Queen Put at Risk by Workfare Provider

1306157961queen-elizabeth-ii-british-elite-1

At 2300 Saturday 2nd of June 2012, a coachload of Tired, untrained and ill equipped people left Bristol by coach for London and the Queens Jubilee.

At around 0240 they were dropped off by the side of a road with their Baggage and Tents and left stood for more than an hour along with 80 other people.

Having Had no sleep at 0415 these people were told that at 0500 they would be starting a 16 hour shift.

No these are not migrant workers, these are Security Staff for the Queen.

Ages ranging from 16 to 50 with one thing in common. Unpaid and on “work experience”.

Almost all of those that left Bristol last night were still not SIA qualified, Some had been told they would be paid for working and that they should “Sign Off” benefits before starting, which turned out to be a falsehood, mistake or lie, I cannot say which.

But at the very least I can say that Tomorrows People, the DWP Service provider, who handle these people, are Failing them Badly.

Tomorrows people Placed young claimants on an SIA style course with a company who Break DWP rules and Regulations on working Hours, Travel distance and Responsibility for Training and Equipment.

For some this will be the First experience of work, for some it is the First time they have been away from home, for all of them it will be one of the most depressing and soul destroying things they will have done.

So “Why do they do it?”

All those people have been promised Proper paid work at the Olympic Games with pay of up to £9000 for doing it.

Well a carrot like that to people who may not have worked in a long time if at all can make them do the most stupid things.

Tomorrows people Need to sort out their so called subcontractor.

The Organisors of the Jubilee need to vet their security subcontracters more carefully.

And the DWP need to make sure that All those promised paid work during the games are given it.

Hopefully none of the untrained security staff who have all been up for more than 12 hours so far will be called upon to protect  the Queen, because they will be unable to do anything due to exhaustion.

Additional.

Last night I drove  to a campsite just off the M11 and collected 2 of the people let down by CPuk, who, it turns out organised (if thats the right word) this clusterfck of Work experience.

When I arrived close to 2300 hours They were stood in a field soaking wet, shivering with cold and close to exhaustion. One was dressed only in Shirt and slacks as she had not been provided with any waterproof coat, save for a lightweight poncho and a hi vis vest for the jubilee event.

Some muppet had put up their tents with doors open and the insides were soaked along with their possessions, even if they had decided to stay they would have to have sleep in wet tents and sleeping bags.

At 0900 Sunday morning they had been given a paper bag with a Sandwich, Muffin and packet of crisps in and told ” dont eat that now its your lunch”. A paper bag, in heavy rain, 3 hours before lunchtime with no way of keeping it dry.

One of them had been refused use of toilet facilities  and hadnt been able to P for almost 24 hours, she had been forced to change into ” uniform” for the event in the open as there were no changing facilities with other male staff refusing to give her privacy, ” I had to change next to a van in public and a bloody red bus stopped almost right in front of me”..

This is a young woman , First time in london, first time away overnight without a member of her family trying to comply with DWP rules.

Well as far as I am concerned she did herself proud. While others had given up and left in the morning , she stuck it through til after the Queen had passed and the crowd dispersed before asking for help.

She has taken a couple of photos and has agreed to send them to me when she wakes for posting.

She slept almost all the way back to Bristol last night, and when she was helped into her home byan elder brother she was obviously finding it hard to walk.

I had only had to drive up and back and I felt like crap when I got into my home 20 minutes later.

As an additional comment I hope that Prince Philip gets better soon.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jun/04/jubilee-pageant-unemployed for Press cover.

It is a shame however that contrary to Close Protection uk statement that training had been completed, I know that some staff had not yet been trained in First Aid ( a requirement) or taught how to safely restrain people without causing injury ( a requirement).

To say that this was to weed out those unsuitable for working in the security industry is pure BS. Close Protection uk wanted free labour.

I am a little confused by a comment in the Guardian, please can someone clarify this?

As one of those workers who was there I have to say that the opinions of people who weren’t there is frankly disgusting. The experiance we gained was priceless and the training we have received was also priceless to use but very costly to the company. This newspaper paper has taken the lies of a few unhappy employees and ran with it too further their own political opinions. This terrible untruthful article could lead to the unemployment of 50 people just because a few people couldn’t handle it. I would love to discuss this with the editor but I am sure he doesn’t care as he has furthered Labours political message. I am also shocked that John Prescott has waded into the subject based on a one sided article why not ask the people who were there. There was 90 or so people who loved and can’t wait to go to the Olympics but your poor journalism has now ruined that and could see us back on the dole line

According to CPuk they sent upto 80 people there, we know that this story concerns 30 of them collectivly and 2 in particular.

That leaves 50 people ( my maths teacher would be so proud) so who were the 90 happy ones who would do it again?, and considering a few left in the morning rather than put up with the treatment they recieved, why has CPuk not mentioned these happy 90 people. Could it be that they have bussed more in from elsewhere or does Mr or Mrs Disgustedreader need to rethink wether his/her statement rings true.

Also I recieved this message from someone trustworthy so i shall post it.

“I gather they were initially turned down as unfit to hold an Olympic contract. Well, “not skilled enough”. More in Guardian tomorrow.”

If indeed true , why have CPuk been given the contracts after all??

A comment on Guardian website which caught my eye in response to:

watershed99, 5 June 2012 10:18PM

What I think would be interesting at this point would be for someone to explain whether

Molly Prince, director of Vision Lifestyle Ltd. and Commitment Fitness Ltd., both registered at 15 King St, Hindley, Wigan, WN2 3AW, whose director ID number is 916699536 is the same person as

Mary Prince, director of Close Protection UK Ltd, and several other companies (now dissolved), also registered at that address, and director ID number is 911160566 given that

Molly Prince, who is a Bokwa Fitness Instructor, appears to be the spokesperson for Close Protection UK Ltd., and apparently is also the person who set up the Leadership Development Centre with the help of Salford University’s Business Incubation Unit.

There will be some, as there always are, who will believe that the 2 kids mentioned in this are both ‘Scroungers’ or using this story to get money, so let me tell you all something that hasn’t made it to press.

Earlier tonight I had a conversation with the Guardians picture desk. The work experience person who took the photo below was asked if they wanted to be paid for it as other papers were requesting the right to use it. Normally the Guardian would get between £80 – £100 for allowing that and the person who took the picture gets Half.

That work experience person refused to accept the offer of cash for the picture.

You may be thinking its only £40 -£50  but thats each time another paper uses it.

If the story was a way to make money they could have , just by saying yes.

I know I should have posted this earlier but other things on my mind so here it is now.

51.674368,0.105426  if you paste that into Google maps you will see where CPuk had their staff ‘Camping’ tho without the rain and the mud.

Not easy to get to in the dark and the rain , even harder to class as ‘onsite’ for the jubilee.

