SOSR Plymouth City Council Personal Assistant

[embleton]

Plymouth City Council through advice from Mark Bates Ltd is in a battle to substantiate the reason to drop the wages from £10.64 to £8.72 hour for Personal Assistant position that support those with likely severe mental illness (SMI) health disabilities on direct payments?

Mark Bates Ltd the insurance provider for those with a personal assistant and Plymouth City Council have instructed those concerned, the employer receiving direct payments to issue letters to their employee and get them quickly to sign their rights away in month notice period without even giving the right to seek advice. Is this really legal, while it is when the employee signs an alteration of terms and conditions of the employment contract.

Many have done this at the request of Plymouth City Council's instruction and their personal assistant have agreed to the reduction to £8.72, it is estimated that (reported on Unison's site from information received from a Plymouth City Council official anomalously) and 230 direct payments employers have been impacted.

My advice is don't sign these letters and say you will remain working for your client and do so stating you are working for the client direct payments employer under protest until an employment tribunal.

The advice you will receive through Mark Bates Ltd is that Plymouth City Council will then say that it is because of an SOSR (Some Other Substainual Reason) to justify the reason for dismissal of the employee who is supporting those with the most vulnerable disabilities usually that are on section 117 for free aftercare under the mental health act?

[embleton]

Plymouth Council advised me incorrectly about Mark Bates Ltd advised them about their involvement, they had no part in the matter?

[embleton]

230 with 50% taken in action so far.

[embleton]

Get your CV up to date PA's I think the next step that the PCC will take is to grade a PA into a band. Employee's of a PA should write a job description from the care plan which the PCC should do for the employer for their PA. The redundancy route is the only way forward with a 2-week break after that re-employ the PA in a band, remember there is still the question about continuous employment in rehiring the employee PA and this should apply to be fair.

My PA is really a mental health support worker (re-graded 30th March 2020) it's his job description; with my physical and mental disabilities. Their experience is in dementia and mental health support worker about 15 years

[embleton]

It has come to my attention when processing my personal information on my systems; that Enham Trust, supportis.com and Plymouth City Council likely have been sharing personal information between at least two parties without consent. Who are these organisations working for their disabled clients or Plymouth City Council?

From what I can see:-

Enham Trust -> supportis.com
Enham Trust -> Plymouth City Council

Plymouth City Council has been responding to my concerns from information passed by Enham Trust from private correspondence with emails between myself and Enham Trust. And Enham Trust has done the same in respect of supportis.com!

[embleton]

Likely population of disabilities impacted by the 230 is psychosis and mood disorders in the SMI category and have personal budgets under free section 117 mental health act aftercare...

Screenshot 2020-07-31 at 02.08.53.png (159.42 KiB) Viewed 280175 times

[embleton]

Freedom of Information request done on PCC concerning contracts/services held by Enham Trust by procurement?

[embleton]

Freedom of Information request done on PCC concerning contracts/services held by Enham Trust by procurement and clearly stated? Possible conflict of interest reference direct payments calculation formula and processing of said information?

[embleton]

The 7th of July 2020 was an eventful day when Plymouth City Council (PCC)/NHS commissioning group mailed an estimated 230 direct payments recipients with an official letter signed by Adult Social Care, this letter explained: "that because of an error in our systems your letter included the incorrect hourly rate". The rate advised by PCC on 1st April 2020 is that it would be £10.64 hourly rate for a Personal Assistant.

A report on another website, Unison, reports it was due to an "admin error" and that the PCC is being reasonable in handling the affair? And PA's should contact PCC directly in this case; who is contacting the PCC?, the employer or employee in the Unison publication case on their website!

A "Confirmation of Variation of Contract Terms" template also included with the mailing for the Personal Assistant's to sign their rights away was enclosed. A notice period on at least a month and provide notice to them in writing if possible by 13th July 2020 was advised by PCC, and the above mailing was received on 10th July 2020 by most recipients.

Notice of what, a major contract variation with no full explanation but "system error" that wasn't noticed in over three months when direct payments accounts should be monitored accordingly in a shorter period! The notice is what, termination of the employment contract otherwise in a month, by the employer making the employee redundant?

The new hourly rate for PA's would be set at £8.72 with effect from 10th August 2020 on the direct payments personal budget system? An estimated 50%, from an anonymous source, said: "had done as the PCC had requested in the correspondence" and adjusted the rate accordingly with consent from their PA's?

A flow chart with the process to follow was also enclosed, with details of what to do when this process is in a deadlock with the employer and employee with the last stage advised as follows: Seek further advice, from your insurance provider or Enham Trust when hitting that stage in the flow chart. A considerable percentage of employers of PA's had hit this obstacle advised in the flow chart, likely the remaining 50%?

This leaves five points open:-

a) personal care budget flexibility?
b) does the PCC have the right to set employee rates for employers with personal budgets?
c) why are PCC, Enham Trust and Insurance providers providing differing advice, and all putting pressure with the employer and employee relationships?
d) what is the correct process for PAs in this process?
e) what is the correct process overall?

Surely the next stage in the equation, e), is for the PCC drop the rate of direct payments of the personal budget, and then directly there is a case to pass to the LGO omnibus man after a complaint, and that has now been advised. But the PCC has advised one or some that they can take the matter to the LGO omnibus man in an email dated 16th July 2020 and that the PCC will be transparent in the explanation with the LGO investigation! So, there is going to be two investigations by the LGO omnibus man in the case...? Is the PCC being reasonable in their explanations and process, surely not?

No employee should accept a major contract variation by signing their rights away, just don't sign anything at all in this matter. The employer then has a choice to drop the pay rate with consent which is perfectly acceptable in employment law or drop it without consent completely unacceptable in employment law and an industrial tribunal would likely rule against the employer; Rigby v Ferodo Ltd [1988] ICR 29 (HL); Burdett Coutts v Hertfordshire County Council [1984] IRLR 91.

[embleton]

Private cafe discussion concerning this matter PCC v Direct Payments Employers that will go public at a later stage, see above post which is public. This matter did go to the LGO omnibus but was covered up, and no action was taken against PCC or published!