York council boss tells of 'axe-wielding' role played by interim managers

Sarah Tanburn

Sarah Tanburn

First published in News
Last updated
by

A TOP interim official at City of York Council has written candidly about the 'axe-wielding' role of people in her position.

Sarah Tanburn, who has been appointed as interim director of city and environmental services to shepherd York's controversial Local Plan through the planning process, says interim managers should bring a cool head to assessing risks, pointing out that no course of action is risk free and helping colleagues and members to work out which risks are most manageable and how to address them.

"Inevitably, interim managers can be the axe-wielders," says Ms Tanburn in an article she has written in a personal capacity in the Local Government Chronicle.

She says she has been an interim manager since 2003 and so has had her share of joining councils in the midst of difficult decisions.

She claims York needs a Local Plan urgently but often such issues became politicised, especially where local people cared passionately about the decision and could raise money for judicial campaigning.

"Stakeholders may admit, possibly only in private, that the proposals are the ‘least worst’ thing to do, although some cannot allow such an opening for negotiation," she says.

"Public law is complex and not always well tested. The parameters of a comprehensive and efficient library service, or the status of a property strategy, can need robust challenge with counsel or in the courts, with no obvious answers. Always, such processes face intense time and capacity constraints.

"Senior managers in local authorities face these challenges all the time. Sometimes, however, a council has an unexpected requirement and an interim is the best solution. If so, that manager should be able to offer you help beyond being the extra pair of hands and ensuring the decision-taking process itself is well managed."

Ms Tanburn says experience across many authorities may suggest new approaches. "I have taken planning techniques and applied them to developing sports facilities, not incidentally helping the leadership out of a quandary."

She says interim managers have the ability to 'offer some blunt truths to power,' and as an interim manager, she had often found it 'that little bit easier to state the unpalatable reality to corporate colleagues or to members, both in power and in opposition,' opening up space for compromise and deliverability.

"If they don’t like it and want to dispose of my services, that’s easily done with no hard feelings on either side," she adds. "When your authority is facing the tough choices, reflecting on the interim experience may give you some of the benefits of being just that step away."

Comments (24)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:54am Fri 5 Sep 14

Oaklands Resident says...

But the interim manager has little knowledge of the culture, history and priorities of an area.

With due respect, I wouldn't let someone like this near a Local Plan which will dictate York's future for 25 years and more.

Bad decisions - such as Labours plan to expand the size of the City by 25% during the next 15 years - would be an irreversible burden for many future generations.

It is for all Council managers - transient or otherwise - to ensure that local views are respected and heeded
But the interim manager has little knowledge of the culture, history and priorities of an area. With due respect, I wouldn't let someone like this near a Local Plan which will dictate York's future for 25 years and more. Bad decisions - such as Labours plan to expand the size of the City by 25% during the next 15 years - would be an irreversible burden for many future generations. It is for all Council managers - transient or otherwise - to ensure that local views are respected and heeded Oaklands Resident
  • Score: -33

11:50am Fri 5 Sep 14

Jack Ham says...

"She claims York needs a Local Plan urgently but often such issues became politicised, especially where local people cared passionately about the decision and could raise money for judicial campaigning."

God forbid local people, who will live here long after Sarah Tanburn has cashed her hefty paycheck and left have an opinion on this!!

Is this article supported by Kersten England and James Alexander. It might be written in a personal capacity but it reflects strongly on the values of CYC right now and what they look for in a £700 per DAY officer.

Terrifying
"She claims York needs a Local Plan urgently but often such issues became politicised, especially where local people cared passionately about the decision and could raise money for judicial campaigning." God forbid local people, who will live here long after Sarah Tanburn has cashed her hefty paycheck and left have an opinion on this!! Is this article supported by Kersten England and James Alexander. It might be written in a personal capacity but it reflects strongly on the values of CYC right now and what they look for in a £700 per DAY officer. Terrifying Jack Ham
  • Score: -91

12:37pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Dr Brian says...

She probably got paid for writing the article and wrote it whilst she was being paid for by us the rate payers of York

She is an over paid nobody so why should her opinions matter?
She probably got paid for writing the article and wrote it whilst she was being paid for by us the rate payers of York She is an over paid nobody so why should her opinions matter? Dr Brian
  • Score: -105

1:58pm Fri 5 Sep 14

jaycee says...

Taking £700 a day as a bench mark she will have earned over £ 2,000,000 in the 11 years she has been an interim manager.Why have the council fallen for it ? It just shows the lack of quality in the current management structure.She is nothing more than a leech on the public purse and it's currently Yorks' finances which are suffering.
Taking £700 a day as a bench mark she will have earned over £ 2,000,000 in the 11 years she has been an interim manager.Why have the council fallen for it ? It just shows the lack of quality in the current management structure.She is nothing more than a leech on the public purse and it's currently Yorks' finances which are suffering. jaycee
  • Score: -107

3:12pm Fri 5 Sep 14

gmsgop says...

jaycee wrote:
Taking £700 a day as a bench mark she will have earned over £ 2,000,000 in the 11 years she has been an interim manager.Why have the council fallen for it ? It just shows the lack of quality in the current management structure.She is nothing more than a leech on the public purse and it's currently Yorks' finances which are suffering.
The chief executive Kersten England it seems used the errm 'full extent' of her delegated powers to recruit this interim. It seems that she does not, has not, will not explain why she chose to take on an interim - as against a full term Director who might become committed to the city, rather then a daily rate gone tomorrow
[quote][p][bold]jaycee[/bold] wrote: Taking £700 a day as a bench mark she will have earned over £ 2,000,000 in the 11 years she has been an interim manager.Why have the council fallen for it ? It just shows the lack of quality in the current management structure.She is nothing more than a leech on the public purse and it's currently Yorks' finances which are suffering.[/p][/quote]The chief executive Kersten England it seems used the errm 'full extent' of her delegated powers to recruit this interim. It seems that she does not, has not, will not explain why she chose to take on an interim - as against a full term Director who might become committed to the city, rather then a daily rate gone tomorrow gmsgop
  • Score: -95

3:21pm Fri 5 Sep 14

gmsgop says...

...person who can make as much mess as she wants and walk away with a reference & leave all the problems behind her.

Bit odd that she has been here months and again panic meetings are being called - let's hope that they get the protocols right, it would be a nice change.

As we are told ms tanburn was recruited for her expertise in getting local plans through the process - perhaps we could be told where that was?

Meanwhile we need to fix the constitution to ensure more transparent hr processes - it seems 'some people' have really allowed power and control to go to their heads: it is ugly
Gwen swinburn
...person who can make as much mess as she wants and walk away with a reference & leave all the problems behind her. Bit odd that she has been here months and again panic meetings are being called - let's hope that they get the protocols right, it would be a nice change. As we are told ms tanburn was recruited for her expertise in getting local plans through the process - perhaps we could be told where that was? Meanwhile we need to fix the constitution to ensure more transparent hr processes - it seems 'some people' have really allowed power and control to go to their heads: it is ugly Gwen swinburn gmsgop
  • Score: -115

4:27pm Fri 5 Sep 14

swh1963 says...

jaycee wrote:
Taking £700 a day as a bench mark she will have earned over £ 2,000,000 in the 11 years she has been an interim manager.Why have the council fallen for it ? It just shows the lack of quality in the current management structure.She is nothing more than a leech on the public purse and it's currently Yorks' finances which are suffering.
A consultant can expect about 70% utilisation if they're lucky ie 30% of their working day is not chargeable (for example winning new business, driving time, professional development). 70% of annual working days of 250 (50 weeks x 5 days per week) is 175 days, which at £700 per day gives a gross income of just over £120k. This compares well to the cost of a senior executive as it is but when you factor in that the consultant has no employment rights and can be brought in and dispensed with very flexibly, that there are no pension or lease car costs and most important of all that she or he will have no paid holidays, sick or maternity leave, it's obvious that compared to paying a senior manager full time in an employment contract, paying a consultant £700 a day represents value for money.
[quote][p][bold]jaycee[/bold] wrote: Taking £700 a day as a bench mark she will have earned over £ 2,000,000 in the 11 years she has been an interim manager.Why have the council fallen for it ? It just shows the lack of quality in the current management structure.She is nothing more than a leech on the public purse and it's currently Yorks' finances which are suffering.[/p][/quote]A consultant can expect about 70% utilisation if they're lucky ie 30% of their working day is not chargeable (for example winning new business, driving time, professional development). 70% of annual working days of 250 (50 weeks x 5 days per week) is 175 days, which at £700 per day gives a gross income of just over £120k. This compares well to the cost of a senior executive as it is but when you factor in that the consultant has no employment rights and can be brought in and dispensed with very flexibly, that there are no pension or lease car costs and most important of all that she or he will have no paid holidays, sick or maternity leave, it's obvious that compared to paying a senior manager full time in an employment contract, paying a consultant £700 a day represents value for money. swh1963
  • Score: 66

5:29pm Fri 5 Sep 14

courier46 says...

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.We don't want this Local plan!
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.We don't want this Local plan! courier46
  • Score: -57

5:50pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Jalymo says...

So what is her problem with communities that can raise funds to get a judicial review? It is legal democratic process.
Perhaps she will declare the proposals unlikely to pass the Government Enquiry and wield her axe to the whole daft Local Plan!
So what is her problem with communities that can raise funds to get a judicial review? It is legal democratic process. Perhaps she will declare the proposals unlikely to pass the Government Enquiry and wield her axe to the whole daft Local Plan! Jalymo
  • Score: -41

10:19pm Fri 5 Sep 14

strangebuttrue? says...

Spoken like a true consultant (of which in my time I have experience of many) a lot of big words strung together that say virtually nothing.

The first six paragraphs appear to say she is going to drive a horse and cart through local residents opinions and if we don't like whatever it is she has in mind, or if we dare to challenge her, she will spend a cartload of our money to fight us in the courts.

The remainder of the article appears to be an advert for herself telling us how brilliant she thinks she is and as she won't be around for the fall out it does not matter to her.

A sure fire vote winner (unless you are Labour) would be the party that says they will get rid of her.

Is that blunt enough for you Ms Tanburn?
Spoken like a true consultant (of which in my time I have experience of many) a lot of big words strung together that say virtually nothing. The first six paragraphs appear to say she is going to drive a horse and cart through local residents opinions and if we don't like whatever it is she has in mind, or if we dare to challenge her, she will spend a cartload of our money to fight us in the courts. The remainder of the article appears to be an advert for herself telling us how brilliant she thinks she is and as she won't be around for the fall out it does not matter to her. A sure fire vote winner (unless you are Labour) would be the party that says they will get rid of her. Is that blunt enough for you Ms Tanburn? strangebuttrue?
  • Score: -64

12:03am Sat 6 Sep 14

yuppieYork says...

Perhaps groups, and individuals, (head hunted?) from the emerging generations should be set up (16-21 years) from each ward - mixed demographic.

They consult the local plan, with mentorship on growth, representing long term 'city success strategy' - Set out by older parish councillors, in conjunction with the consulting planning manager.

Buy in?
Perhaps groups, and individuals, (head hunted?) from the emerging generations should be set up (16-21 years) from each ward - mixed demographic. They consult the local plan, with mentorship on growth, representing long term 'city success strategy' - Set out by older parish councillors, in conjunction with the consulting planning manager. Buy in? yuppieYork
  • Score: -2

12:29am Sat 6 Sep 14

strangebuttrue? says...

This was always going to be a prime one for the score adjusting thing after it has finished it's Friday night lurking in the pubs watering down the drinks. Could still be working on this as I am only minus 20 at the moment.
This was always going to be a prime one for the score adjusting thing after it has finished it's Friday night lurking in the pubs watering down the drinks. Could still be working on this as I am only minus 20 at the moment. strangebuttrue?
  • Score: -38

9:00am Sat 6 Sep 14

oi oi savaloy says...

swh1963 wrote:
jaycee wrote:
Taking £700 a day as a bench mark she will have earned over £ 2,000,000 in the 11 years she has been an interim manager.Why have the council fallen for it ? It just shows the lack of quality in the current management structure.She is nothing more than a leech on the public purse and it's currently Yorks' finances which are suffering.
A consultant can expect about 70% utilisation if they're lucky ie 30% of their working day is not chargeable (for example winning new business, driving time, professional development). 70% of annual working days of 250 (50 weeks x 5 days per week) is 175 days, which at £700 per day gives a gross income of just over £120k. This compares well to the cost of a senior executive as it is but when you factor in that the consultant has no employment rights and can be brought in and dispensed with very flexibly, that there are no pension or lease car costs and most important of all that she or he will have no paid holidays, sick or maternity leave, it's obvious that compared to paying a senior manager full time in an employment contract, paying a consultant £700 a day represents value for money.
thank you for that , sarah, sorry but not convinced!

(seems a bit odd that hers is the only comment on + and all the rest are - , the council mark down muppet as done them well)
[quote][p][bold]swh1963[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jaycee[/bold] wrote: Taking £700 a day as a bench mark she will have earned over £ 2,000,000 in the 11 years she has been an interim manager.Why have the council fallen for it ? It just shows the lack of quality in the current management structure.She is nothing more than a leech on the public purse and it's currently Yorks' finances which are suffering.[/p][/quote]A consultant can expect about 70% utilisation if they're lucky ie 30% of their working day is not chargeable (for example winning new business, driving time, professional development). 70% of annual working days of 250 (50 weeks x 5 days per week) is 175 days, which at £700 per day gives a gross income of just over £120k. This compares well to the cost of a senior executive as it is but when you factor in that the consultant has no employment rights and can be brought in and dispensed with very flexibly, that there are no pension or lease car costs and most important of all that she or he will have no paid holidays, sick or maternity leave, it's obvious that compared to paying a senior manager full time in an employment contract, paying a consultant £700 a day represents value for money.[/p][/quote]thank you for that , sarah, sorry but not convinced! (seems a bit odd that hers is the only comment on + and all the rest are - , the council mark down muppet as done them well) oi oi savaloy
  • Score: -37

9:54am Sat 6 Sep 14

mahlerfan says...

