You are here: Home » Comment »

10% no-show rate is only ‘normal’ in a failed company

July 17, 2012 7:24 pm

Author:

Tags:

Share this Article

Nick Buckles, Chief Executive of embattled security firm G4S, has made plenty of astonishing statements these past few days.

Yet for me, there has been nothing more shocking than the verbal shrug of the shoulders that explained how ‘normal’ it is for 10% of new recruits to not bother turning up for work.

Just what kind of business is he running?

A normalised no-show rate of 10% would leave most businesses in tatters. The fact that such an appalling recruitment policy did not preclude G4S from winning the Olympic security contract is a stain on the tender process itself.

Some basic leadership skills were lacking in G4S’ management. The questions that any decent Chief Executive would ask simply have not been asked. If you know 10% of your workforce will not turn up for work, you can do one of three things.

  1. Realise that the type of people you are employing are thoroughly unreliable and as a result completely review the job criteria and selection procedures to ensure a better standard of applicants
  2. Realise that the application, interview and training procedures are woefully inadequate, and that those managing the recruitment process are incompetent at recognising unreliable applicants at the early stages and weeding them out.
  3. Sit back, do nothing.

Mr Buckles chose the latter, and it is threatening to risk the security and integrity of the Olympic Games.

When G4S has recruited people so unreliable that they fail to turn up for work, it raises questions as to the quality of new employees who do turn up.

This weekend we’ve seen appalling statements from whistleblowers who have described how bombs, guns and hand grenades have gone unspotted by employees during the training process. It shows that there are some who perhaps want to work, but have not been trained appropriately. But it also shows that some applicants have made the grade, been offered an important job, but are simply not taking their responsibilities seriously.

What is clear is that G4S dramatically exaggerated its ability to recruit the promised 10,400 workers. In attempting to meet their unrealistic promises, they seem to have adopted an ‘anyone will do’ mentality. They have concentrated only on getting bums on seats (and they have even failed at that), but furthermore they appear to have failed to provide the kind of training that will ensure they meet their responsibilities – to protect people from those who might seek to cause them harm.

I charge Mr Buckles with gross negligence, a woeful lack of patriotism and running a company whose entire operation is not fit to clean the boots of our Olympians, never mind protect those who wish to cheer them on.

But the time for recriminations is not now. All those involved in the games have to get their heads down and ensure it’s a success. But when the time is right, heads have to roll. This is not an issue where the Government can say ‘it’s all Labour’s fault’. The contract was awarded to G4S in December 2010, almost 7 months into the coalition Government. The security arrangements for the Olympics have been awarded, planned and implemented purely on this Government’s watch.

Indeed, this Government has found time to deliver unwanted reforms to the NHS, to hold a referendum on how we vote and crucify itself with a disastrous budget. But whilst it has been playing at Government, the very real and primary responsibility of protecting the people it serves has not been prioritised – and for that the Government has to excuse.

I would predict that Mr Buckles will, before long, resign from his post. If Mrs May is a woman of integrity, and actually I believe that she is, I would expect her to resign too.

So to whom do we turn to fix this mess? The army of course – many of whom will have just returned from a tour of duty abroad. For me, it is welcome. They are skilled, dedicated, highly-trained and conscientious. No-one will be able to protect the games better than them. But because of the Government and G4S’ negligence, our military heroes are not getting the break they deserve, forced away from their families once more to do a job the taxpayer had asked others to do. We should say a big thank you to them.

The Olympics will be a fabulous event. We should welcome the world to our island, celebrate with them and cheer Team GB on until our throats are sore. Our athletes have trained and prepared their whole lives for this moment – if only G4S and their Government employers had been as dedicated to the cause.

Related posts:

  1. Normal people don’t care about politics
  2. Blair deploys Obama’s web company for Labour campaign
  3. Poor old George: Two’s company, three’s a crowd
  4. There is no “normal” reaction to Auschwitz
  5. Time to think again about the 50% tax rate?
  • Steven T Green

    I’m sorry but this piece misses the point. The 10% no-show rate is an integral feature of the G4S business model. Along with casual employment; low respect for the work force; very basic pay rates and requirements on workers to be “flexible” – e.g. work any unsocial hours anywhere the company requires. Just look one their facebook page to see what their recruits have been saying. The remedy in their business model is to recruit 10% more people than required. This is just the sort of thing Labour should have clear policies to deal with when they are back in power. To empower the 99% against the exploitation by immoral capitalists.

