Hundreds of Rochdale council workers offer to quit

I think I may have just read a crackpot news headline: Hundreds of Rochdale council workers offer to quit to avoid others being made redundant.

Comments went on to include:

‘Coucil staff will not be forced to take redundancy – after more than DOUBLE the number of required workers volunteered to quit.

Rochdale council had warned 200 posts would go when they revealed plans to make £45m worth of savings in September.

But they now say more than 500 people have volunteered to take the payout.

Rochdale Town hall bosses offered an enhanced voluntary redundancy package in an effort to head off compulsory job losses. It appears that the council’s new enhanced package also incorporated 3 weeks pay per year employed.

Council leader Colin Lambert is reported to have said that because enough staff had volunteered to go, they would not need to make any compulsory redundancies when they set their budget in February.

In total, 211 volunteers have been accepted for redundancy, with most leaving by tomorrow, 31st December 2012.

Another 300 applications for voluntary redundancy have been received by the council, but still need to be considered by council bosses. ‘



A more mundane view is that people going on the redundancy deals do so overwhelmingly on the basis of self interest, not out of a wish to assist their work colleagues ..

One can only assume the jobs with the council are crap and poorly paid and that it would be better to be on the dole? Or - the job no longer carry's any satisfaction and to work for a dead-leg council is not good for the image? Or -better to go now with a small wad than await the axe to fall for just as small a wad? Or - the council have sent the heavies in with offers they cannot refuse?
Whatever the reasonings - it beggars belief that they all expect to get re-employed in Rochdale? In a depression they rush to divest themselves of cash- flows -??? What's that all about??

What you have in a number of cases is people approaching normal retirement age (within say two years) who have made the calculation that early retirement is now within their grasp thanks to the enhanced payments.

It used to be that such people were excluded from voluntary redundancy schemes because the cost far outweighed the benefit. I know that is not the case now.

Is this yet another example of council incompetence?

johnb: It seems like the local authority pension scheme is due for an even bigger big hit than your spec. I’ve today read a very ‘Happy Harry’s’ recent Redundancy package statement and am fazed at the discretions that can be made, ages that can apply, payouts and the future (where is all this money coming from?) costs.

The Greater Manchester Pension Fund (GMPF) applies to all Manchester’s authorities and is run by Tameside MBC, local authorities can make discretions.





> Normal retirement age is 65. If your employer retires you before then for redundancy reason, as long as you are 55 or over, there are no early retirement pension reductions.

> ‘As long as you are 55 or over and your employer makes you
Redundant, we will pay your pension benefits immediately. If you retire in this way, there will be no early retirement reductions in your pension benefits.’


? !

The mind boggles. No wonder the council never have any money for the 'Real' things that require attention.