Just been told that 1 of the mothers of work exp kids may be on BBC Radio 2 Live programme. Programme starts at 12 weekdays. I can confirm that John Prescott will be on it and has been contacted by other kids and parents whose children were treated in the same miserable fashion.

Taken from Tomorrows people Statement on Twitter “For the clients over 25 taking part, it is not in their interest to be paid for short term work if they are receiving Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA), because they would have to sign off the benefit when they take on a position and back on again immediately after. The clients taking part who were under 25 are part of the modern apprenticeship programme and therefore came off benefit to take up these employed positions as they are being paid the standard apprenticeship”

More than 1 person on that was UNDER 25 and not paid.

http://www.tomorrows-people.org.uk/news/2012/06/06/statement-from-tomorrows-people-regarding-our-clients-participation-in-work-experience-over-the-jubilee-weekend/

please feel free to see how much they truly care about the jobseekers in their care.

Prospects an associate of CPuk have removed this from public view also  https://viewer.zoho.com/docs/lcbbbie  how many other sanctioned companies are in this scam?

Sent this to Tomorrows people in an email.

It saddens me that you would make so many inaccurate statements . You should be protecting your clients not your contracted services.
There was no fully kitted out campsite used. I saw where they were sent first-hand.
You say under 25s are paid which is also a lie, I met some under 25s there and they only get benefit.
CPuk are a dodgy company to say the least do you really want to be permanently linked to this company?
I do not know if you have actually read my blog so here is the link . http://eddiegillard.wordpress.com/
Please treat your clients with respect and help them. Their treatment despite CPuk denials was abysmal
 So far no response. Maybe they are reading, Maybe they are concocting another lame excuse.
More on CPuk Boss
 Despite CPuk showing massive losses and debts, Miss Molly has done extremely well out of the Skills Funding Agency
http://t.co/eZGfTYFU  on page 22 it shows just how  she is able to spend money she in theory doesn’t have
THE LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT CENTRE LIMITED is another company she has and Bolton, Charnwood and Salford College helped her get £2,584,931.00.
Will prospects make sure these staff who were failed by Tomorrows People can find other courses if they want to without sancion???

Last night on the Newsnight Programme Baroness Scott stated that Tomorrows people had contacted ALL those involved to apologise and see if they were ok.

That’s a LIE from the Baroness, To quote 1 of those that has not been contacted ” Bo**ocks no one asked me if I was ok”

Baroness Scott seems to believe that a company (CPuk) whose Boss had had many Failed security companies were perfect to use finding the unemployed work.

Does anyone else who maybe reading this blog, who owns their own business, not make checks on contractors they use?

And while I am on a bit of a rant, WHY are Tomorrows People paying a PR company.

£3,000,000 is given to Tomorrows People each year by the Govt. Shouldn’t it be spent getting people back to work. Why are Tomorrows People paying some staff between £80,000 and £100,000 a year.

Correction from me.

“That’s a LIE from the Baroness, To quote 1 of those that has not been contacted ” Bo**ocks no one asked me if I was ok” ” Should read ” I was told by my staff that they were beingg contacted but are still in the process”

There you go Cicero-Group I have amended it, and thank you for another number to add to the list of people Tomorrows people sent

“Please be assured that we have been speaking to everyone who we can get hold of and contacting all 94 people involved. “

So that’s 80, now 94 from Tomorrows People And 30,80 ,220 from CPuk.

I suggested that Tomorrows People should not associate with CPuk any more but I have a feeling that they won’t. After all here will Tomorrows People put people then?

Getting back to CPuk.

http://politicalscrapbook.net/2012/06/molly-prince-convicted-perverting-course-of-justice-jubilee-stewards

Molly Mary Just keeps giving and giving.

And here is more to think about http://www.sia.homeoffice.gov.uk/Documents/networks/close-protection/sia_cp_network_notes_3.pdf.

In it  there is a company called Close Protection Worldwide.com as well as members of the SIA and the Met.

Close Protection Worldwide have their HQ at 10  BROAD STREET NEWTOWN WALES SY16 2NA  (Use Google streetview)

Do you notice any similarities?

CPUK.COM one of molly/mary failed companies had a place in reading ( look up that company address and streetview it.

Close Protection uk has its wigan office  again streetview it.

Read the report and hopefully you will see how Dirty these people are and how Molly/Mary got her contracts for the Olympics and managed to get Jobseekers working for her may seem a bit clearer.

http://politicalscrapbook.net/2012/06/jubilee-stewards-manager-police-national-computer/

You might want to read this too if you think Molly/Mary company is above board.

Here is a laugh for you. Last year Leadership Developement Center (you may remember another of mollys firms) was given £2,584,931.00. in grant money,
but accounts filed on March 27th this year show her with

Cash at Bank : £2,489

Net Worth : £58,600

Total Current Liabilities : £271,351

Total Current Assets : £317,894

So where is the money coming from to Pay Max Clifford or any of her staff?

And what about the Olympics contract?

Communicating via email through the PR company Max Clifford Associates, Prince said she was unable to discuss the fire-marshalling contract because it included a non-disclosure clause. She said CPUK won the contract because “the main contractor does not have sufficient staff”.

The Observer has confirmed that CPUK’s fire marshals have not been tested during practice drills at the Olympic stadium. A test took place at the stadium on 5 May, before the contract was awarded, which involved marshals provided by another company bidding to supply the service. “It was not essential that CPUK were at the stadium,” said a spokeswoman for Locog, the body organising the Games. “They were tested at bigger and more complex events and their performance was monitored by an accredited external fire engineer, the London Fire Brigade, and the venue teams, amongst others. They received very positive feedback from all parties.”

Well since the only other venue some of the Tomorrows People went on was a football match in Bristol where there was no sign of London Fire Brigade and the kids were only shadowing stewards at the match and watching people through the gate. How can LOCOG say they were monitored. Or did they, like Tomorrows People, just take CPuks word.

Still on the olympics, Companies need to show they have access to £700,000 to be considered.. So why not this company?

Another Molly company

Commitment Fitness Limited

It’s a public limited company with share capital.   but only registered in February so wonder what its bank balance looks like.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/first-the-pageant-fiasco-now-minibus-carrying-cpuk-staff-overturns-on-m40-7834917.html

I wonder how many more logistical errors this company has had.

And funny how it was the coach driver last time and the minibus driver this time blamed !

 

Tomorrow People Additional.

 

I have just returned from meeting two of Tomorrows People staff at their Bristol office.

I can honestly say that the BRISTOL staff have shown concern for the clients sent to London with CPuk and are trying to address their needs.

I still do not believe there were sufficient checks made on CPuk.

Tomorrows People Trust however ( Head office not Bristol) Have a lot to answer for.

The statement released june 6th was generalised to the point where mistreated clients were basically called liars. Thankfully Bristol Staff appear to have looked more carefully at what has happened.

An apology from TPT Head office would go a long way.

