Social work jobs in Leicestershire to be axed and replaced by call centre staff
More than 50 social worker jobs are to be axed and replaced with call centre staff to save cash.
County Hall said that from November, some elderly or vulnerable people would be dealt with over the phone instead of seeing a care worker face-to-face.
-
Tony Donovan, director of Age Concern LeicesterShire and Rutland
Campaigners for the elderly and unions said they feared Leicestershire County Council's plan would see a "deterioration" in the level of help which vulnerable people receive.
A document leaked to the Leicester Mercury revealed 360 people in the council's adults and communities department are at risk of seeing their jobs changed or scrapped under the scheme, which will save the authority £2.9 million over three years.
More than 50 redundancies are expected – some compulsory and many affecting social workers and occupational therapists.
Age Concern and unions warned people could slip through the net with a call centre, as it relied on people being able to decide for themselves they needed help.
A spokesman for Unison said: "We are concerned not only for our members but for the level of care citizens will receive.
"I'm not saying something will go wrong, I'm saying there is the potential for more decisions being handled incorrectly.
"The council has overestimated the number of people with simple needs.
"I'm a social worker and in my experience many people cannot assess needs for themselves.
"These are the ones who will lose out.
"In child social care the people answering the phones have to be qualified social workers but with adults they think this isn't necessary.
"In reality, a vulnerable child is the same as a vulnerable adult."
The re-structuring is part of the council's drive to save money and also linked to its gradual introduction of the national personalisation programme.
This scheme sees people given a fixed sum to buy the care they want, rather than getting free services direct from the council.
Tony Donovan, director of Age Concern LeicesterShire and Rutland, said: "Older people are not entirely comfortable with using the telephone.
"It can cause distress for some people if they are asked to use a complex system.
"It sounds like a good idea on paper but if people ring up and are asked questions, they sometimes can't give a full explanation or know the extent of their physical limitations.
"In my view, it's clear that the level of service will deteriorate."
Karen Eyres, assistant director of community services at the county's sight-loss charity Vista, said: "We have concerns that the proposed restructuring could be to the detriment of people with sight loss and deaf/blind people."
The job cuts are part of the council's plans to reduce its workforce by 680 in the next four years.
Director of adult social care, Mick Connell said the idea of personalisation was to encourage those able to assess their own care needs to do so with minimal help.
He said: "We need to reduce the amount of time spent on assessment, which means we are moving more towards self-assessment.
"The customer service centre will deal with relatively simple requests so staff can respond very quickly to people's needs.
"That means the small number of people who have more complex needs can be dealt with by senior staff."
Mr Connell said the 26 customer service centre staff would not be trained social workers but would be briefed and backed up by a "professional support" team.
He said 80 per cent of adult social care inquiries were made by phone and that people would still be able to visit area offices.
A staff consultation is due to be completed by the end August.
55 Comments
View all
by Alan, Leicester
Sunday, August 01 2010, 8:21PM
“Social Services has never been right for years, what ever happen to the rights to have access to the services? And more importantly the consultation of the services which allow the clients to be assess of what services that are available. But having a call centre, the question remains Are these customers representatives actually qualified to be social workers to know what services does that person need under emergency? I understand that there are going to be cut from the department but how about the Councillors that has their expenses cut like their meal expenses and travel expenses. The point is the county council willing to have all these changes but you the people elected them should have a say what goes on in the county hall and they are spending your taxpayers' money. What is better having to lose a job which that person is qualified to deal with matters on a higher level or have a person who is less likely to know what the client wants if the service is available what do you think ?”
by cuthbert, Leics
Friday, July 30 2010, 3:30PM
“It is a shame that the comments here seem to have moved away from the main issue raised by the article. That is, that the proposed plans may put vulnerable people at risk.
The county council has statutory duties in relation to the assessment and safeguarding of these people. I fear that the proposed plans will make the already difficult and stressful job of carrying out these duties more difficult and stressful. This could lead to some situations being overlooked and vulnerable people being put at risk.
