Agenda item

Gerard McGrath, Unison, attended the call in and made representations to the Committee on the insourcing option agreed by Cabinet. The following was noted:

- UNISON and the other recognised trade unions in Haringey Council welcomed the agreed clear plan to bring Leisure Services back under direct control. It would become more publicly accountable and transparent and inspire new confidence in residents, with meaningful leisure services they could rely on.

- The unions understood the inherent difficulties in privatising a critical service which should be delivered directly by the Council, along with the difficulties in allowing such an essential public service to be managed externally. Handing this to an external body, in this case, Fusion Lifestyle had been tried and had clearly failed spectacularly. Handing this contract to yet another private or external body would be a failure to learn from the original mistake. Accounts of ‘near misses’, particularly at Park Road, regarding the correct management of chlorine, had alarmed many members and residents living next to this centre and those using the facilities during the various evacuations.

- UNISON members were already relieved that they would, from October 2024, be TUPE transferred and directly employed by Haringey Council, who meaningfully engaged with staff through various fora, including regular structured meetings. UNISON's experience of Fusion in Haringey was of appalling management practices, divisive tactics, and a complete refusal to engage in any way whatsoever with Unions to help improve working conditions.

- UNISON were confident that the current administration was adhering to its manifesto commitment to insourcing public services. The manner in which Fusion Lifestyle had run all the centres into the ground is reckless and contemptible for both its staff group and residents of Haringey, in particular, vulnerable people.

- UNISON looked forward, as always, to working with the Council in welcoming their members and other Fusion employees back to an employer who would treat them with respect, provide meaningful career progression opportunities and help members acquire additional skills to enable them to explore other options in planning their career paths. This could only lead to a better Leisure offer for all residents throughout the borough.

The following was noted in response to questions from members:

·         Cllr Simmons-Safo thanked Unison for their deputation and concurred with the information shared.

·         Cllr White sought clarification around Fusion and trade unions, and it was explained that Fusion did not recognise trade unions.

·         At present, the difference between the Council and Fusion was Unison would only be allowed to come in at the investigation stage of a grievance process.

·         There were wider benefits of insourcing, Unison had spoken to members in Fusion and there was an immense morale issue

Councillor Arkell responded to the deputation; the following was noted:

By bringing leisure services in-house, members would make sure that they were publicly accountable and democratically run. Councillor Arkell was concerned about the way Fusion had managed the leisure centres, the treatment of staff and vulnerable, elderly, and disabled residents. One of the key benefits of insourcing the leisure service was the enhanced salary that could be offered to staff through improved terms and conditions and pensions. The Council recognised the challenges of bringing in approximately 77 members of staff into Haringey Council. It would represent a significant cultural exercise to induct and train staff onto the Council's policies, procedures, and values. Communications with incoming staff would be critical to achieve a smooth transition. Staff engagement, including one to one support, would be offered.

Public questions:

Katie Ferguson, Park Road Lido Group asked the following questions and response included below of the later Cabinet member response in the discussion of the call-in report.

How much would it cost to run the Lido per annum?

The Council had costed up the operation at Park Road as a whole. The Lido had not been separated out as there likely would not be an eventuality where the Lido would operate as a separate entity from the rest of the operations at Park Road.

Do you know how much the energy saving measures reduced this cost?

There would be 15-20% reduction in energy consumption which was built into costs.

Have the Lido income generation figures been modelled?

Generation figures had been modelled based on the information gained from Fusion. Officers would continue to model that and project income streams between now and October 2024 when the contract with Fusion finishes. It was an iterative process into the future, and it would look into both profit and loss management at the centre.

If there was a funding gap, do you have a plan for how this would financed?

Due to the high running costs, pools across the country required subsidising through other income streams; usually generated through different sales or different products and services. Officers were committed to improving the standard of the operation at the Lido. The scenario modelled was the most likely in respect of risk to income and to pipeline customer base, but there was also a contingency available in event of financial impacts that materialise outside of expectations or unplanned events.