Under London Bridge where the Work Experience Kids had to spend the early hours of Sunday Morning before their long shift Staffing the Jubilee Celebrations

Tags: , , , ,

About eddiegillard

Scrapper for the right cause.

209 responses to “Queen Put at Risk by Workfare Provider”

  1. Shiv malik says :

    Hi Eddie, I’d love to know more. Please do email, Shiv dot malik at guardian.co.uk.

    • Findlow says :

      Yes, Shiv, please look into this. It sounds appalling. And today the Observer is telling us all to enjoy the knees-up despite the crap that’s being meted out to the poorest in society, courtesy of the worst government ever.

    • Language matters says :

      Shiv: probably an editorial/sub thing or something but what’s with the absurd language used on the headline and sub-head for your piece?

      “Jobless bussed in to steward pageant
      Coachloads of unemployed people brought in to work unpaid on diamond jubilee river pageant”

      Sounds like its some jolly coach trip to a wonderful national event which they should all be grateful for!

      “jobless” is a ridiculously loaded term, “bussed in” is the language of breaking down school segregation rather than forced labour (for many the first time away from home); “work unpaid” is a two word vicious lie – there’s no such thing.

      This tawdry disgrace surely requires stronger language? Also, I’m just going on the website, but did the piece make it into the paper edition, and with this language?

    • Language matters says :

      it’s leading now on the website: great. thanks for your work.

    • Osakian says :

      It wasn’t just unemployed people from the south working in appalling conditions, my stepson and a whole bus load were brought in from Hull.

      No training was provided, no supervision, they were told they would be fed and were only given the same meagre amount of food as was highlighted in the article, did 3 18 hour shifts with no access to toilets or water and when tents were flooded out had to sleep on the floor of a changing room in west ham.

      The conditions were so bad that by today he and many of them just walked off the job.

  2. Boycott Workfare says :

    Is it ok to repost this on Boycott Workfare website?

  3. Darren says :

    Seems like some exploitation.

  4. Darren says :

    Seems like blatant exploitation.
    Good work.

  5. Grayling says :

    Doesn’t surprise me – in the 80’s & 90’s it’d have been £1/2 ph + benefits , I know that industry ….unfortunately ! ………I can quite easily buy those long shift lengths having done them …..it’s a True Blue cut throat industry ….plenty of crooks

  6. Rory says :

    If you have any more information please do let me know (rorygordon@theperiodical.info). It’s a very interesting article.

    • eddiegillard says :

      Spoken with Shiv malik and he has some details, I will post others here as I confirm them.

    • Molly Prince says :

      I am happy to answer your questions! But first I will cover some back ground information for your story to ensure accuracy of reporting. Firstly We are absolutely un aware of any staff being forced to attend the event and are extremely un happy if this is the case. There is no unpaid labour, everyone in training is being paid apprenticeship rate, whilst this is not a great amount, but it is the national recognised training rate of pay set by government. It was agreed that the sponsoring of licenses, purchasing of kit needed to work, boots, combats etc that individuals would normally purchase themselves would benefit them more. The majority of people who worked the event enjoyed the experience and are looking forward to the Olympics! We are not in the business of exploiting anyone

      My Company – Close Protection UK Limited is an SIA Approved Contractor and has Investors in People accreditation, we take the welfare of our staff and Apprentices very seriously in deed. Our relationship with Tomorrows People is such that they referred a number of unemployed individuals in Bristol and Plymouth, whilst we were recruiting in readiness for this year’s Olympics. The Staff travelling to The Jubilee are completing their training and being assessed on the Job for NVQ Level 2 in Spectator Safety after having completed all the knowledge requirements in the classroom and some previous work experience. It is essential that they are assessed in a live work environment in order to complete their chosen qualifications.

      The nature of Festival & Event work is such that we often travel sleeping on coaches through the night with an early morning pre-event start, it is the nature of the business and there is misconception about this, it’s hard work and not for the faint hearted. We had staff travel from several locations and some arrived earlier than others at the meeting point which I believe was London Bridge, I will investigate why they got off the coach before the others arrived, as it would have seemed more sensible to stay on the coach.This is an unfortunate set of circumstances but not lack of care on the part of CPUK.

      CPUK Have not only purchased tents for everyone (Some stewards wanted to use their own but it was too wet to put them up, they insinsted in having a go! )CPUK Director had organised a warm dry communial area for all to sleep)and all other camping facilities, we have put all staff through Btec Level 2 Door Supervision, applied and paid for SIA Licenses at £255 each, purchased Magnum boots circa £70 each, Combat Pants and Polo Shirts circa £50 per set, HI VIS & PPE etc., so our financial investment is extensive. The Jubilee Job will run at an extensive loss, and if you take a look at our published accounts you will see the company ran at a loss last year due to our investment in giving apprentices work placement opportunities which we could not charge our clients for!

      The Legacy of all this being, we have built a workforce highly trained weekly over several months and ready to deliver excellent security and event safety services. And as Danny commented earlier even if we are not in a position to offer full time and permanent employment to all these individuals, they will be SIA Licensed, experienced and employable. They will be called upon by CPUK as needed every year for the festival season, so in short we feel very strongly that we have done our bit, to help with making people more employable by offering good quality training, resources and the final bit being work experience whilst being supervised by our extensively experienced supervisors, tutors and assessors.

      Should you require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact me directly,

      Kind Regards,

      Molly Prince
      Managing Director
      Close Protection UK Limited
      ,

      • eddiegillard says :

        Thank you for your comments Molly, tho sadly you have been miss informed by your own Managers if you believe that to be true. Work experience people I met this weekend had been told to get themselves tents and camping equipment. The “campsite” was a swampy field behind an overground station and these people were not well treated at all. I can only suggest that you speak with your office staff and then publically apologise for their actions.

        You may honestly believe what you say, but I have stated facts.

      • Molly Prince says :

        If any individual who was actually involved and feel they were mis treated, then I would ask they contact me directly my email is molly@ldc-uk.com I have launched investigation as to why the group were de-bussed at London Bridge, and am very unhappy about that situation, and would like to sincerely apologise to all concerned that should not have happened.
        There are however a lot of inaccuracies in this report and I can only get to the bottom of things if those who are un happy with their treatment contact me directly. We are not in the business of exploiting anyone, we have paid for SIA licences, bought boots, clothing and equipment that individuals would normally purchase, so our investment is more than we will be paid for this job.

      • Grayling says :

        ‘m afraid this sounds like Management speak straight out of Dogburts ….typical PR BS or sugar to swallow sh** with , it reminds me of All for Emma A4e , managers parroting off what they think will impress Lady Muck …in her tax payer funded mansion in the name of ” singing from the same hymn sheet ” ………Sorry Molly , those prices you quote are retail prices with the High St margins inculded , the wholesale price with buying power would be less than you quoted …….As for ” we are not aware ” that was the sort of pathetic excuse used at Nuremberg – the people that tended to use that were despatched through a trap door into eternity ……….I’m afraid people have been around too long and haven’t fallen out of a tree …Nice Try though !!

