Carrilion in trouble
Discussion
Digga said:
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Mrs Digga has worked on projects for PS clients and told me all about this. The other side of the coin and a common occurrence is the one-to-many meeting; the PS will turn up mob-handed, with all sorts of hangers-on, to a meeting that really only needed to be two or three people each side. The reason being a.) it's a jolly and a day out of the office, b.) gives someone with a non-job a justification for existing. The trouble is, it very often serves to obstruct and unnecessarily elongate routine meetings.
Building contractors don't like client meetings on Fridays either
Willy Nilly said:
When the various managers, finance directors, directors etc at Carrilion apply for their next position, what will having Carrilion on their CV do for their careers? I'm guessing they're well versed in BS and will get another well paying job.
"Would you like fries with that?"Rovinghawk said:
Willy Nilly said:
When the various managers, finance directors, directors etc at Carrilion apply for their next position, what will having Carrilion on their CV do for their careers? I'm guessing they're well versed in BS and will get another well paying job.
"Would you like fries with that?"Smiler. said:
Will Interserve be following Carillion down the rabbit hole?
Share price is taking a hammering & profit warning last year.
Friend of mine has recently left Interserve, partly because they were a terrible company to work for, but also because they are running out of contracts. I would not be at all surprised if they were the "next Carillion". Share price is taking a hammering & profit warning last year.
Brave Fart said:
Smiler. said:
Will Interserve be following Carillion down the rabbit hole?
Share price is taking a hammering & profit warning last year.
Friend of mine has recently left Interserve, partly because they were a terrible company to work for, but also because they are running out of contracts. I would not be at all surprised if they were the "next Carillion". Share price is taking a hammering & profit warning last year.
Countdown said:
Fastpedeller said:
Usget said:
frankenstein12 said:
Since I work in this arena a little clarification maybe....
So as an example I saw a tweet from a doctor earlier toay about the fact it was costing £75 for a lighbulb to be changed which to common sense and common layman seems insane however its a matter of viability.
For a silly simplistic example you could hire someone at say £75 a day all year round to change light bulbs however they may only have to change a light bulb once a week so you are paying them £75 every other day for nothing.
If you could pay a contracting company £75 every few days for changing the light bulb instead which will clearly be cheaper.
It of course changes if it turns out the person hired full time just to change lightbulbs has to change 2 light bulbs every day of the year because then its clearly cheaper to have him full time as you are only paying him £75 a day where you would be paying the contractor £150 a day.
Whilst this makes sense, up to a point, it falls into the standard project management trap of trying to rationalise everything into a discrete role. The fallacy is that the £75 a day lightbulb permie couldn't possibly do anything else with the time he spends not changing bulbs.So as an example I saw a tweet from a doctor earlier toay about the fact it was costing £75 for a lighbulb to be changed which to common sense and common layman seems insane however its a matter of viability.
For a silly simplistic example you could hire someone at say £75 a day all year round to change light bulbs however they may only have to change a light bulb once a week so you are paying them £75 every other day for nothing.
If you could pay a contracting company £75 every few days for changing the light bulb instead which will clearly be cheaper.
It of course changes if it turns out the person hired full time just to change lightbulbs has to change 2 light bulbs every day of the year because then its clearly cheaper to have him full time as you are only paying him £75 a day where you would be paying the contractor £150 a day.
It’s only when the contract goes live that you find out why the price was so low. Because everything is EXTRA and because they never actually bother doing the stuff that is written in black and white in the contract and because they submit numerous fraudulent invoices. In fact you have to employ so many people to monitor them that you may as well have kept the service in-house in the first place.
98elise said:
frankenstein12 said:
Usget said:
frankenstein12 said:
Since I work in this arena a little clarification maybe....
So as an example I saw a tweet from a doctor earlier toay about the fact it was costing £75 for a lighbulb to be changed which to common sense and common layman seems insane however its a matter of viability.
For a silly simplistic example you could hire someone at say £75 a day all year round to change light bulbs however they may only have to change a light bulb once a week so you are paying them £75 every other day for nothing.
If you could pay a contracting company £75 every few days for changing the light bulb instead which will clearly be cheaper.
It of course changes if it turns out the person hired full time just to change lightbulbs has to change 2 light bulbs every day of the year because then its clearly cheaper to have him full time as you are only paying him £75 a day where you would be paying the contractor £150 a day.
Whilst this makes sense, up to a point, it falls into the standard project management trap of trying to rationalise everything into a discrete role. The fallacy is that the £75 a day lightbulb permie couldn't possibly do anything else with the time he spends not changing bulbs.So as an example I saw a tweet from a doctor earlier toay about the fact it was costing £75 for a lighbulb to be changed which to common sense and common layman seems insane however its a matter of viability.
For a silly simplistic example you could hire someone at say £75 a day all year round to change light bulbs however they may only have to change a light bulb once a week so you are paying them £75 every other day for nothing.
If you could pay a contracting company £75 every few days for changing the light bulb instead which will clearly be cheaper.
It of course changes if it turns out the person hired full time just to change lightbulbs has to change 2 light bulbs every day of the year because then its clearly cheaper to have him full time as you are only paying him £75 a day where you would be paying the contractor £150 a day.