An email we sent to this person was ignored for weeks until we enlisted the help our local counciller . The reply we eventually received was unreadable in parts & we made an official complaint . She did apologise for the gibberish but still did not answer our specific points . Kersten England may think she is worth £700 a day plus VAT - I can't agree
An email we sent to this person was ignored for weeks until we enlisted the help our local counciller . The reply we eventually received was unreadable in parts & we made an official complaint . She did apologise for the gibberish but still did not answer our specific points . Kersten England may think she is worth £700 a day plus VAT - I can't agree mahlerfan
  • Score: -3

10:06am Sat 6 Sep 14

Paul Hepworth says...

courier46 wrote:
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.We don't want this Local plan!
Unfortunately for you, every Local Authority has to have one, by Whitehall decree.
[quote][p][bold]courier46[/bold] wrote: Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.We don't want this Local plan![/p][/quote]Unfortunately for you, every Local Authority has to have one, by Whitehall decree. Paul Hepworth
  • Score: 4

3:19pm Sat 6 Sep 14

nowthen says...

swh1963 wrote:
jaycee wrote:
Taking £700 a day as a bench mark she will have earned over £ 2,000,000 in the 11 years she has been an interim manager.Why have the council fallen for it ? It just shows the lack of quality in the current management structure.She is nothing more than a leech on the public purse and it's currently Yorks' finances which are suffering.
A consultant can expect about 70% utilisation if they're lucky ie 30% of their working day is not chargeable (for example winning new business, driving time, professional development). 70% of annual working days of 250 (50 weeks x 5 days per week) is 175 days, which at £700 per day gives a gross income of just over £120k. This compares well to the cost of a senior executive as it is but when you factor in that the consultant has no employment rights and can be brought in and dispensed with very flexibly, that there are no pension or lease car costs and most important of all that she or he will have no paid holidays, sick or maternity leave, it's obvious that compared to paying a senior manager full time in an employment contract, paying a consultant £700 a day represents value for money.
Meanwhile , in the real world , £ 700 is £100 short of my monthly take home income of which over £120 goes in council tax some of which is used to pay for looney left, interim gobbledygook spouters . You are completely out of touch with reality and unfortunately I'm bankrolling you ! Unbelievable !
[quote][p][bold]swh1963[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jaycee[/bold] wrote: Taking £700 a day as a bench mark she will have earned over £ 2,000,000 in the 11 years she has been an interim manager.Why have the council fallen for it ? It just shows the lack of quality in the current management structure.She is nothing more than a leech on the public purse and it's currently Yorks' finances which are suffering.[/p][/quote]A consultant can expect about 70% utilisation if they're lucky ie 30% of their working day is not chargeable (for example winning new business, driving time, professional development). 70% of annual working days of 250 (50 weeks x 5 days per week) is 175 days, which at £700 per day gives a gross income of just over £120k. This compares well to the cost of a senior executive as it is but when you factor in that the consultant has no employment rights and can be brought in and dispensed with very flexibly, that there are no pension or lease car costs and most important of all that she or he will have no paid holidays, sick or maternity leave, it's obvious that compared to paying a senior manager full time in an employment contract, paying a consultant £700 a day represents value for money.[/p][/quote]Meanwhile , in the real world , £ 700 is £100 short of my monthly take home income of which over £120 goes in council tax some of which is used to pay for looney left, interim gobbledygook spouters . You are completely out of touch with reality and unfortunately I'm bankrolling you ! Unbelievable ! nowthen
  • Score: 1

4:13pm Sat 6 Sep 14

magnard says...