    • http://twitter.com/mistyblulabour dave stone

      Excellent points, Steven. And of course, “flexibility” works both ways: a motivated employee will be on her/his bike the very moment a better offer comes along. So given the gap between a job offer (when G4S could be bothered to respond) and actual employment, the expected ‘churn’ would most likely be greater than usual.

      Interesting to see how this matter is being discussed on ARRSE*, one comment: “What will it be like when G4S are running the police service?”!

      *http://www.arrse.co.uk/

      • treborc

         My nephew worked for them before he went into the army, he told me he was on the cash and carry, they told him he’d be locked into the van he would not be able to get out until the van returned, they locked him in went two miles down the road to Mc Donald’s they opened up the back of the van said come on lets have breakfast, they had a key for the back door.

        He then told me about doing security on a factory, he said he was shown the key points and he would have do a walk about every hour, so he went with another chap who had worked for them for years, he worked during the day at another job did this at night, when he went to walk around the chap said do not bother we have a set of keys here, you just turn the key wait five six minutes before you do the next, leave one for  ten minutes as if your looking around you do the first four hours and I will do the last, this way we can get some sleep.

        He worked for them for a year while his application for the army went through, he said they even charged him for wear and tear of his Uniform, when he returned his Uniform in good condition they said it was damaged and they stopped a massive chunk of his wages for the replacement of the damage they said was not accidental.

        They are a cheap bunch of cowboys.

      • treborc

         My nephew worked for them before he went into the army, he told me he was on the cash and carry, they told him he’d be locked into the van he would not be able to get out until the van returned, they locked him in went two miles down the road to Mc Donald’s they opened up the back of the van said come on lets have breakfast, they had a key for the back door.

        He then told me about doing security on a factory, he said he was shown the key points and he would have do a walk about every hour, so he went with another chap who had worked for them for years, he worked during the day at another job did this at night, when he went to walk around the chap said do not bother we have a set of keys here, you just turn the key wait five six minutes before you do the next, leave one for  ten minutes as if your looking around you do the first four hours and I will do the last, this way we can get some sleep.

        He worked for them for a year while his application for the army went through, he said they even charged him for wear and tear of his Uniform, when he returned his Uniform in good condition they said it was damaged and they stopped a massive chunk of his wages for the replacement of the damage they said was not accidental.

        They are a cheap bunch of cowboys.

    • Alexwilliamz

      But if you employed 10% more and 10% did not turn up then you would still be 1% out. No wonder they are up the proverbial creek if this is their actual model! Can’t do the maths.

      :cough:

  • Solomon Hughes

    You’re right to be shocked about Buckles acceptance of the 10% no-show rate. But like Steven T Green, I am a bit shocked that a Labour blog would not recognise the problem is likely to be driven by poor wages and conditions. You are quick to point at “unreliable” staff and “incompetent” recruitment, but realy the point is G4S conditions are so poor that people accept them when they have to , but continue looking for better offers: In particular G4S sought to make max. profits by employing people for the olympics on the lowest poss. rates for the shortest poss. time, a mean and unstable approach.

    • Quiet_Sceptic

      That certainly seems to fit with some of the BBC reports on the experience of would-be G4S staff:

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-18767999

    • jaime taurosangastre candelas

      I was told today that G4S had applied to our PFI provider for the contract to provide security at the hospital, but were unsuccessful.  We instead have a small company who provide door security.  It is not a big contract I would imagine – there are I think 6 people on the shift, plus a manager.  Maybe 20 people in all.  They are quite good though.  Many are ex-Air Force or Army, they try to have a Polish speaker on each shift, and I am unaware of any problems with the contract.  They are also helpful and polite to both staff and to the public, they are happy to help paramedics with doors, and they were very happy to “integrate” with hospital staff when we had a fun day with some football and a barbecue, and some came along to our Christmas party as well.  They feel part of the team, not a problem.  So in that the PFI provider got it correct.

      This Olympics contract though is very odd, and while I try not to jump to the conclusion, it seems hard to believe there is anything less than profit-seeking and incompetence, possibly inbred incompetence from so many years of taking government money for so little output. But there is a very small positive – at the expense of the holiday time for our soldiers – in reality, the Games will now be better protected now that professional people are providing the security. I hope the soldiers get a good bonus, paid by G4S.

      • Alexwilliamz

        Small is beautiful and generally less exploitative and responsive than vast monolithic organisations like 4GS. Ironically most public money that goes to the ‘efficient’ private sector goes to a handful of big companies who are as inefficient and lumbering as the public bodies they are meant to replace. the difference merely that they drive down wages and cream off the difference in management fees.