Note i said its a silly simplistic example. Clearly there are a great many factors but to make it simple for lay person to understand I leave that bit out.
I normally ask the person if that can buy the lamps for £2 in B&Q are they going to go and pick them up for free? Are they also going to bring their own steps etc and lug them from the car park. Are they going to do the risk assessment?
If their boss is happy for them to be doing free lamp changing can they do the other 4 or 5 that need to be done before the end of the day (across a couple of local sites).
Obviously they will be providing their car and fuel for free to transport stuff between sites.
Then there is the insurances they will need to hold.
Going back to the original doctors example, its no different to asking why it's costs so much to run a GP practice, when prescription pads are so cheap?
Edited by 98elise on Wednesday 17th January 18:41
eccles said:
Quite a lot of the 'bulbs' where I work are huge big things up in the hangar roof, that need cherry pickers for access, even the tube lights in our workshop need a scissor lift. Bulbs in the paint shop are quite labour intensive to change, all of which come under the '£75 to change a bulb' remit.
It’s the sensational reporting in the press about things they do not understand / or don’t care it makes a good headline. V8 Fettler said:
Does no-one on the client's team read and understand the proposed contract before the contract award stage? For contracts of a larger value, does not the client write the contract?
Lots of different reasons/issues.In some cases the contracts are read by Civil Servants who weren't necessarily property or FM experts. In many other cases the services provided by the in-house staff wasn't fully identified or appreciated so, for example, Geoff the caretaker might do what was in his Job Description but over the last 30 years he's informally taken on a wide range of other jobs which nobody identified when the contract was being written. Or assumed it was covered under "General maintenance". Then there was the "one size fits all" approach where the contract might be appropriate for a City centre Hospital but not necessarily for a village clinic.
And all of the above is before you take into account the fact that the Outsourcer will use the cheapest staff, minimum headcount to provide as little of the contracted service as possible. Some of the subcontractors they sent us would be excellent and would be shocked at how much we were paying the Putsourcer compared with what the Outsourcer was paying them. And gradually none of the decent subbies would work for them which meant they would subcontract to "Gibbering Buffoon & Son" which then introduced another layer of fraud and incompetence into the mix.
Digga said:
That and toothless HR departments who, whatever else they meddle in, seem to disappear at the first sign of trouble when employees require management. It's comically typical that large organisations, if and when any deadwood it pruned, use the crutch of external consultants to do at least some of the dirty work.
Investment banks don't and they are quite largeChanging a bulb needing a cherry picker may take alot more than £75 but how many bulbs are there at regular heights that go pop?...
Interserve/Carrillion/Amey etc grew on the back if outsourcing. Nothing will change though. It'll go straight out to tender again.
Birmingham council is currently fighting Amey through the courts over their road repairs and struggling with Capitas new IT systems.
Interserve/Carrillion/Amey etc grew on the back if outsourcing. Nothing will change though. It'll go straight out to tender again.
Birmingham council is currently fighting Amey through the courts over their road repairs and struggling with Capitas new IT systems.
Edited by Sa Calobra on Thursday 18th January 08:26
HID lamps at height are usually replaced under bulk maintenance programmes (i.e. all lamps in a given area one after the other).
Spot replacement might not affect the lighting levels if this has been taken into account at design stage.
Maintenance is rarely considered properly in such installations though. Even when the box is ticked.
Spot replacement might not affect the lighting levels if this has been taken into account at design stage.
Maintenance is rarely considered properly in such installations though. Even when the box is ticked.
Countdown said:
V8 Fettler said:
Does no-one on the client's team read and understand the proposed contract before the contract award stage? For contracts of a larger value, does not the client write the contract?
Lots of different reasons/issues.In some cases the contracts are read by Civil Servants who weren't necessarily property or FM experts. In many other cases the services provided by the in-house staff wasn't fully identified or appreciated so, for example, Geoff the caretaker might do what was in his Job Description but over the last 30 years he's informally taken on a wide range of other jobs which nobody identified when the contract was being written. Or assumed it was covered under "General maintenance". Then there was the "one size fits all" approach where the contract might be appropriate for a City centre Hospital but not necessarily for a village clinic.
And all of the above is before you take into account the fact that the Outsourcer will use the cheapest staff, minimum headcount to provide as little of the contracted service as possible. Some of the subcontractors they sent us would be excellent and would be shocked at how much we were paying the Putsourcer compared with what the Outsourcer was paying them. And gradually none of the decent subbies would work for them which meant they would subcontract to "Gibbering Buffoon & Son" which then introduced another layer of fraud and incompetence into the mix.
crankedup said:
Outgoings outpacing income e dry month. Slow income on major projects. = £964 million short .
They are considering a call on shareholders to help bolster the finances. Company has been low balling major projects for years, using cheap labour and outing perfectly good decent companies with thier cheapo substitutes with people on rubbish money. Now it seems the business model is unravelling.
Chickens and roosting coms to mind.
Seems you called it right back in November.They are considering a call on shareholders to help bolster the finances. Company has been low balling major projects for years, using cheap labour and outing perfectly good decent companies with thier cheapo substitutes with people on rubbish money. Now it seems the business model is unravelling.
Chickens and roosting coms to mind.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff