G4S cant secure Olympics

[tinfoilhat]

No, I'm not saying that at all, I'm saying necessary services should not be run for profit. I'm not against businesses making profit but I am against businesses making obscene profit. I am also against private businesses using state tax money and staff.

 

If a business is fair to it's customers and staff, pays tax why can't it make billions ? And because of the size of the state machine most businesses make money from the state because they supply them. Could be basics like stationary to important integral partnerships (like them or not) like BAE systems. Are we going to ditch them (and the R&D and expertise) or nationalise them ?

 

And as this is related to g4s, they were barking mad if they thought they could fulfil the contract. I mean, who in their right mind would either ditch an existing job for 6 weeks work, or ditch benefits for 6 weeks work only for to wait 6 weeks to get on benefits again ? Should have been a partnership using alot of different companies with either the army or police running the show. Whole thing is a joint public/private **** up.

[green]

 

And as this is related to g4s, they were barking mad if they thought they could fulfil the contract. I mean, who in their right mind would either ditch an existing job for 6 weeks work, or ditch benefits for 6 weeks work only for to wait 6 weeks to get on benefits again ? Should have been a partnership using alot of different companies with either the army or police running the show. Whole thing is a joint public/private **** up.

 

I used to work for Securicor many moons ago before it became G4S. A contract this size would have had numerous levels of management & logistics working on it. Im shocked, they didnt think through the actual hours, terms of employment for new staff and take up ratios. In the old Securicor days, we would have been all over this like a rash....directors included. Im simply shocked that they couldnt see the pit falls in this contract. Im now wondering if, they thought they were going to do some kind of training deal with the A4E's of this world, and take staff up from them, but the recent fallout from those said companies inhibited this.

 

Who knows......but as you say, its a joint public/private **** up.

[donkey]

Why all the niggling? As long as some bloated multinational corporation with links to top politicians and major international financial institutions has got to pocket billions of our money for doing sod all - Isn't that what the Olympics is all about? Not to mention the NHS (oh I just did), and transport and infrastructure etc. Isn't that what everything is all about? Three cheers for UK PLC. Company directorships and champers all round!

[saunaman]

How timely is it that the CPS, only now , after 2 years , decide that G4S has no case to answer in regards to Jimmy Mubenga's death on a 'plane taking him back to Angola . Witnesses on the plane describe they heard him calling for help to other passengers whilst being restrained by G4S .

 

The CPS lawyers argued that no evidence could prove to a jury that the guards used illegal or deadly force . So how could a guy be capable of shouting for help immediately before allegedly suffering a cardiac arrest ? Not quite convinced about this , the timing of the judgement also seems a little suspect .

 

Hope G4S don't have fingers in pies at the CPS ..........

[green]

How timely is it that the CPS, only now , after 2 years , decide that G4S has no case to answer in regards to Jimmy Mubenga's death on a 'plane taking him back to Angola . Witnesses on the plane describe they heard him calling for help to other passengers whilst being restrained by G4S .

 

The CPS lawyers argued that no evidence could prove to a jury that the guards used illegal or deadly force . So how could a guy be capable of shouting for help immediately before allegedly suffering a cardiac arrest ? Not quite convinced about this , the timing of the judgement also seems a little suspect .

 

Hope G4S don't have fingers in pies at the CPS ..........

 

When it comes to the Dark Arts, the CPS are right up there, with the MET.

[Rupert_Baehr]

When G4S were 'Group 4 Security' and had the contract to carry criminals around in sweat boxes, they managed to lose a few.

 

They've obviously screwed up this contract, but which firm is big enough to provide 12 or 13,000 trained, security-cleared people for a 3-week job?

 

Is there a British Company, or should the government (and Locog) have looked overseas?

 

I wonder whether there would have been any 'public comment' had the government / Locog given the contract to 'Wacky-Hat' (or perhaps even Blackwater?)

 

Was anybody really surprised that G4S had difficulty in obtaining clearances for so many people?

 

Wasn't there some concern (a few years ago when teachers were required to be cleared to work with children) that there would be insufficient time to clear them all before the start of the school term?

 

Are there no data which suggest how long it would take to clear, say, 10,000 people?

