CSC axes another 640 UK IT workers
NHS computer bungle biz slashes Blighty workforce by over 1,000
Bungling IT services firm CSC is to lay off a further 640 IT workers in the UK on top of the 500 bods it is shaving from its NHS account.
"We can confirm that we have started a formal 90-day consultation process in the UK which could reduce the number of people working in our UK business by an anticipated number of 640 people," a CSC spokesperson said in a statement emailed to The Reg.
"This action is necessary because the IT services market is changing, and our customers want competitive, new services with different contract and delivery models."
The US company said back in February that it was looking for voluntary redundancies and reassignments for 500 staff who had worked on the botched NHS patient records project.
Last week, union Unite held a lunchtime protest over the 500 jobs, claiming that CSC had enough voluntary redundancies to cover the job losses and should thus be able to avoid firing anyone, but that the firm was going to anyway.
"We have put forward a detailed plan which will avoid any compulsory redundancies in the company," Unite national officer Kevin O'Gallagher said.
“However, these plans have fallen on deaf ears. Our members are now taking to the streets to get their voices heard. As a union, we will do everything in our power to support these workers though this very uncertain time.”
CSC insisted that consultations were still ongoing, and that it had made "significant progress" with volunteer redundancies and redeployments and was hoping for more.
The new round of cuts is "separate and independent of the NHS consultation programme", the CSC spokesperson said today.
Again, the IT services giant is looking for volunteers to leave the firm and hoping to reassign people to other parts of the firm, but with the lay-offs now pipped to total 1,140 people, it is becoming less and less likely that the company will get the necessary offers.
CSC said it was still committed to the UK market, as well it should be since it just bagged a deal with the Ministry of Defence to take over pay, HR and pensions administration from HP last week. The company also has a contract with Transport for London to provide IT services including real-time customer information and desktop support.
"We are confident that these carefully targeted and managed reductions will not impact the overall quality of service we provide to our customers," the spokesperson said. ®
What's wrong with buying British?
Why do we have to outsource these contracts to overseas companies? We've certainly got the required skills in the UK, and with CSC laying off a good portion of their IT workforce in the UK it's not exactly going to be difficult to find employees to carry out the work.
All too often we're seeing overseas companies winning UK government and infrastructure contracts, companies who have little first-hand knowledge of the UK, and who ultimately funnel the (excessive) profits out of the UK thereby damaging our economy.
Re: What's wrong with buying British?
You'll never get a senior management role in the public sector, with that attitude.
Ditching your staff, then having them rehired (on worse conditions) by an inefficient private sector organisation, with one eye on its bottom line, and no eyes on your needs, is the way to go. OK, so services get worse, but at least you'll have a nice fat kickback to enjoy, and your PA can keep you insulated from the goings on in the real world.
Can anyone state exactly how much cost savings there have been with the outsourcing of ICT from government hands to the private sector?
I ask because I seem to remember that was the rallying cry back in the day when these contracts went out to the private sector...how the private sector was more efficient, innovative, reactive to trends etc.
I suspect that the answer is pretty much 'bollocks all'.
Pint coz ....well its a pint innit?
Re: Cost Savings
"Can anyone state exactly how much cost savings there have been with the outsourcing of ICT from government hands to the private sector?"
Not without using a minus sign. You think the answer is "pretty much bollocks all". During my involvement with a procurement process in the NHS, where I several times pointed out that for the same money you could get people in-house and have some change left-over, I know for a fact that money was lost through outsourcing to private companies. It was eventually made clear that I was there to lend legitimacy to the process (as a representative of my group) rather than to actually be of use.
Really, the entire idea of outsourcing: that Cost of Work + Private Profit < Cost of Work is dubious. It presuposes a wonderful level of improved efficiency to be introduced by virtue of Private Enterprise. There's a lot of wastage in the NHS, but not sure it's enough to counter the literal billions of profit that various companies have made out it.
Oh, and that outsourced company they eventually hired? They were a complete joke, failed in their role and then walked off at the end of the year with the money. All because - and I quote from one of the people on the decision board - "by outsourcing it, it's not our responsibility".
Re: What's wrong with buying British?
"quality doesn't come into it in MBA land its all about the size of your team"
You have a point there, and it does explain the headlong flight into outsourcing offshore.