nowthen wrote:
swh1963 wrote:
jaycee wrote:
Taking £700 a day as a bench mark she will have earned over £ 2,000,000 in the 11 years she has been an interim manager.Why have the council fallen for it ? It just shows the lack of quality in the current management structure.She is nothing more than a leech on the public purse and it's currently Yorks' finances which are suffering.
A consultant can expect about 70% utilisation if they're lucky ie 30% of their working day is not chargeable (for example winning new business, driving time, professional development). 70% of annual working days of 250 (50 weeks x 5 days per week) is 175 days, which at £700 per day gives a gross income of just over £120k. This compares well to the cost of a senior executive as it is but when you factor in that the consultant has no employment rights and can be brought in and dispensed with very flexibly, that there are no pension or lease car costs and most important of all that she or he will have no paid holidays, sick or maternity leave, it's obvious that compared to paying a senior manager full time in an employment contract, paying a consultant £700 a day represents value for money.
Meanwhile , in the real world , £ 700 is £100 short of my monthly take home income of which over £120 goes in council tax some of which is used to pay for looney left, interim gobbledygook spouters . You are completely out of touch with reality and unfortunately I'm bankrolling you ! Unbelievable !
I'm not sure on what you base your assumption that you're bankrolling me but you're wrong. You're also wrong in comparing your take home pay to someone else's gross pay, and in suggesting you pay council tax while they don't (they probably pay more than you do, and more income tax of course).
Some people earn more than others, get over it. My point was that at the higher earning levels it is often best value to pay a day rate, and that this particular day rate compares well to the salary CoYC would otherwise have to pay. That's the economic reality I'm in touch with.
[quote][p][bold]nowthen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]swh1963[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jaycee[/bold] wrote: Taking £700 a day as a bench mark she will have earned over £ 2,000,000 in the 11 years she has been an interim manager.Why have the council fallen for it ? It just shows the lack of quality in the current management structure.She is nothing more than a leech on the public purse and it's currently Yorks' finances which are suffering.[/p][/quote]A consultant can expect about 70% utilisation if they're lucky ie 30% of their working day is not chargeable (for example winning new business, driving time, professional development). 70% of annual working days of 250 (50 weeks x 5 days per week) is 175 days, which at £700 per day gives a gross income of just over £120k. This compares well to the cost of a senior executive as it is but when you factor in that the consultant has no employment rights and can be brought in and dispensed with very flexibly, that there are no pension or lease car costs and most important of all that she or he will have no paid holidays, sick or maternity leave, it's obvious that compared to paying a senior manager full time in an employment contract, paying a consultant £700 a day represents value for money.[/p][/quote]Meanwhile , in the real world , £ 700 is £100 short of my monthly take home income of which over £120 goes in council tax some of which is used to pay for looney left, interim gobbledygook spouters . You are completely out of touch with reality and unfortunately I'm bankrolling you ! Unbelievable ![/p][/quote]I'm not sure on what you base your assumption that you're bankrolling me but you're wrong. You're also wrong in comparing your take home pay to someone else's gross pay, and in suggesting you pay council tax while they don't (they probably pay more than you do, and more income tax of course). Some people earn more than others, get over it. My point was that at the higher earning levels it is often best value to pay a day rate, and that this particular day rate compares well to the salary CoYC would otherwise have to pay. That's the economic reality I'm in touch with. magnard
  • Score: 2

4:17pm Sat 6 Sep 14

magnard says...

magnard wrote:
nowthen wrote:
swh1963 wrote:
jaycee wrote:
Taking £700 a day as a bench mark she will have earned over £ 2,000,000 in the 11 years she has been an interim manager.Why have the council fallen for it ? It just shows the lack of quality in the current management structure.She is nothing more than a leech on the public purse and it's currently Yorks' finances which are suffering.
A consultant can expect about 70% utilisation if they're lucky ie 30% of their working day is not chargeable (for example winning new business, driving time, professional development). 70% of annual working days of 250 (50 weeks x 5 days per week) is 175 days, which at £700 per day gives a gross income of just over £120k. This compares well to the cost of a senior executive as it is but when you factor in that the consultant has no employment rights and can be brought in and dispensed with very flexibly, that there are no pension or lease car costs and most important of all that she or he will have no paid holidays, sick or maternity leave, it's obvious that compared to paying a senior manager full time in an employment contract, paying a consultant £700 a day represents value for money.
Meanwhile , in the real world , £ 700 is £100 short of my monthly take home income of which over £120 goes in council tax some of which is used to pay for looney left, interim gobbledygook spouters . You are completely out of touch with reality and unfortunately I'm bankrolling you ! Unbelievable !
I'm not sure on what you base your assumption that you're bankrolling me but you're wrong. You're also wrong in comparing your take home pay to someone else's gross pay, and in suggesting you pay council tax while they don't (they probably pay more than you do, and more income tax of course).
Some people earn more than others, get over it. My point was that at the higher earning levels it is often best value to pay a day rate, and that this particular day rate compares well to the salary CoYC would otherwise have to pay. That's the economic reality I'm in touch with.
Apologies for the confusion with user names - my original post was from a machine logged in with an old user name.
[quote][p][bold]magnard[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]nowthen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]swh1963[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jaycee[/bold] wrote: Taking £700 a day as a bench mark she will have earned over £ 2,000,000 in the 11 years she has been an interim manager.Why have the council fallen for it ? It just shows the lack of quality in the current management structure.She is nothing more than a leech on the public purse and it's currently Yorks' finances which are suffering.[/p][/quote]A consultant can expect about 70% utilisation if they're lucky ie 30% of their working day is not chargeable (for example winning new business, driving time, professional development). 70% of annual working days of 250 (50 weeks x 5 days per week) is 175 days, which at £700 per day gives a gross income of just over £120k. This compares well to the cost of a senior executive as it is but when you factor in that the consultant has no employment rights and can be brought in and dispensed with very flexibly, that there are no pension or lease car costs and most important of all that she or he will have no paid holidays, sick or maternity leave, it's obvious that compared to paying a senior manager full time in an employment contract, paying a consultant £700 a day represents value for money.[/p][/quote]Meanwhile , in the real world , £ 700 is £100 short of my monthly take home income of which over £120 goes in council tax some of which is used to pay for looney left, interim gobbledygook spouters . You are completely out of touch with reality and unfortunately I'm bankrolling you ! Unbelievable ![/p][/quote]I'm not sure on what you base your assumption that you're bankrolling me but you're wrong. You're also wrong in comparing your take home pay to someone else's gross pay, and in suggesting you pay council tax while they don't (they probably pay more than you do, and more income tax of course). Some people earn more than others, get over it. My point was that at the higher earning levels it is often best value to pay a day rate, and that this particular day rate compares well to the salary CoYC would otherwise have to pay. That's the economic reality I'm in touch with.[/p][/quote]Apologies for the confusion with user names - my original post was from a machine logged in with an old user name. magnard
  • Score: 2