 

Clearances take time and cost money. G4S couldn't get the job done in time. - Hardly a surprise.

 

Nearly all servicemen hold a NV clearance, so there is no problem with clearing them.

 

G4S couldn't (by their own admission) recruit sufficient cleared personnel but presumably they had already arranged accommodation for the people who would be working for them. (They weren't going to try to put them all under London Bridge every night, were they?)

 

Presumably, they had also arranged catering for the staff they were going to employ and they had arranged transport to take those staff to and from their place of work.

 

The Army might have to provide the security-cleared manpower, but will they not be able to use the accommodation, catering facilities and transport arrangements which had already been set up by G4S?

 

I can understand why G4S might've had difficulty in hiring and clearing sufficient personnel, but I wonder whether they have been asked about the arrangements they made to accommodate, feed and transport those personnel?

 

If they didn't make such arrangements, why should they be paid a penny?

[Darth Vader]

 

 

 

I can understand why G4S might've had difficulty in hiring and clearing sufficient personnel, but I wonder whether they have been asked about the arrangements they made to accommodate, feed and transport those personnel?

 

If they didn't make such arrangements, why should they be paid a penny?

 

Well, the spokesperson for G4S on the news blamed the costs of accommodation, but if Ousetune's mate is anything to go by, they had to sort their own accommodation out. I'd say this needs thoroughly investigating, but that would probably be a pre-determined outcome, and just more jobs for the boys employed to 'investigate'.

[Anna B]

Yet after admitting that the security at the Olympics was a 'humiliating shambles' Nick Buckles, chief exec of G4S, was insisting they were still entitled to a £57million management fee...

[Rupert_Baehr]

Well, the spokesperson for G4S on the news blamed the costs of accommodation, but if Ousetune's mate is anything to go by, they had to sort their own accommodation out. I'd say this needs thoroughly investigating, but that would probably be a pre-determined outcome, and just more jobs for the boys employed to 'investigate'.

 

'Costs of accommodation'? - What did they expect? Did they expect to find 10 or 12,000 people who lived in the local area and would be prepared to work for them for a few weeks?

 

How much would it cost to rent somewhere to live within a few miles of the Olympic Park?

 

It's all very well to say: "Here's £8.60 an hour. You will have to find your own accommodation, you will have to make your own way to work (travelling before public transport starts - and there will be nowhere for you to park your car) (If you can afford to run one on that money) and you will have to arrange your own catering."

 

You can say that ... but how many people would be interested in working under those terms?

 

If you have to accommodate 10-12,000 people within travelling distance of the Olympic Park (and remember, many of them will have to be there before the punters get there and others will have to be there after they leave) then you are going to need a lot of accommodation and it will have to be pretty close to where the people are going to work.

 

What were the transport arrangements? - I understand that there is some concern that it may be difficult to move those attending the Olympics around. Are those organisations which are shifting the public around going to start work a few hours earlier (and work a few hours later) to move the support staff?

 

Then there's the catering problem. 10-12,000 people get through quite a bit of food each day. (That's 10-12000 on top of those who are going to be fleeced by the traders serving the public. )

 

In the past, it has been claimed that 5000 people were fed with 5 loaves and 2 fish.

 

Were they planning on using 14 or so loaves and 5 fish?

 

I doubt you'd get away with feeding your 10 or 12000 employees fish sandwiches every day for 3 or 4 weeks.

 

If they didn't organise catering, accommodation and transport for their employees, then - although they might be able to talk their way out of the 'obtaining manpower' problem - I do hope somebody is going to prosecute (as opposed to 'sue') senior staff in that company.

 

If the government doesn't act decisively - and act in such a manner as would tell the world that they are not prepared to be jerked around by G4S - then perhaps they should be replaced.

 

But replaced by what?

[Rupert_Baehr]

Yet after admitting that the security at the Olympics was a 'humiliating shambles' Nick Buckles, chief exec of G4S, was insisting they were still entitled to a £57million management fee...

 

I saw his performance on TV.

 

It was embarrassing.

 

How the hell did he manage to be put in charge of anything?

 

I wouldn't put him in charge of a toilet roll.

 

Even if I had two.