Forestry Commission Trade Unions - www.fctu.org.uk
Review of Forest Research 2008
Further Information
In the summer of 2008, James Pendlebury announced a review of the purpose and structures of Forest Research.
Early Retirement Scheme Announced
7th Feb 2009
With the main body of the Review report still unpublished, FR have announced that they wish to introduce a modest early retirement scheme. Members will be aware that FR have been struggling to balance their books over the last few years, and with each of the countries coming under additional funding pressure, FR has now reached a point where it must reduce its overall staff numbers in order to operate within its means. The scheme, along with opportunities for retraining and redeployment, will also help manage the introduction of the three new Science Centres, and will be done on a voluntary basis (though with compulsory terms).
We are currently in discussion with FR Senior Managers regarding the criteria for selecting volunteers and the evidence base that will be need to support applications. We hope to complete this by Monday 16th February, and will post more details when they are agreed.
Update by Lorraine Adams
13th Dec 2008
We were concerned, despite reassurances to the contrary that the methodology being used in this review was resulting in a narrow cost-cutting exercise, rather than an effectual means of summing our collective efficiency. We met with James P on September 15th to raise our concerns and we felt we were very much listened to. James was encouraging in that he wished for the FCTU FR team to become more involved with the process, tailoring it to be more fit for purpose and as a result the review process would become more transparent. At this stage the FCTU FR were willing to participate in the review along with the management review board on the understanding that our input would have a genuine influence on the methodology being implemented and the amount and type of data gathered, and have real input into the final report. We also requested that any help we gave in making the review process more robust was without prejudice.
Mark Oram attended the next review group meeting on the 24th September as a observer to allow the FCTU FR team to make an educated decision as to how far the review process has progressed and how we might feed into it. During this meeting confidentiality issues were raised by the review group.
As a direct result of our invitation from James to participate in the review as a full member, a meeting between Edward Shephard , myself and Peter Freer-Smith, Chair of the review group, was organised. This meeting revealed a great deal of confusion about the level of confidentiality required and whether the TU team could be party to the information that had already been gathered. It was quite clear that the reviewing process was drawing to a close and that no new data or methodology change could be entered into the review process. However we could take the summation papers offered at each review meeting back to the FCTU FR committee for discussion and reporting back so long as we remained within their pre-set time frame.
It was decided that the level of participation on offer was limited and not as full as James had suggested would be possible. Our summation was that to participate at this stage would yield little change to the robustness and usefulness of the final report and as such we would rather not be involved but would wait until the report was out and re-open negotiations and consultation at this later stage.
The Staff council is meeting tomorrow and it is hoped that with the November deadline for the EDR report passed, that more information will be available to us so that we can start in transparent talks again.
FR "3 centres" Reorganisation:
We were invited to meet with James on the 15th September to discuss the initial rolling out of the 3 centres design for restructuring Forest Research. This was an information giving exercise where James fleshed out his vision for FR and we gave our gut reaction to his proposal. We felt that the proposed reorganisation, as it stood then, was a positive step forward for the Agency and very much welcomed the removal of the internal market. However the idea was in its infancy and no clearly defined plan of "who goes where" was available. As such there was little to consult on at this stage but your FCTU FR team put forward suggestions for making this change more palatable. We questioned how large the overlaps between the centres would be and sought reassurance for those members of staff who may not see immediately where their job fits into the scheme. You will now have all had a chance to hear James’ views on the restructuring and been able to question him. We look forward to the next stage of Trade union engagement as James and the Centre Heads put forward a methodology for this major structural and cultural change. We are all “watching this space”.
If you have any questions concerns or queries please do not hesitate to speak to one of your trade union team below.
Edward Shephard, Robert Matthews, Lorraine Adams, Glenn Brearley, Dave Watterson, Nick Fielding, Steve Coventry, Steve Osborne, Mark Oram, Norman Dandy, Mike Perks, Jamie Awdry, Vicki Lawrence, and Joan Webber.