    • Alexwilliamz

      This is news to anyone of us? Perhaps like the shock that banks have been gambling, the press have been unethical and ups have been subsidising their pay with expenses fiddles we need a judicial investigation into the practises of the big corporations who win most of the public contracts out there. Are our leaders really this insulated that they a) did not know this is going on or b) think that we did not realise it?

  • PeterBarnard

    Although I don’t have a lot of admiration for the way that G4S appears to treat its employees - there will be a lot more to come out of this, that’s for sure – at the end of the day, a contractor is only a contractor, and responsibility for this situation developing in the way that it has lies with the party with the ultimate responsibility for meeting the objective of the contract : the Home Office.

    It appears that the scope of the contract was (something like) quadrupled or quintupled late last year. This was not only appalling, but given the time remaining it was unrealistic. What on earth were those responsible for assessing how many people were required doing between July 2005 and December 2011?

    We see here classic buck-passing from the Home Office > LOCOG > G4S. We also see the result of “knowing the price of everything, and the value of nothing.” There are three parameters to a project : quality, time and cost and by far the most important is quality. Time comes second and cost is the least important (“pay peanuts, get monkies”). Unfortunately, in this country, we invariably seem to put cost in the pre-eminent category.

    • rwendland

       If I remember the committee evidence right, LOCOG asked G4S if they could increase it to supply 21,000 temporary security staff!  G4S said no, but they thought – foolishly it turns out – they could provide 10,400.

    • rwendland

       If I remember the committee evidence right, LOCOG asked G4S if they could increase it to supply 21,000 temporary security staff!  G4S said no, but they thought – foolishly it turns out – they could provide 10,400.

    • Bernard

      The problem with the ‘pay peanuts get monkeys’ analogy when it comes to public-private contracting is that there are some very public instances of contract awards which pay handsomely and lead to poo-flinging that monkeys could only dream of.

      As an example, a million monkeys with a million screwdrivers could hardly wreck the DWP the way the big IT contract around the turn of the millenium did. 600 consultants came in and spent a year and a half implementing an IT system that worked so badly that the whole department came as close as any public organisation can to collapsing.

  • Dave Postles

    G4S (alias Group 4) will quickly become yesterday’s news as HSBC descends into a quagmire in the US:

    http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/07/16/scathing-report-details-money-laundering-problems-at-hsbc/?ref=global&pagewanted=print

  • rwendland

    Watched the G4S committee evidence this lunchtime.  No MP asked the question I was dying to hear put:

    “I understand from your evidence that the contract is to supply about
    10,400 temporary security staff for a management fee of £57
    million. You also gave evidence that the security staff will be paid
    £8.50/hour, plus a £1/hour retrospective bonus if they complete their
    assigned duties.

    Doing some back-of-envelope maths, that works out as a management fee
    of about £5,500 per security worker. If the average worker trained for 1
    week, then worked for 3 weeks at 40 hours/week, I work out they would
    be paid about £1,500 each for the Olympics.

    Could you tell me if my understanding of your basic business model is
    correct: you earn a £5,500 management fee for each temporary
    employee supplied who is paid about £1,500? And secondly, does that £1,500 pay + NI etc
    costs come out of your £5,500 fee, or is that cost paid to you by LOCOG
    on top of your management fee?”

    Is my back-of-envelope understanding of the G4S business model about right?  If so, it seems pretty outrageous. Did no company really bid less than G4S?
     

    • Alexwilliamz

      Welcome to the world of public contracts. It might also give some people an inkling of where the money goes and it most cases it is not the pensions of the run of the mill public servant.

  • Daniel Speight

    Another blow against the privatization of public services. Why was this false idol of neo-liberalism worshiped for so long when it was so obviously failing. The evidence was there with the railways and utilities. What a wasted 13 years of government by New Labour turned out to be.

    Yet for me, there has been nothing more shocking than the verbal shrug
    of the shoulders that explained how ‘normal’ it is for 10% of new
    recruits to not bother turning up for work.

    So regarding the prisons that G4S runs, does the 10% include just guards, or the guards and prisoners.

    • Alexwilliamz

      The fact that they had to rename tells us all that this ‘incompetence’ or in reality negligence has been going on for years. Just like the banking crisis people have been cutting corners for years and if everything goes to the script no problem, but whenever something out of the ordinary comes along disaster. If you examine much of what we have been doing as a society over the last 30 years you will see the same pattern. Corners cut to fill the pockets of a handful of people.

      • Daniel Speight

        Alex, maybe it’s government for spivs and by spivs.

