Baby P - finally some heads roll

[E36GUY]

About bloody time.

Article doesn't say it but Sharon Shoesmith also removed from post according to the news on Sky.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7757893.stm

[elster]

Why does the head always seem to get fired?

Surely it is down to the case worker?

[tomTVR]

Indeed, that evil Sharon Shoesmith deserves to lose her job for those terrible acts she did to that child

[bigTee]

The head will get fired and put into a new role with the same salary.

[paoloh]

E36GUY said:

About bloody time.

Article doesn't say it but Sharon Shoesmith also removed from post according to the news on Sky.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7757893.stm

The article does say it.

About bloody time too.

[grumbledoak]

elster said:

Why does the head always seem to get fired?

Surely it is down to the case worker?

And if the case worker wants the baby removed and is overruled?

You can hand down authority, but not responsibility.

[elster]

grumbledoak said:

elster said:

Why does the head always seem to get fired?

Surely it is down to the case worker?

And if the case worker wants the baby removed and is overruled?

You can hand down authority, but not responsibility.

The case worker writes the reports, they are the ones seeing the child.

All the ones with direct contact should be getting fired, not the ones who probably have never even heard of this kid before the trial.

[Chris_w666]

grumbledoak said:

elster said:

Why does the head always seem to get fired?

Surely it is down to the case worker?

And if the case worker wants the baby removed and is overruled?

You can hand down authority, but not responsibility.

Well paid director of childrens services is the one ultimately responsible, it would be down to her to discipline/suspend staff beneath her.

If the department fails and the issue is not dealt with the director shoulders the blame.

[grumbledoak]

elster said:

All the ones with direct contact should be getting fired, not the ones who probably have never even heard of this kid before the trial.

No idea where you work, dude, but that opinion is the epitomy of st management.

The coal-face workers are seldom in a position to make the management do their job properly. The management's job is to ensure those beneath them do theirs properly. Possibly the case worker should also be fired, but the buck stays right at the top.

[elster]

grumbledoak said:

elster said:

All the ones with direct contact should be getting fired, not the ones who probably have never even heard of this kid before the trial.

No idea where you work, dude, but that opinion is the epitomy of st management.

The coal-face workers are seldom in a position to make the management do their job properly. The management's job is to ensure those beneath them do theirs properly. Possibly the case worker should also be fired, but the buck stays right at the top.

So say a worker fks up it is their bosses bosses fault?

All the Chief has to go on is the reports, nothing more.

[heebeegeetee]

elster said:

grumbledoak said:

elster said:

Why does the head always seem to get fired?

Surely it is down to the case worker?

And if the case worker wants the baby removed and is overruled?

You can hand down authority, but not responsibility.

The case worker writes the reports, they are the ones seeing the child.

All the ones with direct contact should be getting fired, not the ones who probably have never even heard of this kid before the trial.

So you think the case workers should have bveen paying the £4,500 it costs to get a court order to put a child into care out of their own money? Or you think the case workers should over rule the decisions made by their bosses?

[MikeyT]

About time she went ...

The problem with PH is that everyone's a boss ...

[172ff]

Cant see what difference it will make, bar the front page of tomorrows Sun.

[elster]

heebeegeetee said:

So you think the case workers should have bveen paying the £4,500 it costs to get a court order to put a child into care out of their own money? Or you think the case workers should over rule the decisions made by their bosses?

You are assuming that the report includes the high risk and injuries.

[HRG]

elster said:

grumbledoak said:

elster said:

All the ones with direct contact should be getting fired, not the ones who probably have never even heard of this kid before the trial.

No idea where you work, dude, but that opinion is the epitomy of st management.

The coal-face workers are seldom in a position to make the management do their job properly. The management's job is to ensure those beneath them do theirs properly. Possibly the case worker should also be fired, but the buck stays right at the top.

So say a worker fks up it is their bosses bosses fault?

All the Chief has to go on is the reports, nothing more.

Afraid so.

The best explanation I ever heard was this:

Take an organisation chart and when something goes wrong turn it upside down and fill it with st. When the st can't flow any further that's where the buck stops

[grumbledoak]

172ff said:

Cant see what difference it will make, bar the front page of tomorrows Sun.

Their replacements will be more clearly aware that they will be held accountable for the actions of their department(s). Don't underestimate that simple fact, it is the basis of all effective management.

[paoloh]

elster said:

heebeegeetee said:

So you think the case workers should have bveen paying the £4,500 it costs to get a court order to put a child into care out of their own money? Or you think the case workers should over rule the decisions made by their bosses?

You are assuming that the report includes the high risk and injuries.

You're assuming it doesn't.

[heebeegeetee]

elster said:

heebeegeetee said:

So you think the case workers should have bveen paying the £4,500 it costs to get a court order to put a child into care out of their own money? Or you think the case workers should over rule the decisions made by their bosses?

You are assuming that the report includes the high risk and injuries.

I don't knowe what you mean. I think your view point is rather bizaare. the ground workers do their job (if they have the time ar resources to do so, not often the case and not the case in this er, case) and then report on. It's then out of their hands. What more would you have them do? Kidnap the baby? Enter property without a warrant? spend their own money?

[heebeegeetee]

172ff said:

Cant see what difference it will make, bar the front page of tomorrows Sun.

It won't change page 3.

[Chris_w666]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Will she need one? Career in social work or education behind her & final salary pension scheme when her Directors salary will have been £70-80k as a minimum.