New Science Centres Announced
26th Sept 2008
Over the last few days members in FR will have received a letter from James Pendlebury outlining a proposed new structure for FR: copy of letter. The letter proposes re-brigading the current FR divisions into three new 'Centres'.
Following a meeting with James the unions have cautiously welcomed the proposals and in particular the decision to scrap FR's internal market system. We have been assured that the changes will not result in any direct job losses.
At the same meeting we also discussed our concerns with the ongoing review, and in particular the lack of a transparent project plan. The unions have been invited to join the review group and Mark Oram kindly attended the meeting on 24th September initially as an observer. However we remain concerned at the progress with the review and have indicated that we can only consider joining the review team provided;
- there is genuine scope to shape the review, its process, the detail of information yet to gather and the conclusions; and
- that TUS involvement in this stage of the review must be without prejudice to what comes after.
We are hoping to discuss our potential involvement with Peter Freer-Smith next week and will update members on our progress as soon as possible.
Review Update
10th Sept 2008
The joint unions' team the FCTU Forest Research Area Committee has been engaged with management during the ongoing process of the Efficiency Review Below is our summary of the process so far. We should be interested to hear your comments so please feel free to contact any of your local representatives listed below.
Kindest regards, Lorraine Adams - FR Area Committee Secretary
The FCTU Forest Research Area Committee (AC), your local joint unions’ team, were notified of the need for and the commencement of an FR Efficiency and Delivery Review prior to the last staff council meeting at the beginning of May. AC members met with James Pendlebury, Peter Freer-Smith and Ken Charles to discuss the terms of reference of the review and the general health of Forest Research and the associated budgets. This meeting went well and the AC members came out of the meeting feeling confident that the terms of reference would be produced and disseminated to all staff, and that the review process (focusing on financial year 2009/10) was to be clear and transparent. Reassurance was also given that the review would be all encompassing and that no division or section would be left out including the CEO’s office. At this stage the team were informed that the planned TSU review would be amalgamated into the main review. It was agreed that the composition of sub review groups would be published to the AC members along with meeting schedules.
When pressed about the current financial year budget deficit it was said that measures already in place, eg no capital purchases, reduction on travel and foreign travel and other cost saving exercises would be sufficient to bring the budget under control.
The meeting was followed up by a memo to all staff from James Pendlebury highlighting the need for the review and provided the terms of reference. The information requested at this first meeting was provided to the AC in mid July, and after an emergency meeting of the AC, a second meeting was held with Peter Freer-Smith to raise our further concerns regarding the processes already underway that appeared to be out with the terms of reference.
At this meeting it was agreed that, in addition to the 3 member review groups of each division/section, all staff would have an opportunity to meet with Peter Freer-Smith within their divisions to discuss the Efficiency Review. This will be happening between now and the end of September and union members are encouraged to ensure that their Division/section head for a date. It has also been agreed that minutes of these consultations will be taken and peer reviewed by 2 division volunteers for factual accuracy, the resulting reports from these meetings will then go forward to Peter Freer Smith for consideration when writing the final report.
What happens next:
- AC representatives will be meeting with Peter Freer Smith and James Pendlebury (date to be confirmed) to discuss the processes involved for assessment during the review and the additional financial measures for FY 2008/9 that are being put in place since our meeting of the 20th June. We will be looking to obtain clarification between these savings and their impact on the Efficiency Review.
- Please can all members look out for, help to organise and attend your divisional meeting with Peter Freer-Smith and make sure that you have your say.
- After this time the AC are considering whether or not it may be useful to call joint union meetings at both Alice Holt and NRS to gather your views; please let your local rep know if you think this would be helpful?
For any members who have particular concerns that they wish to discuss with a local union representative please feel free to contact any of our team: Edward Shephard, Robert Matthews, Lorraine Adams, Glenn Brearley, Dave Watterson, Nick Fielding, Steve Coventry, Steve Osborne, Mark Oram, Norman Dandy, Mike Perks, Jamie Awdry, Vicki Lawrence, Joan Webber and Shirley Stephens.