4:21pm Sat 6 Sep 14

alanyork says...

swh1963 wrote:
jaycee wrote:
Taking £700 a day as a bench mark she will have earned over £ 2,000,000 in the 11 years she has been an interim manager.Why have the council fallen for it ? It just shows the lack of quality in the current management structure.She is nothing more than a leech on the public purse and it's currently Yorks' finances which are suffering.
A consultant can expect about 70% utilisation if they're lucky ie 30% of their working day is not chargeable (for example winning new business, driving time, professional development). 70% of annual working days of 250 (50 weeks x 5 days per week) is 175 days, which at £700 per day gives a gross income of just over £120k. This compares well to the cost of a senior executive as it is but when you factor in that the consultant has no employment rights and can be brought in and dispensed with very flexibly, that there are no pension or lease car costs and most important of all that she or he will have no paid holidays, sick or maternity leave, it's obvious that compared to paying a senior manager full time in an employment contract, paying a consultant £700 a day represents value for money.
YOU ARE HAVING A LAUGH ! I've been self-employed all my life and occasionally earnt £700 in a week but never in a day !
You obviously have never run your own Business ?
[quote][p][bold]swh1963[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jaycee[/bold] wrote: Taking £700 a day as a bench mark she will have earned over £ 2,000,000 in the 11 years she has been an interim manager.Why have the council fallen for it ? It just shows the lack of quality in the current management structure.She is nothing more than a leech on the public purse and it's currently Yorks' finances which are suffering.[/p][/quote]A consultant can expect about 70% utilisation if they're lucky ie 30% of their working day is not chargeable (for example winning new business, driving time, professional development). 70% of annual working days of 250 (50 weeks x 5 days per week) is 175 days, which at £700 per day gives a gross income of just over £120k. This compares well to the cost of a senior executive as it is but when you factor in that the consultant has no employment rights and can be brought in and dispensed with very flexibly, that there are no pension or lease car costs and most important of all that she or he will have no paid holidays, sick or maternity leave, it's obvious that compared to paying a senior manager full time in an employment contract, paying a consultant £700 a day represents value for money.[/p][/quote]YOU ARE HAVING A LAUGH ! I've been self-employed all my life and occasionally earnt £700 in a week but never in a day ! You obviously have never run your own Business ? alanyork
  • Score: -1

4:24pm Sat 6 Sep 14

alanyork says...

strangebuttrue? wrote:
Spoken like a true consultant (of which in my time I have experience of many) a lot of big words strung together that say virtually nothing.

The first six paragraphs appear to say she is going to drive a horse and cart through local residents opinions and if we don't like whatever it is she has in mind, or if we dare to challenge her, she will spend a cartload of our money to fight us in the courts.

The remainder of the article appears to be an advert for herself telling us how brilliant she thinks she is and as she won't be around for the fall out it does not matter to her.

A sure fire vote winner (unless you are Labour) would be the party that says they will get rid of her.

