BASW must have mixed feelings about Lisa Arthurworrey's successful appeal against the GSCC's refusal to register her. Technically it should be hailing it as a victory for its representation service. But in its judgement the tribunal has made it clear it believes BASW has no reason to congratulate itself. Laying into the organisation, it says Arthuworrey succeeded "despite not because of her representation". It says that social workers are "entitled to the best possible" representation," too, infering that she was short-changed. I sat through the hearing and it was clear the chair was very unimpressed when Arthurworrey's representative announced he would be unable to attend to sum up his case because he had commitments elsewhere.

 

 

 Well, in the light of what you've written there, I'd certainly have to think twice about it. But what would the alternatives be? Although I'm a member of Unison, I'm not exactly dazzled by their support - and certainly don't think I could rely on them to be any better. 

And some representation must be better than none! 

I will be honest sally I wouldnt trust any of them to represent me if I needed help they are as much use as a chocolate fire guard. (no disrespect to chocolate or fire guards intended)

Over the course of 15 years of practice I have been very unimpressed with Unison, who I don't believe make a good job of representing the profession at all. Fortunately, I have not needed them to represent me personally, but I have known others who have needed support and who have been badly let down. Maybe it would make more sense for groups of individuals to pay a monthly amount to retain the services of a decent solicitor. 

 

Do you have any more confidence in BASW than Unison, Pete? You've made an interesting point about solicitors. For most people solicitors' fees are prohibitively expensive, which is why they choose their union or BASW to represent them.

Why do you say that, Lins? Have you had a bad experience yourself?

I havent personally but I know many of colleagues that have. Out of a point of interest I work now for the NSPCC and we have accessto solicitors free for personal as well as professional consultations.

Wow! What an amazing perk. I don't think I've ever heard of an employer doing that.

 

I don't think I would Sally. I resigned from Unison a few years ago and joined BASW but then rejoined Unison. There was a lot of bullying and victimising going on with my then employer and lots of people lost their jobs unfairly. Despite Unison representing my colleaguesl so badly, I still felt that they were more likely to be robust in defending me should I need defending. I don't know if that was the right or wrong thing to do, fortunately I never had to put my decision to the test. My feeling was that BASW are more intetrested in defending the profession than the individuals within it ( I might be wrong).

Me thinks Ian needs to reflect very seriously on his position and BASW members need to ask how their very high membership fees are being used - obviously not in employing lawyers to represent Lisa. But then, one suspects, the travel expenses and hosting (drinks/grub) allowances are of more importance and requiring much greater drain on resources.

Gravy train - mmmmmm 

BASW, in its youth (I recall) was once af orce to be seriously considered - now, well mmmmm. I tend to think the CST have made a good point, and BASW, despite their protests, are shown to be not the best friend (or even competent friend) of a profession it suggests it represents.

Not being a member (tho former member), I nevertheless suggest some new leadership and a serious purge of the staff, top to bottom.

Shame on you BASW! 

Wilt 

 

 

 You definitely raise some good points but the question remains, for me anyway, that there isn't much alternative.. 

Does anyone from BASW want to come back on Wilt's points? The experience of one of our reporters suggests that BASW isn't going wild on junkets!

On the wider point, it's a pretty depressing picture - if the choice social workers have is between no representation and poor representation. Does anyone have any good stories of being represented by BASW, Unison or anyone else?

 

I have coincidentally some years ago attended a function at Carden Park Hotel – very nice too, especially if you like golf as it has a world renowned golf course. Unfortunately I am among those who believe golf spoils a good walk. Fortunately I was not paying the expenses. However, I never knew that BASW owned a night club. Now that is a revelation. 

The article (blog) in question (http://www.communitycare.co.uk/blogs/social-work-blog/2008/05/social-care-conference-caterin.html) is about an ‘annual bash’ whereas my point in my piece was about the seemingly endless conferences attended by BASW staff, the costs of which must be phenomenal. I am no spoil-sport wanting to deny people their annual get together, but I do really wonder why so many staff and its CEO in particular need to go to so many conferences, all over the UK and abroad. Is this the wisest use of scarce resources, especially when the costs (not insubstantial) of employing a barrister for Lisa would be closer to the core values of BASW? 

On the point of good representation by BASW, yes in actual fact I do know of good examples of social care workers being represented. A simple search of the relevant Care Standards Tribunal findings on the CST website will illustrate this, apart from a few minor other examples of which I have heard. And I take on board the points made by the BASW CEO that in the end Lisa won the day, but of course the CST were quite clear that on this most critical of occasions they failed to deliver in any adequate fashion, and I repeat shame on you BASW. 

I recall a personal experience as a BASW (and BASW Independents) member of a function arranged for Independents to meet at the House of Commons with a then MP who had a social work background, as his guest. I was unable to attend for a variety of reasons but in part because I was attempting to address a complaint from a vexatious complainant which BASW were meant to be assisting me with. Where was the head of the BASW Representations Service when I needed to speak to him – at the House of Commons? And who might have paid those costs? 

This issue, as with Lisa, is about core values, priorities and whether or not BASW employees and their expenses are properly monitored (as with MPs) by the membership and the profession as a whole. Indeed whether BASW are in fact fit for purpose, and not if they choose to have their annual bash on some sticky floored and dubious nightclub which they own (mmmmm). 

I reiterate, BASW needs a root and branch look at what it is they do, how much money is spent on expenses for conferences attended by staff and in fact if they really are achieving anything, let alone their core aims. 

Wilt

 

As a former Council Member and Chair of Membership Services (I left after being unjustly accused by a member of high standing of unacceptable behaviour at an AGM) I have to come to BASW's defence to some degree arising from what 'Wilt' has stated. I was going to resist making further Posting but here goes!

BASW does not own a Night Club - as if it would! It did sell part of it's leased building to people who opened it up as a Nighclub. I never did agree with this line of action but it was totally legitimate and made good business sense.

In respect of expenses BASW staff (and other Officers & Members) have to submit proper claims for expenses and there are quite tight rules and regulations. The mileage rate was appallingly low I recollect!

Given also their low numbers of salaried staff a number of journeys / Conference attendances have to take place - it is only fair that they stay in reasonable accommodation. There are certainly no paid 'junkets' - I have no doubt that staff and Officers are quite frugal and circumspect in how they spend the Association's money.

Now back to whether they ought to have had a solicitor / QC represent Lisa Arthurworry - I believe that they should in view of the issues, the National and International interest and the multi-disciplinary elements.

I would never wish BASW anything but well but 'Wilt' raises important issues which it is perhaps best that an ex-member responds to without having had any contact with anyone in BASW prior to doing so. I have a knowledge of BASW's internal workings and when I was  Council Member (and hence, a Company Director) I would never have accepted anything that was less than totally honest, ethical and totally open to scrutiny - BASW uses nationally recognised and very expensive and astute auditors.