Review Update
1st Aug 2008
The review group had its first meeting on 14 July: Action Points. These action points make clear who is taking on the individual tasks of the review and indicate that the review will cover all aspects of FR’s activities.
The details of the next working meetings are as follows:
Forest Management Division Bill Mason, Peter Freer-Smith – PFS, Chris Quine – CQ |
4 August |
HS Division Andy Moffat – AM, PFS, CQ |
5 August |
Ecology Division PFS, CQ |
5 August |
HR & Admin Ken Charles – KC, AM, PFS |
8 August |
CEO’s Office (inc Commercialisation & Bus. Dev. & QA) Alison Melvin, AM, PFS |
11 August |
Finance Sandra Smith, AM, PFS |
11 August |
Communications Xanthe Christophers, AM, PFS |
14 August |
TSU KC, Stuart Snape, AM, Janet Dutch, Ralph Harmer |
15 August |
Tree Health Division Hugh Evans, CQ, PFS |
18 August |
Biometrics, S&S Division Helen McKay, CQ, PFS |
19 August |
In a note to the FCTU, Peter Freer-Smith indicates that: I believe that savings will be required from across the whole organisation, with the focus falling particularly where there are currently deficits (08/09) and where skills are not well suited to future needs. While these criteria may not impact equally in all areas there is certainly no targeting of particular areas/units. On targets for savings I can add that FR’s requirement to meet its full costs (including the cost of the capital invested in the business) remain in place. This target is a normal requirement for all Government Agencies and Departments. As staff know we failed to achieve this in 07/08 and our aim must be to have costs (including salary costs) at levels which allow us to achieve this target in future years.
The review timetable is: second meeting of review group 9 September, third meeting mid/end September and report to FR CEO end November
Review Launched
25th June 2008
On 20th June, FCTU reps met with James Pendlebury, Peter Freer-Smith and Ken Charles in order to discuss the proposed Forest Research Efficiency and Delivery Review. The terms of reference for the review are to:
- Undertake an efficiency and delivery review across all areas of FR (Science Divisions, Technical Services Unit, Administration, Finance, Communications and CEO’s Office).
- Set out the current staffing levels by location, pay band and job requirement to look at the skills and competency base across FR in light of the rapidly changing market we are now in and our predicted future needs. Identify other efficiency savings (VME, rental charges, etc.) including where deliverables may no longer be required by external or internal customers. For TSU the review needs to determine how best to support both FR and FC business requirements, including those of the Inventory and Forecasting Unit.
- The Review Group will consider both value for money and FR’s responsibilities towards the environment and will make recommendations to FR’s CEO on the delivery of these efficiency savings in the light of the predicted future skills requirements (parallel planning of the Forests and Climate Change Research Centre).
- Membership: Peter Freer-Smith (Chair), Jim Dewar (CFS), Ken Charles, Sandra Smith, Chris Quine, Andy Moffat and Janet Dutch.
- Timetable: The Review Group will make a final report to Dr James Pendlebury by the end of November 2008.
As indicated by the terms of reference the review incorporates the previously planned review of TSU which was announced as part of the Inventory and Forecasting report. Although we are concerned that any review at this time might exacerbate the workload pressures already being felt by some staff, we are pleased that the work will be contained within a single review with a clear remit and timescale. Feedback indicates that members would welcome both a stable long-term vision for the agency that lays out its future role within the wider FC and an end to the bureaucracy of its internal market.
In the short term however we are concerned that FR's predicted budget deficit for 08/09 may mean that some posts will be lost and that staff on fixed term contracts will not be replaced once their contracts expire; this may further increase the existing workload pressures. We have agreed that we shall meet again with Peter once the review team are up and running and are considering how best to consult with members and incorporate any ideas and suggestions over the coming weeks.