Is that blunt enough for you Ms Tanburn?
not really, say what you mean give her both barrels, better still get rid of her WHO IS SHE ?
[quote][p][bold]strangebuttrue?[/bold] wrote: Spoken like a true consultant (of which in my time I have experience of many) a lot of big words strung together that say virtually nothing. The first six paragraphs appear to say she is going to drive a horse and cart through local residents opinions and if we don't like whatever it is she has in mind, or if we dare to challenge her, she will spend a cartload of our money to fight us in the courts. The remainder of the article appears to be an advert for herself telling us how brilliant she thinks she is and as she won't be around for the fall out it does not matter to her. A sure fire vote winner (unless you are Labour) would be the party that says they will get rid of her. Is that blunt enough for you Ms Tanburn?[/p][/quote]not really, say what you mean give her both barrels, better still get rid of her WHO IS SHE ? alanyork
  • Score: -3

4:25pm Sat 6 Sep 14

magnard says...

alanyork wrote:
swh1963 wrote:
jaycee wrote:
Taking £700 a day as a bench mark she will have earned over £ 2,000,000 in the 11 years she has been an interim manager.Why have the council fallen for it ? It just shows the lack of quality in the current management structure.She is nothing more than a leech on the public purse and it's currently Yorks' finances which are suffering.
A consultant can expect about 70% utilisation if they're lucky ie 30% of their working day is not chargeable (for example winning new business, driving time, professional development). 70% of annual working days of 250 (50 weeks x 5 days per week) is 175 days, which at £700 per day gives a gross income of just over £120k. This compares well to the cost of a senior executive as it is but when you factor in that the consultant has no employment rights and can be brought in and dispensed with very flexibly, that there are no pension or lease car costs and most important of all that she or he will have no paid holidays, sick or maternity leave, it's obvious that compared to paying a senior manager full time in an employment contract, paying a consultant £700 a day represents value for money.
YOU ARE HAVING A LAUGH ! I've been self-employed all my life and occasionally earnt £700 in a week but never in a day !
You obviously have never run your own Business ?
Yes I have run my own business in the past actually and £700 a day is actually at the lower end in consultancy - if you get the big accountancy firms in you're looking at £1500 a day easily and the highest rate I saw was £4000 a day. Whether that kind of rate ever represents value for money is debatable but its not debatable those rates exist.
[quote][p][bold]alanyork[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]swh1963[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jaycee[/bold] wrote: Taking £700 a day as a bench mark she will have earned over £ 2,000,000 in the 11 years she has been an interim manager.Why have the council fallen for it ? It just shows the lack of quality in the current management structure.She is nothing more than a leech on the public purse and it's currently Yorks' finances which are suffering.[/p][/quote]A consultant can expect about 70% utilisation if they're lucky ie 30% of their working day is not chargeable (for example winning new business, driving time, professional development). 70% of annual working days of 250 (50 weeks x 5 days per week) is 175 days, which at £700 per day gives a gross income of just over £120k. This compares well to the cost of a senior executive as it is but when you factor in that the consultant has no employment rights and can be brought in and dispensed with very flexibly, that there are no pension or lease car costs and most important of all that she or he will have no paid holidays, sick or maternity leave, it's obvious that compared to paying a senior manager full time in an employment contract, paying a consultant £700 a day represents value for money.[/p][/quote]YOU ARE HAVING A LAUGH ! I've been self-employed all my life and occasionally earnt £700 in a week but never in a day ! You obviously have never run your own Business ?[/p][/quote]Yes I have run my own business in the past actually and £700 a day is actually at the lower end in consultancy - if you get the big accountancy firms in you're looking at £1500 a day easily and the highest rate I saw was £4000 a day. Whether that kind of rate ever represents value for money is debatable but its not debatable those rates exist. magnard
  • Score: 0

5:07pm Sat 6 Sep 14

nowthen says...