      • Jon says :

        Molly if you don’t mind me asking who funded the said equipment and SIS cards provided?

        Its difficult to believe your company did looking at the last filed accounts for as there was only £1,317 in the company account and the current credit score is Caution.

        http://companycheck.co.uk/company/05750805

        Could you tell us if this equipment was government funded? and also what screening did your company undertake in order to obtain such a prestigious contract?

        I see from the email address you have provided above your linked to the Leadership Development Centre at Salford Uni. Are they behind it?

        Jon

      • alexstanek says :

        “There is no unpaid labour, everyone in training is being paid apprenticeship rate” contrasted with thiis statement: “Our relationship with Tomorrows People is such that they referred a number of unemployed individuals in Bristol and Plymouth, whilst we were recruiting in readiness for this year’s Olympics”. So i am guessing you paid the latter people nothing, contrary to your claims?

        I have also done more research into the clothing you spent monies on. Please tell us which brand polo shirt cost “circa” £50? Also the word circa worries me……..

        Could you send us a link to your “accounts” proving that the company made a loss? And do you have any PROOF that the whole operation was run at a loss?

        Furthermore, when you say that it was “agreed” about the purchase of all those goods, I assume it was not agreed with the workers?

        Molly, if you had SOME morality, you would contact those who felt robbed, not the other way round… you know it is unlikely they will see your ONE comment on here……… Speaking as an entrepenuer myself, if a problem like this arose, I would be calling everyone ASAP and apologising etc etc.

        I would like to discuss this further Molly, so if you could email me @ alexstanek@hotmail.co.uk that would be great (If i don’t hear a reply, we you know what i will assume)…..

      • Tim says :

        Your PR spin and distortions have zero credibility because people really were treated in an appalling manner. Instead of trying to justify this abuse, you should have been disciplining the culprits and improving your management practices so that this never happens again.

        What you should be doing is sending out a written apology to all those people who were affected by your company’s malpractice and offering them significant financial compensation. As things stand, your miserable company could be taken to court over, for example, the lack of adequate toilet breaks. Furthermore, I understand that Members of Parliament are now interested in this case so unless you act quickly to apologise and reform, you stand to lose lucrative Department for Work and Pensions contracts. Indeed, this case has now been highlighted on TV and radio press reviews so there will be more adverse publicity and consequences for your company unless you get the damage limitation right.

        I’ve done my fair share of press and PR work (including for government ministers) and your denial response has been completely the wrong approach.

      • Anon says :

        Molly, how much of your income will you give to a charity of Eddie Gillard’s choice if you are shown to have lied in this message?

      • eddiegillard says :

        check last years bank balance for the company.. I can only assume Molly works for nothing

      • Anon says :

        But I’m sure she’s getting valuable work experience and training!

      • jenniemacfie says :

        Molly, would you be kind enough to clarify some points? Firstly, which company Close Protection UK paid for training the stewards – was it Leadership Development Centre which, I discover on LinkedIn, is, like CPUK, owned by you?

        If so, were Tomorrows People aware of this common ownership? What measures did CPUK put in place to ensure that all the stewards had completed the necessary training before the Jubilee?

        Would you also clarify if the cost of the equipment supplied to the stewards was recouped from the fee charged to the Jubilee organisers by CPUK, recouped from another organisation or government body, or donated as an in-kind benefit by CPUK?

        It would also be of public interest, I am sure, to know what fee per steward was charged to the Jubilee organisers. Thank you, in anticipation.

      • simone says :

        erm well your company may well have had to provide the clothes and hi vis etc and at a cost too, but other companies would have provided this equipment and PAID the workers too, and yet they make a profit

      • eddiegillard says :

        Any Health and Safety equipment needed for work would have had to be paid for by the company .It was not an act of benevolence but rather compliance with the law.

      • Natalie Minnis (@natubat) says :

        “…everyone in training is being paid apprenticeship rate, whilst this is not a great amount, but it is the national recognised training rate of pay set by government.”

        This is inaccurate and misleading. £2.60 an hour is the national minimum wage for apprenticeships, not the “national recognised training rate”. Many businesses pay trainees more than this, as the government’s website says:

        http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/educationandlearning/14to19/optionsat16/dg_4001327

      • eddiegillard says :

        Thank you, I do enjoy seeing people taking a genuine interest and putting the records straight.

      • Gillian says :

        Molly Prince. My comments are addressed towards the woeful crowd management abilities of your company rather than your employment terms – though I’m not impressed by those either.

        I attended the Jubilee boat pageant. Your company was totally inept at crowd managment. Are you thinking of resigning?

        If there had been an emergency it would have been a disaster. The disorganisation was a disgrace to an international event with heavy implications for public order and terrorism.

        I stood outside Millbank Tower after being herded there by your people. I’m not going to blame them. You didn’t famillarise them with the location or train them in dealing with understandably irate people who weren’t being told where or why they were being herded.

        Neither could they deal with people who climbed trees and pushed and shoved, which I think is a normal thing in a crowd keen to see things.

        The only good thing was that it wasn’t too crowded. It appeared to me that your people were so concerned with avoiding an incident that they didn’t allow enough people to witness the parade. They were also afraid to confront any trouble makers.

        Perhaps Close Protection had their eye on future contracts rather than seeing this one passed off to the satisfaction of all attending. Or maybe the workers couldn’t be bothered. Remind me, what were you paying them and what were their prospects?

        I’ve been to exactly the same spot for previous river events and they’ve passed off beautifully. The difference is that the Police and other emergency services were in charge, not a private events management company.

        I hope to see them and not Close Protection ever again.

        I note that Close Protection will be at the Olympics.

        So will I.

        Would you let me know if our visits will coincide so that if they do I can stay at home?

      • eddiegillard says :

        With any luck Molly or Mary will not be allowed to run any sort of company so you may have peace while at the olympics. I only hope that the Olympic Organisers make sure those on work experience and promised paid work at the games, get trained up and given that oppertunity. It is after all the least they can do.

  7. Alex says :

    Im at a loss of words….Even an event like this has to be tainted by exploitation. Way to go DWP for ruining one of the days alot of us could of just forgot about the worries of umemployment and reporting to our jobcentre/workfare overlords.

  8. adam says :

    can you cite your source? if it is first hand, pictures? video? Something to make your story credible, your providing nothing but your word.

    • eddiegillard says :

      As you don’t know me I can understand why my word wouldn’t be enough for you, but feel free to watch the papers as this story is true and will be in print soon.

  9. Noel Kennedy says :

    I drove a group of GS4 employees to the Epsom derby yesterday on a similar trip! it’s an OUTRAGE. I myself done an 18 hour shift!

    • eddiegillard says :

      Thankfully I don’t think DWP will be able to stop benefits for those who left after the jubilee yesterday, When they were at Bristol on saturday night, one of CPuks Staff called a role before they got on the coach. To my way of thinking that puts the kids on Company time from that point onwards.

    • Grayling says :

      and this what the far right and Cameron wants ……..not a great sympathiser with the Police or the Fed , but they’re suspicious of the Windsor report …everything outsourced to G4s , Kelilogs , Haliburtons etc that doesn’t require a warranted officer ….they don’t want loyalty to the state , public service ethos etc …just company automatons

      • Alex says :

        I wouldn’t really say that Cameron is far right. You can use emotive language as much as you want but all it does is give your opinion less credibility when you state things that others know to simply not be true.

    • Grayling says :

      very little due recourse for Security staff , bar anonymously tipping off the HSE , or reporting the firm to ACAS and taking a Employment Tribunal out against the firm …which means you’ll never work in that Industry again …or even become unemployable ……………I’ve worked for Rentokil …Our CEO who was the then head of the CBI said it wasn’t in guards interests to join a union ………it’s very paranoid , seedy and sleazy industry full stop ……..like with bent coppers , lines get blurred and there’s mirrored cultures with the wannabe plastic police

  10. anne martin says :

    how angry are we all going to get? they are stoking it and you know what happens if you play with fire. watch this space

    • eddiegillard says :

      Personally very angry, tho I feel I should say, despite many comments on other social networking sites about this, NO-ONE should place any blame on the Queen, whilst we do not live under a monarchy but under a mishmash of Monarchy and Democracy, we all have played a part by not taking action sooner and more passionately against the policies which have led to situations like this.

  11. hossylass says :

    I’m sure that I found something very wiffy about Tomorrows People a few months ago – may have been someone who is patron or a board member, and undue influence…
    Sorry I cant remember, maybe someone with a more efficient brain will take it up.

  12. Grayling says :

    people shouldn’t fall for that fluffy image with these …apparent ! charities …just another business bidding for contracts http://www.tomorrows-people.org.uk/

  13. wilson says :

    The Work Programme trainees were signed up to Prospects, served apprenticeships with Close Protection UK Ltd then taken for further training projects (silver jubilee) by subcontractor Tomorrows People.

    http://www.prospects.co.uk/News/OlympicsWork/tabid/805/Default.aspx

    Tomorrows People are financed, in part, by the European Social Fund.

    http://www.esf-works.com/places/south-west/esf-funding-in-the-south-west

  14. sonofcy says :

    Get used to this Guys & Gals, this is the future, it is very unlikely to be a one off either. Welcome to the second Elizabethan age. My heart goes out to these people. It could be, you, sons daughters… It will be unless stopped

    • eddiegillard says :

      It doesn’t even need to be this way, Companies like CPuk have shown that they can do it right when they don’t try and do things on the cheap.
      If the DWP made it hard for exploitative companies to operate instead of encouraging this behaviour, we would have a much better system.

      Work Experience is a GOOD thing, DWP and Government have turned it into a cash cow for slave traders

      • Grayling says :

        and Grayling encourages it trying to take us all back to the 19th Century with this laissez faire / classic liberalism stuff – ” Shed loads of money to be made “

      • sonofcy says :

        Good luck with that, this is not an anomaly, it’s policy now. Whatever Grayling says. The people who benefit from this “Experience” i.e. the “Providers” and the companies provided to are serious donors of the Tory Party. This we have seen goes right up to Cameron himself with his 250K “Dinners”. No wonder he’s so enthusiastic about Royal Pageantry…it is so spectacular and diverting…

    • Paula says :

      Totaly agree – I have two sons am so worried – if we dont do something they will be worse off than the poor caged chickens.

      • sonofcy says :

        Look at the web site http://www.boycottworkfare.org. It will give your lads some tips on methods to avoid this. But it is not easy. At the moment they have said they won’t saction anyone who refuses “Work Experience”, however, that does not apply to other “Schemes”. Mandatory Work activity is one and can be “offered” for any reason the Jobcentre likes. Look at the site, it has suggestions. I have a son approaching working age too and I fear for him. It is only a question of time before someone is injured or even killed by one of these scab firms.
        CPUK put untrained unequipped people into a crowd control situation where alcohol was consumed. Thankfully it was the Jubilee so the crowd was good natured. At the Olympics, that may not be the case…

  15. Nigel Woodcock says :

    interesting article, thanks. But a shame about the random capitals.

    • eddiegillard says :

      I am not a writer by trade or inclination, I also am not a trained secretary or indeed calm when it comes to abuses of individuals so please forgive my typos

      • Betty says :

        Afraid I’m with Nigel Woodcock on this – the random capital letters make it harder to read and distract from the point of the article.
        The basic rule for capitals is: use at the start of a sentence, use for the name of a person or place (eg. John came from Bristol), and use when referring to yourself as “I”. (eg: “then I took photos”.) You can also use capitals for a whole word if you want to sound like you’re shouting – eg: I HATE the jubilee!
        Please don’t be offended – the reason I’m pointing it out is because this is good stuff that you write, and it’d be great to make it look more professional by getting the punctuation right.

      • eddiegillard says :

        Education is a wonderful thing, tho to be honest, it seems people are more concerned with how it was written than the content. Never mind.

      • Joa says :

        I have to disagree with Betty, at least you are trying to do something. I don’t know your educational background nor do I think that it matters however you are keeping people informed.

    • Nigel Woodcock says :

      for those who are interested, the words “sick bag” have been chopped off the bottom of my profile pic! (but not on Facebook)

  16. lucysjcreativeducator says :

    Lovely country, delightful government (not).

    • eddiegillard says :

      In all Honesty it wouldn’t matter who anyone voted for, the Government would still get in.. we need less political rivalry and more action, all the parties at the moment are more interested in point scoring than action.. and thats a sad form of democracy

      • thewanderingscot says :

        “In all Honesty it wouldn’t matter who anyone voted for, the Government would still get in.. we need less political rivalry and more action, all the parties at the moment are more interested in point scoring than action.. and thats a sad form of democracy”

        This is not unique to Britain – the same thing is happening here in the US and (I believe) in Australia too. We seem to be witnessing a paradigm shift in the concept of democracy and representative government toward a more feudal system of the “Haves” and “Have nots” where elected officials and corporations enrich each other at the expense of the taxpayers. It is basic greed and corruption – but they write the laws so they get away with it.

  17. tonyschumacher says :

    Hmmm, “Queen put at risk”? What about the poor people who are untrained, tired and probably not insured due to their lack of training. Shouldn’t the headline be “People put at risk”? Or does it only matter when it’s the Queen?

    • eddiegillard says :

      If I had titled it poor sods get wet, cold and tired, how much notice would have been taken???

    • eddiegillard says :

      People matter, doesn’t get the same response tho unless it has Queen , risk, threat in the tags for security services to pic up on.. Yes it would have been more appropriate to Title it People at risk, but now it will at least be made public and catch the attention of those who care when it suits them.

      • sonofcy says :

        It’s good that you have brought this up. People don’t know what is happening. The DWP is less than truthful and that is an understatement. Did you know that those under “Mandatory Work Activity” do not volunteer the are forced under threat of benefit sanction. Three of those and you are sanctioned for 3 years. Did you also know that anyone can be put on MWAG but the most likely are the disabled, even those cancer patients with more than 6 months to live? Can you imagine if one of those people were a recovering cancer patient what effect it would have on their recovery?.
        We have no real idea of course who these poor sods were or why they were there, but it does not take a long stretch of the imagination to understand that it could happen. Especially with millions of pounds involved.

        If this sort of thing becomes widespread, the monarchy will not escape the splatter when the truth comes out. Its whole existence is dependent on the perception that it is separate from government…

  18. jamiewoods77 says :

    Thank you for posting this, and for speaking out.

    • eddiegillard says :

      I would hope that more people would speak out. I learned today that while the work experience staff were manning the bridge getting soaked and cold, their managers and supervisors stayed in a warm dry portacabin with a kettle for hot drinks.

  19. Anita Heybourne says :

    Absolutely disgusting. Will follow and share your article.

    • Molly Prince says :

      Please be sure to share my response thank you

      • Tom says :

        You are making money off unemployed people, much like a parasite would in nature. Your company may not be in profit but I bet you are still being paid, with tax money.

      • Martin says :

        I truly hope this story is not true, or if it is you make it right. If true It’s truly disgusting.

      • eddiegillard says :

        I am sorry to say, despite CPuks denial, it is true. People who went on that experience were told different things by differen staff , some were told they were being paid for it right up until it was time to get on the coach, around 10 or more walked off on sunday morning after spending the night under the bridge and went home. The two i mention in the blog and those in the Guardian stuck it out to their credit. They put up with all the crap they had taken from the company, they put up with the rain, they put up with not being able to eat hot food or have hot drinks while they did their jobs for the day. It was only when they had completed their work for the day that they asked for help. Lazy people, as some have described them in comments to the Guardian, would not have stayed, would not have done their jobs and in point of fact would not have gone in the first place. These kids were lied to , cajoled and forced to put up with this in the hope of work in the futeure. Their reward for trying has been poor treatment, poor training and dissapointment in what should have been a good experience for them.

      • Martin says :

        So you made no profit from this event… that’s irrelevant and no excuse for the conditions you made these people live and work under. You could and should have found better accommodation at the very least that could have been a warm sports hall and a handful of camp beds… you could have supplied that at a similar cost level, adequate changing and toilet facilities should have been provided too.

        You made no profit but I bet you will be living off the publicity at having ran security for the Jubilee for decades… it will make a nice addition to your portfolio, what i’m less convinced about is that this experience has been as rewarding for these poor people.

      • Cinque Cento says :

        Part of your response was “we have paid for SIA licences, bought boots, clothing and equipment that individuals would normally purchase,”

        I suggest you familiarise yourself with the Personal Protective Equipment at Work regulations which stipulate that employers should provide PPE for staff. PPE is defined in the Regulations as ‘all equipment (including clothing affording protection against the weather) which is intended to be worn or held by a person at work and which protects him against one or more risks to his health or safety’, eg safety helmets, gloves, eye protection, high-visibility clothing, safety footwear and safety harnesses.

        So the ‘boots, clothing and equipment’ was NOT an altruistic gesture on your part; it was part of your statutory duty.

      • johnmwwarksJohn W, says :

        I bet Cameron thinks this sort of behaviour by work placement companies is perfectly acceptable, whilst munching on his Swan an Kumquat pasty.
        Wonder what the Queen thinks if she were allowed to comment ?

  20. RoRoll says :

    You’ve made to to the Guardian, Eddie!

    • eddiegillard says :

      I would rather have not had to say anything. This sort of behaviour from companies using people in this way and failing to meet even their most basic needs should not be happening.

  21. skidrow301 says :

    Reblogged this on Hidden British News.

  22. AlmosJustice (@AlmosJustice) says :

    Molly Prince.
    Your response is condescending and heartless. Not once have you conceded that if this story is true, which you obviously don’t accept, that you owe a massive apology to those so ill treated. Your only response is that your are investigating why they were dropped off at london Bridge instead of wherever you were informed by your managers. So you concede that you will investigate the one factual element that cannot be disputed.However, you don’t even care that IF these allegations are then proven that your company is responsible for diabolical treatment of those not in a position to challenge you. You require them to contact you directly when it’s apparent that many dare not under fear of sanctions being applied to them. Hold a gun to their heads and ask them to complain.
    You then go on to mention that the costs of kitting the poor devils out appropriately, which in several cases seems not to have happened anyway, exceeds the contract fee you received. As has been pointed out, no doubt you bid for the contract knowing that in order to bolster your company’s CV, which will no doubt bring further contracts your way, therefore, although you are not directly profiting from this disgusting excercise, it’s a decent loss leader for you. Failing that why did you not bid at a price that would have enabled your costs to be met? Undoubtedly other bidders that WERE covering their costs were undercut by your bid. Your comments seem to indicate that your are proud of your company and your operations. That says more about you and your attitude to your employees than a thousand complaints ever could.

    • Grayling says :

      the so called Magnum circa £70 boots http://www.patrolstore.com/magnum-boots.html?gclid=CLWfjoDytrACFSYhtAodInUL8w the bigger picture is to give a quasi police appearance …, everything bar warranted officers to be outsourced to the likes of G4s , Halliburtons , Kelilogs etc ………….not normally a supporter of the ” FED ” but those coppers have seen right through the Winsor Report

      .in any case the wholesale cost would be offset against Corporation Tax ….that’s why workwear is stamped with the company logo …..sorry Molly but this is all a red herring ……..text book shock doctrine / disaster capitalism ….very unethical profiting from people’s misery and arrogating functions of the state to these companies and trying to cover it up .

  23. John W. says :

    This is typical Tory policy say 80 people at approx £6.50 per hour based on a 16 hour shift = a wage bill of £8320.00. i wonder how much the contract was worth. Twitter & Facebook should start a campaign to make sure these people are paid by embarrassing “Close Protection UK” into doing so.

  24. shitlord idiot says :

    yo whats with all the random capital letters in your article m8. learn to proof read. agree w/ the sentiment though

    • eddiegillard says :

      I have a habit of saying whats on my mind wether it hurts or pleases. Grammer and written english not my strong point.

      • tony batt says :

        Well done Eddie, keep up the good work, just ignore the grammar pedants who cant see the wood for the trees

      • Linda Biles says :

        What on earth is the matter with people if they are more concerned with grammar and spelling than they appear to be with the plight of these poor people!