It is interesting that other local authorities who planned to adopt similar systems have now shelved them.
Contrary to popular belief, many Social workers and Occupational Therapists carrying out these duties on behalf of the county council earn less than the national average salary. The majority earn less than the salary which is proposed for the "Smokefree Alliance Co-ordinator (Tobacco Control)". In my opinion the staff affected by the proposed plans are worth every penny that they cost.
The reality is that good quality assessment and services for Adults costs money. What is up for debate is whether society values vulnerable adults enough to bear this cost.
Obviously, local authorities have difficult decisions to make in relation to budgetary cuts. I am glad that it is not me who has to make these decisions. One can see that vulnerable adults are not as valued as children by society at large from the treatment of high profile cases where things have gone wrong. Compare the treatment by the media and the public outcry in the cases of "baby P" and "Khyra Ishaqu" to the recent case of "Mrs D N".”
by Fiona, Loughborough
Thursday, July 29 2010, 9:08PM
“Thank you J for your apology, I graciously accept it and I will also apologise for my avoidance to answer your questions - can we be friends now ?
But before I go, I posted a comment on this site last week about the council 'non jobs' (which i stupidly (as I am stupid as you quite rightly pointed out)) mentioned a comment about Kelvin MacKenzie and Mr Pickles view on non jobs - to which you then had one of your fab rants about how Mr MacKenzie is a bigot and is a liar about Hillsborough (I don't think that was part of the story)
Sorry can I just have another cut and paste moment ?
"i.e. your desire to talk about anything other than the issue at the heart of the debate"
You then made comments such as "anybody who has Kelvin MacKenzie as a hero" (I never said that he was) and that anybody who bases their life on the ramblings of a .....) (sorry can't find the thread to quote it word for word) - you presumed that Kelvin is my hero and also presumed that I base my life on the workings of Kelvin MacKenzie (again none of those comments were actually said)
But you didn't put anything in your first post about the comments by Mr Pickles
Sorry the cut and paste is now taking over my life
"Perhaps instead of basing your view of the world on nothing other than guesses, half formed opinions, and questions, you could bother to actually ASK and find out the reality of the situation?"
Did you ASK if Kelvin MacKenzie was my hero, did you ASK if I based my life on Kelvin MacKenzie, did you ASK if I had been to University - no you made assumptions without checking the facts !
One final comment, no I haven't been to University and yes I do take it as a compliment that you think I have, but no i've just worked very hard for what I have got - but by ASSUMING i have been to Uni, does that mean those who have been are right wing scum, moronic idiots ?
PS you haven't answered Jim's comments regarding your wife's job and the evidence - are you avoiding the subject xxx”
by j, leic
Thursday, July 29 2010, 2:41PM
“Fiona, let me put this really simply:
Address. The. Points. I. Have. Raised. Instead. Of. STILL. Using. Avoidance. Techniques.
And, err, Fiona, you may not have noticed but there was a little word that looks like this - "sorry" - after the admission that I had assumed you went to Uni, although why you didn't see that assumption as a compliment I am not sure.
So, your claim that you "I acknowledge........when I am in the wrong" is not backed up by ANY evidence whatsoever (there is not even any recognition of your continual use of avoidance techniques, i.e. your desire to talk about anything other than the issue at the heart of the debate), whereas I seem to have made 2 apologies in this thread alone.........
What is the saying, actions speak louder than words? Now who is the hypocrite.....................?”
by Citizen, Leicestershire
Thursday, July 29 2010, 12:48PM
“Rubino
Your post suggests that County are proposing a similar system to Leicester City plans (which are now on hold).
Its a shame that the article does not make it clear that worker will still visit , as it implies that assessments will be undertaken over the phone without a visit from a worker.
Anyone who has worked for an Access department or indeed social services would know that assessing over the phone is ridiculous & dangerous.”