SCVO criticises Scottish government for lack of charity involvement in employment scheme

The umbrella body says charities and social enterprises have been ‘sidelined’ in favour of private companies in contracts to deliver the Fair Start Scotland service

The Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations has criticised the Scottish government for a perceived lack of charities and social enterprises among the organisations awarded contracts as part of an employment scheme.

Yesterday, the Scottish government announced it had awarded £96m worth of contracts to a mixture of public, private and voluntary sector organisations as part of the Fair Start Scotland service, which will try to help at least 38,000 people across the country find employment.

The announcement detailed a number of charities and social enterprises that were either partners or delivery partners in the programme, with three of the nine areas across Scotland involved in the programme having a third sector organisation as the primary partner delivering the programme.

But SCVO said referring to many of the charities named as “partners” was misleading, and claimed that the Scottish government had rowed back from its promises to put voluntary organisations at the heart of Fair Start. 

John Downie, director of public affairs at SCVO, said: “The Scottish government promised a brave new world in its vision for employability in Scotland.

“Its ambitions were that the third sector would be heart and centre of the new employability landscape, but instead charities and voluntary organisations have been sidelined to make way for private companies which lack the local knowledge required.

“It’s simply not good enough, and ignores the successful values-driven approach of the third sector in providing such vital services across the country.”

A blog post from Downie said the Scottish government’s referral to many of the third sector organisations announced as “partners” was misleading.

The blog post said: “I think more than a few would have been surprised to find themselves described as ‘partners’ of the winning bidders, particularly as while these third sector organisations have agreed in principle to be in the supply chain – depending on negotiations – they haven’t, as one large charity told me, seen the actual business delivery model.

“This would indicate that they’re not really partners – and they say it’s misleading to say they are.”

Fraser Kelly, chief executive of Social Enterprise Scotland, said: “We find it hard to understand how, after such a thorough consultation process, the vast majority of contracts have been awarded to big private sector corporations instead of social enterprises and charities.

“We believe that this was a unique opportunity to reshape the employability landscape in Scotland and to tailor services to the real needs of individuals to get them back to work. It was also an opportunity to grow the capacity of locally owned and controlled social enterprises and, ultimately, to bin the old-fashioned approach of prioritising bargain basement provision.”

The Scottish government did not respond to a request for comment before Third Sector’s deadline. 

Jamie Hepburn, employability minister, told the Scottish parliament yesterday that Fair Start “is an important milestone in our commitment to providing Scottish employment support which will help people faced with barriers into work, access a fairer and more targeted support service”.

Source link

Former chief’s unfair dismissal case against the Scottish SPCA has been dropped

Stuart Earley had made complaints of unfair dismissal and discrimination based on his disability and his age

A complaint of unfair dismissal and discrimination against the animal charity the Scottish SPCA has been dropped by the charity’s former chief executive, court papers show.

The charity said it had not made any payment to Stuart Earley for him to drop the case, which was withdrawn at the end of last month.

Earley, who worked for the SSPCA for nine years, stood down with immediate effect in November last year, citing the desire for a new challenge.

In a statement on the charity’s website at the time, the SSPCA said Earley had agreed with the charity’s board to leave immediately to allow him to focus on his future plans and so the charity could move forward under new leadership.

Earley had previously faced media criticism for his perceived high wages.

But Earley made complaints of unfair dismissal and discrimination because of disability and age, which were due to go before an employment tribunal before the complaints were withdrawn last month, court papers show.

The SSPCA said the case occurred because of a “misunderstanding” and it had not made any payment to Earley in exchange for the termination of the case.

Harry Haworth, chairman of the SSPCA, said: “There was a misunderstanding after the former chief executive left the society, which was resolved. The tribunal claims were withdrawn. The society did not make any payment in respect of those claims.”

Third Sector was unable to contact Earley for comment.

Kirsteen Campbell became chief executive of the SSPCA at the beginning of this month.

Source link

Tribunal orders Scottish Refugee Council to pay two former staff £27,000

A Glasgow employment tribunal found the charity had unfairly dismissed two former refugee integration advisers

The Scottish Refugee Council has been ordered by an employment tribunal to pay two former employees almost £27,000 in compensation and expenses for unfair dismissal and discrimination.

In a judgment issued by the Glasgow employment tribunal last week, the SRC was found to have unfairly dismissed Stephen McGuire and Petra Kasparek from their roles as refugee integration advisers on 30 June 2016.

As a result, the tribunal ordered the charity to rehire McGuire on or before 31 July 2017 on his previous pay and conditions, and pay him arrears of wages of £6,084.09 and expenses of £1,200.

Kasparek was found to have been discriminated against because she was on maternity leave and was compensated with £8,466.02 and £10,000 compensation for injury to feelings as a result of the charity’s discrimination.

Of this figure, £4,487.35 is payable to the public purse because Kasparek had been receiving unemployment benefit after her dismissal.

She was also granted £1,200 reimbursement of fees in taking the case to court.

Kasparek and McGuire worked for the charity’s refugee integration service, which was principally funded by a two-year, £2m grant from the Big Lottery Fund that ended on 30 June 2016, the judgment said.

The SRC made a formal application for a second grant from the BLF at some point before the original grant was due to run out, but became aware that a decision would not be made until August and decided to give notice of the risk of redundancy to the four refugee integration advisers.

A second application was made to the BLF for development funding, which would have kept the service running until a long-term decision was reached, but it was rejected.

Kasparek, while funded by the grant, was on an indefinite contract and went on maternity leave in June 2015. McGuire, who was previously on a temporary contract, was employed as maternity cover, according to the judgment.

Kasparek gave notice of her intention to return from maternity leave on 12 May 2016, but decided to take her accrued annual leave until 4 July 2016.

The affected staff were given formal notices of dismissal. The tribunal found there was “no attempt by the respondent to consult with any of the individual recipients of these letters when they were issued” or prior to 13 June 2016.

The SRC board then decided to retain two of the four affected refugee integration advisers for two months from the end of the grant, with all four affected staff undergoing interviews to decide who would be retained.

Kasparek was not included in many of the communications sent out by the charity to those affected by the redundancy decision, the tribunal found.

It said she was disadvantaged in the interview process for the two temporary roles because she was unable to refer to recent examples of work, having been on maternity leave. She also appealed her dismissal, which she lost, although McGuire did not make an appeal.

Kasparek was unemployed until 3 October 2016, but her new role paid £94 a week less than her previous salary.

The BLF grant application was eventually successful and ran for two years from 1 September 2016, but Kasparek was not reappointed.

McGuire took some temporary employment before finding a new job.

The tribunal’s judgment said that it was not impressed with the evidence provided by John Wilkes, chief executive of the SRC at the time of the redundancies, and Kes Cameron, head of finance and administration. It said that Wilkes had “a surprisingly poor understanding of the respondent’s policies and procedures” and Cameron was “clearly and significantly lacking in experience or understanding of the role of a manager conducting an appeal against dismissal”.

In a statement, Gary Christie, interim chief executive of the SRC, said: “SRC always seeks to retain the expertise of our highly dedicated staff. However, like many charities, we face difficult staffing decisions in tight timeframes when project funding streams come to an end and no new funding is in place.

“The tribunal decision shows that in this instance we got it wrong. The board and management team will carefully consider the judgment in detail. The charity will implement all necessary actions, including an audit of our HR processes, to make sure that when difficult redundancy situations regrettably arise in the future we do so equitably and in line with our policies.”

Source link