      • johnmwwarksJohn W, says :

        Now please just think about your comment Linda for a we moment will you. Grammar & Spelling NOT being a strong point. What does the fact that someone who is not very good at spelling and grammar say to an average person.

        It says to me that they are likely to be of lower intellect and just ripe for exploitation by someone else – or to put it in fewer word – As thick as a brick.

        Now i’m in business myself and this is a disgusting case and should be debated at the highest level and the culprits should have the book thrown at them as it is morally wrong with no justification whatsoever.

        Furthermore it is wrong to threaten to take someone’s benefits away, if they did not participate in the programme.

        Now it is about 25 years since I was unemployed and perhaps things have changed but I used to walk into a Job Centre and the wages were clearly displayed with the job description.

        At some point surely someone with at least an IQ in double figures must have surely asked what they would be paid for doing this work. Now unless they were lied to,which might have serious legal implications in the Job Centre
        staff context. I fail to believe that none of these people ever uttered an interest in being paid.

        OK so they were perhaps threatened, which again would have serious legal implications. Look at the recent cases over the past few months where employers like Tesco have refused to take part in these Government schemes as they deem it to be wrong too. Only David Cameron disagrees with this and thinks it is perfectly acceptable behaviour.

        I’d like to know how you put a threat to someone or tather how this job was sold to them. I think they were or must have been lied too.

        Nobody in their right mind would just turn up without asking something about the job – would they ?

        i’d have taken the risk with losing benefits and then made so much noise afterwards, they’d have had to pay me to shut me up otherwise i';d have gone to the press.!!

      • Chris Tandy says :

        Correct grammar, spelling and in this instance, a fluttering union flag are all you need now to hide from the truth. The first three are good for communication, I admit. The latter is good for camouflage. It’s not called ‘queen’s english’ for nothing….

  25. Danny Callaghan says :

    At the beginning the writer states “these are not migrant workers”

    Are we suggesting that if they were migrant workers this terrible affair would be acceptable?

    Danny

  26. Paul Bull says :

    Mollie

    I hear what you’re saying so can you confirm:
    1) In addition to the 30 unpaid and 50 apprentices you supplied, how many other security staff did you supply?
    2) What were they paid – hourly rate?
    3) Where were they accommodated?
    4) Were each of the unpaid/apprentices supervised at all times?
    5) Where the staff given any statutory breaks?
    6) Did they receive any HOT meals at anytime?
    7) Were all staff that were paid receve payment for travelling time?
    8) What wet weather gear were people asked to bring/have? – the branded garments are part of your duty as an employer. When I work on trade shows, conferences the employer gives me this to promote and identify their staff. They don’t see it as an imposition!
    9) The boots and hi-viz jackets are part of employers supply of Personal Protection Equipment – a part of your duty of care provisions surely?
    10) Did you underbid to ensure you got the cntract?
    11) Did you do the same in respect of Olympics – and under similar constraints re cost/profits and the need to cut corners.
    12) Why wasn’t suitable [DRY] accommodation close to the Thames supplied for your employees?

    There are I’m sure many more questions people want answering – but these will do for now

  27. Grayling says :

    BBC running this now #Lord Prescott on the attack …Mollie Price – when in a hole stop digging ! , as for #Grayling he can’t blame the SWP and UK Uncut for this http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18329526

    • eddiegillard says :

      Yes I just read that the other 30 refused to be paid for it.. How wonderful that the fact they wernt being paid in the first place has been missed. Oh no wait, they were being paid in training and boots.. my mistake sorry Mollie

      • fibromitesunite says :

        “How wonderful that the fact they wernt being paid in the first place has been missed.”

        Seem they hadn’t refused payment out of the goodness of their hearts but because they didn’t want it to affect their benefits:

        “Of these, 50 people under the age of 25 were paid the government’s standard rate for apprentices of £2.60 per hour and the other 30 either accepted the same rate or refused payment in case it would adversely affect their benefits.”

  28. Ian says :

    Your headline “Queen Put at Risk by Workfare Provider” is misleading.

    These were not the Queen’s personal security, security in this instance is a word for steward, those who cleans up and move people along so streets can be cleared or returned to normality.

    Nothing at all to do with personal protection.

    Quote:
    “No these are not migrant workers, these are Security Staff for the Queen”
    Unquote.

    • eddiegillard says :

      I’m sorry if you are confused by this. Let me explain CP uk were supposedly training these kids in event security. The kids who undertook this were under the impression this was in the security field. And yes of course the Queen was put at risk.

      They are not the employed personal security of Her Majesty, but they were there to aid in her protection as well as that of the public.

      Now, I know this may be hard for you to understand, but the point of the blog, stay with me on this one, is the treatment of those kids who were there under the guise of work experience.
      I hope that clears something up for you.

  29. Claire says :

    The very fact that unpaid ‘staff’ were used to provide stewardship is already disgusting. Even more horrifying is the fact, even though it’s being denied, people were literally sleeping rough. I sincerely hope the company concerned personally apologises to every single person. Oh, heard a rumour that the MD is actually on holiday?!
    Another point was made about health earlier. Not every disabled/poorly person claims disability benefits so it’s quite feasible that someone with, perhaps, joint issues or even weakened immune system was there this weekend. What could the consequences be then?

  30. Grayling says :

    A letter to the Home Secretary:

    Dear Home Secretary,

    I’m writing to you because I am alarmed by the revelations in today’s Guardian newspaper about the private security firm Close Protection UK (CPUK) – (‘Unemployed bussed in to steward river pageant’ – Guardian, June 5 2012)

    If the allegations are true, it is totally unacceptable that young unemployed people were bussed in to London from Bristol, Bath and Plymouth and forced to sleep out in the cold overnight before stewarding a major event with no payment.

    I am deeply concerned that a private security firm is not only providing policing on the cheap but failing to show a duty of care to its staff and threatening to withdraw an opportunity to work at the Olympics as a means to coerce them to work unpaid.

    It also raises very serious questions about the suitability of using private security contractors to do frontline policing instead of trained police officers.

    I call on you to immediately investigate this matter and alert the Security Industry Authority to see if CPUK has breached its SIA Approved Contractor Status.

    I believe that this could be a breach of 2.3.1(f) of the SIA Approved Contractor Status Terms and Conditions of Approval, which states a contractor can have approved status removed if it is “found no longer to meet the fit and proper person criteria applied by the SIA.”

    I also ask you and the Secretary of State for DCMS to urgently review CPUK’s contract to provide security during the Olympics.

    It would be completely inappropriate for a company that appears to have such a blatant disregard for the care of its workers to be policing such a prestigious event.

    Yours sincerely,

    John Prescott

    http://johnprescott.nationbuilder.com/a_letter_to_the_home_secretary%5D

  31. Liam says :

    Arbeit Macht Frei, eh Molly? You’ve certainly profited from Free Labour!
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arbeit_macht_frei

    • W Johnson says :

      Yet another a mistaken conflation of Socialism and Social Conscience and therein lies part of the problem – by diktat it is inconceivable that a ‘Tory’ can be anything other than ‘Nasty’, or that a socialist can be anything other than caring.

