I know it’s small, but their lack of attention to detail on announcements like this really annoys me, it was clearly pasted from elsewhere where Fusion were being talked about in the third person and someone forgot to adjust it.
Also, what other areas of the the business do they have to focus on? Do they mean specifically the operating model they agreed to with Lewisham, but have different ones elsewhere?
@clausy Only the bit added by the FCA is searchable - the bit with the real content isn’t.
Audited just means a true and fair view, it doesn’t give judgement calls on eg whether the MD should get paid £2million + private jet
I’m not a big a fan of outsourcing monopolies (which a lot of council functions are) to private companies, though I appreciate there are potentials for genuine savings in some areas. (There is also potential for just paying extra money to private companies)
GLL actually have a good graphic design department, although somewhat ironically it is outsourced! OH used to work there but not for them. They are obviously perfectly capable of producing a text PDF but have chosen to send an image based one to Companies House et al.
Here linked from their own site is their financial statement for 2018 - fully searchable.
Hi @oakr, I don’t have any legal background but went through the TUPE process several times when a corporate customer chose to move their service contract for the provision of travel services from my employer to another company. Any employee working solely on that customer’s account had to be offered positions by the new company on the same terms and conditions as they already had unless the employee chose not to transfer. I was lucky in that I worked for a large global company most of my working life and each time I went through the TUPE process ended up being offered a new position by my original employer so never actually transferred to another company at all.
Assuming the Fusion employees working at the locations covered by the Lewisham service contract don’t work at any other locations Fusion manage then I can’t see any reason why they would not be covered by TUPE but I stand to be corrected as it is 10 years since I was last personally involved!
I think (and I could be wrong) that a lot of the swimming teachers were self-employed and won’t have any TUpE guarantees. It’s a shame because (in my experience) they were often the most professional and helpful of the staff at FH Pools.
I sincerely hope that the maintenance issues with the FH Pools building can be addressed and don’t get worse as a result of the transfer of management. That was already shaping up to be an argument between the Council, the building contractor and the firm operating the building since it opened.
It would make sense to keep most, if not all the staff, at least initially. What good is the facility without the people that know how to run it and the sessions?
Sorry, I wasn’t quite clear - I mean the facility staff who work on site with the working knowledge and customer relationships should be valued and kept on, not necessarily the rest of the organisation as a whole.
Sorry for the delay on this - it has taken longer than expected.
I have been liaising with Council officers and we expect to be able to make an announcement next week, confirming the re-opening date. I’ll update on here ASAP.