  • P Spence

    G4S like other outsource companies are hyper exploitative of their employees. They do not offer decent T&C or any long term career prospects. They are the dark side of capitalism. This article completely ignores the reality experienced by recruits and employees of G4S. The Labour Party was founded to represent workers like these: they are failing to do so. That must change.

  • Owen Edwards

    My nephew is working for G4S and simply hasn’t been given hours by them – it’s not just about people not turning up, it’s about G4S actively failing to arrange the correct number of people on shift.

  • Jo

    Have you looked at the facebook sites where people trying to work for G4S are telling the rest of us what is really going on? People are being messed about to the most appalling degree. Many are trained and waiting for a schedule that can’t be accessed as it appears the IT is down and no-one answers the phone. People have put their lives on hold and turned down other jobs  for this work, they have spent money on travel and accommodation and putting their own time into being trained and they are being treated as if they are less than nothing. My guess is that if ’10% fail to turn up’ it’s because G4S haven’t shared the fact that they were expected to. It is clear that the admin of the whole thing is inadequate, under-resourced, untrained and seemingly uncaring. This will be as a result of  management over committing and not wanting to put the time and cash into ensuring that recruitment staffing systems work.  This mistreatment of potential staff is G4S’s true failure and most inexcusable offence

    • Alexwilliamz

      I reckon one decent server would provide sufficient computing power to process these people. A dozen decent administrators and some telephonists who can read a computer screen throw in a couple of general office monkeys and the whole thing should run itself. Classic management heavy (highly paid managers and execs no doubt) and not enough people who actually do the real work. Perhaps they should have got that farmer who runs glastonbury to manage it instead.

  • Chris

    My wife volunteers in a local charity shop. On Tuesday  17 July they got a call from G4S asking about another volunteer who had applied for a job on the Olympic security team. Inefficient recruitment does not seem an adequate description!

Latest

  • News Unison Conference 2013 Unison set out their expectations for a Labour government

    Unison set out their expectations for a Labour government

    By Mark Ferguson

    Unison General Secretary Dave Prentis set out his tests for continuing to support Labour this afternoon. Speaking at their conference in Liverpool, Prentis said: For too long we’ve built the careers of Labour politicians, only to be let down when we needed them most. I don’t want to hear Labour apologising for past mistakes, I want to see a clear agenda from Labour for the future. We must not support a Labour Government that does not : put an end [...]

    Read more →
  • Featured Scotland Why on earth shouldn’t Nigel Farage visit Scotland?

    Why on earth shouldn’t Nigel Farage visit Scotland?

    By Tom Harris

    You’ve got to admire Nigel Farage. Like a comedian who’s already died on stage at the Glasgow Empire, he’s put on his “optimistic” hat and chosen to return to Scotland to campaign for UKIP. His last visit, you will recall, was memorable for his being forced to seek refuge in an Edinburgh pub from a mob of nationalists and trots shouting “SCUM!” at him as he tried to convey his message (a tad harsh, I thought. But I suppose “gentleman [...]

    Read more →
  • Comment

    Labour needs more than a few warm words on the environment, energy security and climate change

    By Callum Smith

    It seems that with the announcements of their intention to end universality in social security and accept the Coalition’s spending envelopes, Labour are gradually beginning to articulate what the Labour Party’s 2015 manifesto will look like. While much has been said on social security, general economic direction and housing shortages; there has been little said on the environment, energy security and climate change. Other than a few warm words from Mary Creagh MP in LabourList’s ‘One Nation Labour: Debating the Future’ [...]

    Read more →
  • News 5,000 soldiers face redundancy – Media roundup: June 18th, 2013

    5,000 soldiers face redundancy – Media roundup: June 18th, 2013

    Subscribers to our morning email get the best of LabourList – including the Media and blog round up – every weekday morning. If you were a subscriber you would have already received this (and much more) in your inbox. You can sign up here. 5,000 soldiers face redundancy Thousands of members of the armed forces will receive redundancy letters tomorrow – as Government defence cuts continue to bite. Up to 5,300 serving soldiers in the Army will lose their jobs – including [...]

    Read more →
  • News Has David Cameron lost the plot?

    Has David Cameron lost the plot?

    Once upon a time David Cameron was known for his deft handling of the public mood. Not anymore. Last night, he tweeted: This is the menu for the #G8UK dinner. I’ll chair a discussion on tax, trade, transparency and Syria at 830 tonight pic.twitter.com/GAWDxvEDkI — David Cameron (@David_Cameron) June 17, 2013 This is a Prime Minister who is often lambasted as “out of touch”, at a time when half a million people are being driven to using Foodbanks because they [...]

    Read more →