magnard wrote:
nowthen wrote:
swh1963 wrote:
jaycee wrote:
Taking £700 a day as a bench mark she will have earned over £ 2,000,000 in the 11 years she has been an interim manager.Why have the council fallen for it ? It just shows the lack of quality in the current management structure.She is nothing more than a leech on the public purse and it's currently Yorks' finances which are suffering.
A consultant can expect about 70% utilisation if they're lucky ie 30% of their working day is not chargeable (for example winning new business, driving time, professional development). 70% of annual working days of 250 (50 weeks x 5 days per week) is 175 days, which at £700 per day gives a gross income of just over £120k. This compares well to the cost of a senior executive as it is but when you factor in that the consultant has no employment rights and can be brought in and dispensed with very flexibly, that there are no pension or lease car costs and most important of all that she or he will have no paid holidays, sick or maternity leave, it's obvious that compared to paying a senior manager full time in an employment contract, paying a consultant £700 a day represents value for money.
Meanwhile , in the real world , £ 700 is £100 short of my monthly take home income of which over £120 goes in council tax some of which is used to pay for looney left, interim gobbledygook spouters . You are completely out of touch with reality and unfortunately I'm bankrolling you ! Unbelievable !
I'm not sure on what you base your assumption that you're bankrolling me but you're wrong. You're also wrong in comparing your take home pay to someone else's gross pay, and in suggesting you pay council tax while they don't (they probably pay more than you do, and more income tax of course).
Some people earn more than others, get over it. My point was that at the higher earning levels it is often best value to pay a day rate, and that this particular day rate compares well to the salary CoYC would otherwise have to pay. That's the economic reality I'm in touch with.
Where did I suggest that you don't pay council tax ? I've no problem with some people earning more than others and as for the fact that you pay more income tax , get over it. Comparing your salary to CoYC officers is telling, as they couldn't even set up legally compliant signs for a bridge traffic restriction. Please also explain why none of my council tax is going towards paying your salary .
[quote][p][bold]magnard[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]nowthen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]swh1963[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jaycee[/bold] wrote: Taking £700 a day as a bench mark she will have earned over £ 2,000,000 in the 11 years she has been an interim manager.Why have the council fallen for it ? It just shows the lack of quality in the current management structure.She is nothing more than a leech on the public purse and it's currently Yorks' finances which are suffering.[/p][/quote]A consultant can expect about 70% utilisation if they're lucky ie 30% of their working day is not chargeable (for example winning new business, driving time, professional development). 70% of annual working days of 250 (50 weeks x 5 days per week) is 175 days, which at £700 per day gives a gross income of just over £120k. This compares well to the cost of a senior executive as it is but when you factor in that the consultant has no employment rights and can be brought in and dispensed with very flexibly, that there are no pension or lease car costs and most important of all that she or he will have no paid holidays, sick or maternity leave, it's obvious that compared to paying a senior manager full time in an employment contract, paying a consultant £700 a day represents value for money.[/p][/quote]Meanwhile , in the real world , £ 700 is £100 short of my monthly take home income of which over £120 goes in council tax some of which is used to pay for looney left, interim gobbledygook spouters . You are completely out of touch with reality and unfortunately I'm bankrolling you ! Unbelievable ![/p][/quote]I'm not sure on what you base your assumption that you're bankrolling me but you're wrong. You're also wrong in comparing your take home pay to someone else's gross pay, and in suggesting you pay council tax while they don't (they probably pay more than you do, and more income tax of course). Some people earn more than others, get over it. My point was that at the higher earning levels it is often best value to pay a day rate, and that this particular day rate compares well to the salary CoYC would otherwise have to pay. That's the economic reality I'm in touch with.[/p][/quote]Where did I suggest that you don't pay council tax ? I've no problem with some people earning more than others and as for the fact that you pay more income tax , get over it. Comparing your salary to CoYC officers is telling, as they couldn't even set up legally compliant signs for a bridge traffic restriction. Please also explain why none of my council tax is going towards paying your salary . nowthen
  • Score: 0

5:18pm Sat 6 Sep 14

magnard says...

You're confused - I'm not employed by CoYC in any way nor have I ever been and none of your council tax goes towards my income.
You compare your take home pay with Sarah Tanburn's gross day rate and say that £120 of it goes on council tax (as if some of hers doesn't also go to council tax). That's a meaningless comparison. I was comparing the likely cost of employing her as an interim with the likely cost of employing someone on an employment contract in the same role. In terms of that comparison it is better value for money to use an interim - I wasn't commenting on whether paying people at that kind of level (whether as consultants, interims, or employees) is value for money in itself but in general you get get what you pay for, and if you pay substantially less for a post you'll get substantially less quality applicants.
You're confused - I'm not employed by CoYC in any way nor have I ever been and none of your council tax goes towards my income. You compare your take home pay with Sarah Tanburn's gross day rate and say that £120 of it goes on council tax (as if some of hers doesn't also go to council tax). That's a meaningless comparison. I was comparing the likely cost of employing her as an interim with the likely cost of employing someone on an employment contract in the same role. In terms of that comparison it is better value for money to use an interim - I wasn't commenting on whether paying people at that kind of level (whether as consultants, interims, or employees) is value for money in itself but in general you get get what you pay for, and if you pay substantially less for a post you'll get substantially less quality applicants. magnard
  • Score: 0

5:48pm Sat 6 Sep 14

courier46 says...

Paul Hepworth wrote:
courier46 wrote:
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz


zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz


zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz


zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz


zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz


zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz


zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz


zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.We don't want this Local plan!
Unfortunately for you, every Local Authority has to have one, by Whitehall decree.
You didn`t read my comment,i said "this local plan" not a local plan.
Keep up!!!!!
[quote][p][bold]Paul Hepworth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]courier46[/bold] wrote: Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.We don't want this Local plan![/p][/quote]Unfortunately for you, every Local Authority has to have one, by Whitehall decree.[/p][/quote]You didn`t read my comment,i said "this local plan" not a local plan. Keep up!!!!! courier46
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree