub to start a relationship with. Only serious companies please (those not making staff redundant!"
My g-Reed contacts say that there is a glut of "revised" adverts for the staff they made redundant to apply for but funnyly not the same volume as those that were reviewed.
Hi silverbells,
I've heard the same on Reed. Apparently they have indeed put up a load of internal adverts for new positions. Given all the major contracts between now and 2011 come out this year, they couldn't really drop the Business Development team to two people unless they were leaving the industry.
Interesting stuff, dinkiecarr you know what you’re talking about.
Your right about the good people not waiting around. I will say that I've worked with some very dedicated people many of whom have faced similar barriers to the people they support. Their satisfaction comes from not the pay despite what sceptics may think. And if you are a sceptic ask the long term (or the not so long term) unemployed what they would prefer the Job Centre or a provider.
I would not blame the providers for making redundancies more so the Government. They have started to build something and now they are allowing it to fall down. Why? Because everything is paperwork and slow moving. Let’s have a meeting about a meeting, discuss the next action within the action plan next month. Well actions speak louder than words. It’s Not flexible but it needs to be!
Ps
Daniel great website.
I think it would be fair to say that the knock on effect of Pathways implementation has knocked a number of providers for 6 (Carter & Carter, Instant Muscle being two prime examples). Reed is suffering because it runs four PLP contracts which it's had to implement from scratch, and it costs money. Simple as - and we know the FnD tariffs aren't setting the world alight....
The FnD results are the acid test for all providers, it's as simple as that. I wish all the providers the best will on earth, and to be honest I see very little between the larger providers. All have fed off the rump of the more lucrative EZ, ND, NDDP, and Action Team contracts, and now don't have as much cash-flow. Simples
BTW - The other reason for redundancies might just be the fact that Reed has EZ contracts expiring very soon, rather than some Machiavellian scheme to rule the world. Though the probably do, it's some way off....
An Ex-Reed Employee
Surely Carter & Carter and Instant Muscle went under before Pathways came in? I agree that FND will be the testing ground for the Commissioning Strategy though.
Instant Muscle were running cost efficient New Deal programmes but I don't think their NDDP work was as finanically remunerative. They we're stretched geographically and I don't think some of their Director's actions/behaviour helped the cause. Don't know if they had any Pathways under way.
Carter and Carter grew far too quickly and acted a bit like our banks: a fleet of audi convertibles here, a host of £100,000+ salaries there, totally uncontrolled growth and no thought for tomorrow. They had a disastrous LSC audit, confessed to fraudulent paperwork and the game was up. Again, Pathways wasn't on the radar. Just incompetent management, the death of Phil Carter and a host of other Shareholders/Directors jumping ship before the proverbial hit the fan.
I genuinely believe that DWP's contracts are financially viable if you deliver what you say and manage the contract responsibly. They are big, ugly, scary contracts but they're certainly not death traps.
I have worked on the fringes of the industry since 1993 and in it since 2001. I have also worked my way up, but also slid back down, working for providers who have subsequently lost DWP contracts and struggling to get recognised by new entrants. I used to be a member of VRA and much was written about atandards and qualifications, but nothing positive appears to have come out of it.
I also find it ironic that we are a 'training and recruitment' sector and yet treat our own staff very badly in most cases. I work in disability/disadvantaged and with very few notable exceptions, when did any of the big organisations actively encourage those who are disadvantaged on their own payroll?
Incidentally DWP encourage third sector to sub-contract, but how do we bankroll it when payment by big contractors tends to be 1 month behind (if you are lucky)
Disenchanted
As a former member of Reed in Partnership's Business Development team this news surprises me not; I'm no qualified management accountant, but it was obvious from the outset that the financial models for fND and Pathways before it were lean in the good times and in the bad time would never work.
I am an ex-instant muscle employee who worked on a very lucrative NDDP programme the problem was with the programme centres heamorraging money and not being innovative enough with clients we where sub sontracted to our local Pathways to work prime provider then IM went bump in february 3 months into their sub contract I was invited over to join with the Pathways provider and have been here ever since and can't wait for FND to come in.
I have heard through the grapevine, ***** are making possible redundancies and a lot of staff are starting to question their job security. Morale is down due to the fact that no one saw this comming and no one was informed before hand, but it seems like the trickling is not stoping and just slowing down.
This is a hard recruitment business and in order to make funds avaliable for FND, all of the redundancies were inevitable, however this does not g-tee that the contract will be awarded as they have shown with the performance of pathways that targets have been tough to achieve and deliverace accross many different areas is difficult to control.
I used to work for XXXXXXXX and they are an organisation that quite literally rule by fear.
No one ever felt secure about their job and their processes were the highest labour intensive paperwork trail you could imagine.
Apparently their [quality assurance] team had lost them a huge amount of money which ran into millions due to the balance of time when you could claim an into work outcome because it became expired. Not exactly cutting edge stuff.
They had a very "unique" culture and you either fitted in or didn't and if you did I take my hat of to you as it's a game that I didn't much care for.
I have worked in a bank and the regulations were stricter than this and for what - a simple registration - Utterly ridiculous.
In XXXXXX I have heard they have also pulled out of Flexible New Deal.
They are way behind other competitors delivering like contracts such as XXX for example - XXXXXXXX and XXXXXXXXXXXXX.
In terms of Welfare to Work, networking is key and XXXXXX have always been on the fringe. They are shunned at partnership events and are never invited and most providers prefer not to work with them due to having had some negative exp or other.
Edited 26/3 - They are indeed legendary in the sector, but I've also heard a surprisingly high number of positive experiences from frontline staff in this organisation. Unfortunately, I think it's better to X out the names in this particular case. People who know their reputation will doubtless be able to guess who they are, and it's important that the organisation realise what their reputation is, but there's a limit to how far anyone can be trashed on the site. The whole point is bringing people into the discussion, not strengthening their bunker mentality. Sorry!
I think you did the right thing here Daniel. It's important this site informs and creates debate.
I have worked for this provider and while I wouldn't call them legendary they generally deliver, which is more than many.
I would take Ex-employees claims with a pinch of salt as I know this provider is pretty hot on performance management and they sound very disgruntled.
I would recommend Ex-employee returns to their previous career, they XXXXXXXXXXXXXX.
D'oh! You do realise that you just criticised someone for being insulting and then insulted them? For what it's worth, I imagine that all providers are going to be pretty hot on performance management with FND. Now, let's put this behind us and move along. Anybody wants to talk further, they're going to have to open a new topic.