Board index ‹ Off Topic ‹ The Sin Bin ‹ Olympic Army

So now G4S who got the gig to provide Olympics security, at a tender of £300m, have seemingly fscked it up, and are about 35% short of the staff they need. Despite record numbers of unemployed and a double dip recession.

Or, as their PR man put it, they have "some issues in relation to workforce supply". http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18804547

Solution? Easy. Having told the Army that tens of thousands of them are facing the chop, rope in what will now be a total of 17,000 on duty, cancelling their summer holidays.

Increasingly, you couldn't make any of this up.

[Big Graeme]

What they mean is they couldn't find people to do this for the crappy wages they were paying.

All they had to do was pay a decent rate for the job, offer basic accommodation and transport and for the dole to make it easier for people to take these short term contracts.

It will be interesting to see just how much, if anything, G4S will be fined or have payments withheld/clawed back. I would hope it will be the total cost of providing fully-trained soldiers and not the minimum-waged dopes that G4S were relying on. Apparently the Home Office were comfortable with a JiT provision, in order to keep G4S's training costs to a minimum and were, up to the weekend, happy with the "we'll be alright on the night" messages they were getting.

Although this is a very serious matter, of more concern to me is the increasing use of the likes of G4S in future policing. What would've happened in last summer's riots if these clowns were anywhere near the problem?

You have to ask though, what sort of "security" can G4S offer other than a nightwatchman type duty or guiding visitors around the sites - a job that is already being fulfilled by free volunteers (thousands of them).

Bag searches and metal detector manning maybe, but I do hope that we weren't relying on them to counter a terrorist attack, which, lets be honest, is the main concern - its one thing to have a temporarily employed and quickly trained guard in a hat three sizes too big standing at the door way of one of the athletes quarters, but quite another thing to have that guard as the first line of defence in a Munich Olympics style terrorist attack.

I do hope there is a Plan B.

[Billinge_Lump]

cod'ead wrote:

It will be interesting to see just how much, if anything, G4S will be fined or have payments withheld/clawed back. I would hope it will be the total cost of providing fully-trained soldiers and not the minimum-waged dopes that G4S were relying on. Apparently the Home Office were comfortable with a JiT provision, in order to keep G4S's training costs to a minimum and were, up to the weekend, happy with the "we'll be alright on the night" messages they were getting.

Although this is a very serious matter, of more concern to me is the increasing use of the likes of G4S in future policing. What would've happened in last summer's riots if these clowns were anywhere near the problem?

Apparently it's £50,000 per day per venue for not meeting staffing levels at venues.

Billinge_Lump wrote:

Apparently it's £50,000 per day per venue for not meeting staffing levels at venues.

If so, that seems a bloody strange penalty. It would probably be cheaper for G4S to turn round now and say "we can't cover any of it, here's your £50k per day, per venue back, we'll just bank the difference ta"

JerryChicken wrote:

You have to ask though, what sort of "security" can G4S offer other than a nightwatchman type duty or guiding visitors around the sites - a job that is already being fulfilled by free volunteers (thousands of them).

Bag searches and metal detector manning maybe, but I do hope that we weren't relying on them to counter a terrorist attack, which, lets be honest, is the main concern - its one thing to have a temporarily employed and quickly trained guard in a hat three sizes too big standing at the door way of one of the athletes quarters, but quite another thing to have that guard as the first line of defence in a Munich Olympics style terrorist attack.

I do hope there is a Plan B.

I don't think G4S are expected to be firing the missiles from the roofs of the surrounding blocks of flats.

[Big Graeme]

JerryChicken wrote:

I do hope there is a Plan B.

That would mean having a plan A to start with.

Personally I don’t see the problem, why not force the unemployed and those claiming disability benefits to fill the shortfall? For heaven’s sake those in wheelchairs can even provide their own seating as they man the entrances.

If we could only find some well meaning, professionally run, French organisation that could provide us with the names and addresses of those fit for work.

[Big Graeme]

Listening to the phone ins last night and this morning it sounds like a huge cockup by G4S rather than the availability of a workforce.