      It is nasty now, to believe that standing on your own two feet, free from state intervention in your every waking moment is preferable to being a mere cog. But that’s not the way ‘they’ think. Brainwashed into believing that the state should deal with everything they cling to any scrap of reportage to piss on your parade, whoever you are. So today we get this workfare story: and as a result some miserable, soulless corner of Lefty-Twitter lights up with glee:

      • eddiegillard says :

        Thank you for that. I understood not a word of it. Possibly because I do not care what political party did what to whom or when or where. Niether Labour, Tory , Lib Dem or Monster Raving Loony should agree with the treatment of these kids and should be making damned sure it cannot happen again.

      • Grayling says :

        Don’t feed the troll – like most bullies they squeal like stuck pigs – they don’t like it up ‘em

  32. Ste Bristolco says :

    Hi eddie – wanted to say thanks for posting such a brilliant write up, for being brave and saying it like it is. Ignore the grammar police, obviously they not been referred to Work Programme (yet!) so have nothing else to worry about. Do you know who else is involved in this in bristol? or have any ideas on how it can be stopped or improved

    • eddiegillard says :

      Stopped.. easy, The DWP stop all work experience and workfare programes. Made better .. yes stop all the programmes as they stand. Spend money on Training for work, instead of pay private companies to do it…badly.

      Yes I know it all costs money, but then I am sure if the Government can afford to pay cabinet staff more than 80k a year each (scottish cabinet staff excluded as they don’t take the piss) they can find a way. I know it’s a bit simplistic but thats what I would like to see

      • Ste Bristolco says :

        definitely i agree. its a government of the rich for the rich, who seem to think the vast majority of people in the country can rot, and prefer to siphon money to private companies rather than helping us out.

        a few of us in bristol spoke some time ago about setting up a union for unemployed workers, this was before the workfare thing, and it strikes me that this is even more necessary now. everyone seems terrified to speak out, or to take action for fear of sanctions or being called a scrounger. But this affects people in work as much as those unemployed. There are allegations on twitter that sacked SIA qualified workers before taking on the workfare lot.

  33. Simon says :

    Let us assume that Mollie Prince is being totally sincere when she says that her company is losing money on the weekend’s display of boats and the Olympics. However, you don’t need to be too much of a cynic to guess that both events will feature prominently in the company’s promotional literature.

    As for the fact that the company has paid for training, how exactly is that supposed to help the people involved pay their bills?

  34. Grayling says :

    trying to blackmail now Prince ??? – Jobs could be lost if contracts are jeopardised …typical Security Industry tactics …yes yours Prince ! – like something out of a Dickens Novel http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jun/05/call-inquiry-jobseekers-jubilee-stewards

  35. Grayling says :

    A good comment from a channel 4 post:

    “In June 1897, Queen Victoria also celebrated her Golden Jubilee, 400,000 of London’s poor were the guests of a banquet with free food, ale and tobacco.

    In June 2012, Queen Elizabeth celebrated her Golden Jubilee, millionaires sang songs outside her house, whilst people with no jobs were forced to sleep rough and work for free stewarding the masses of sheep that had turned up.”

  36. Grayling says :

    Molly Price CPUK has deleted her twitter account , a Tory Peer is a Tomorrows People Director

    A mailing that someone recieved

    ” CLOSE PROTECTION UK EXCLUSIVE OFFER*** ONLY OPEN TO JSA CLAIMANTS!
    Are you unemployed?, you have WON a “Close Protection UK” special offer! An all star (everyone’s a star) London 2012 Exclusive Jubilee Celebration stewarding pass complete with Central London Underbridge free accomodation, convenient sized minilunch and extra-length experience, you have won up to 18 hours**** on Diamond Jubilee Sunday! You should bring an umbrella to the hotel (*outdoor accomodation) which is based in the exclusive location in Central London with close proximity to riverside Jubilee events in immediately below London Bridge**. SMALL PRINT: Your benefits may be at risk if you don’t keep up with any experience payments, or any other work experience based on it.

    *Hotel accomodation will not be provided inside what is legally defined as a “building”
    “””London Bridge” refers to a publicly accessible area within the constructs of London Bridge, certain elements of food and drink serving and toilet facilities will be improvisational in nature.
    *** Take up of offer conditional on continuing to be paid your Jobseekers Allowance.
    **** 18 hours or equivalent length of Diamond Jubilee Celebration you will be required to attend.

  37. Eleanor Whalley says :

    Eddie I’d be really interested in having you on the radio show I”m producing tomorrow to talk about what you’ve found. The show runs from 11 till 2pm and you’d be on around like 1ish probabbly. We’d like to arrange a debate around the issue. Please email me if you’re interested. The radio show is in Islington.

    • eddiegillard says :

      While a lovely thought, I am 122 miles from you with kids on a school holiday. And as I have probably mentioned before, this isnt about me but the poor sods who were treated horribly by a company supposedly giving them work experience.

  38. Grayling says :

    Please report Close Protection Uk to the Health and Safety Executive http://www.hse.gov.uk/contact/index.htm and Tomorrow’s People to the Charity Commission http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/Our_regulatory_activity/Reporting_issues/default.aspx and please share. This has to be investigated properly.

  39. Grayling says :

    the plot thickens stinks to high heaven – yes where did the £1.5m of hard working tax payers money allocated for stewarding go ? http://liberalconspiracy.org/2012/06/05/where-did-1-5m-for-river-pageant-stewarding-go/#comment-387624

  40. Grayling says :

    The owner of CloseProtectionUk has had 8 previous Security Companies all dissolved according to Boycott Workfare

  41. Grayling says :

    ” Apology ” from Tomorrows People to stewards on BBC News Website …also on FB ” via Sue Brock on her wall (hope you don’t mind Sue) “A mother of one of the Governments Jubilee steward slaves writes….

    “My child is part of this farce up there, but is so desperate for a job they have stuck it out. They have been on the phone in tears, saying they are soaking wet, bleeding feet and sleeping in a wet muddy field with barely any facilities. I have said for gods sake come home but if they did it would be the end of the course and no SIA badge, I feel murderous, they are still there with one more night to do. Lets not forget that we as parents had to provide the tent and all the camping gear, not cheap””

  42. Truffles says :

    Complaint to DWP about Close Protection UK Ltd, Jobcentre Plus and Work Programme Providers offering of unpaid Work Trial and Work Placements
    http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/close_protection_uk_ltd_jobcentr

  43. Grayling says :

    Dudeabroad The Guardian

    ” The firm, Close Protection UK (CPUK), has issued “sincere apologies” for what it called the “London Bridge incident”, but insisted that it had not been exploiting individuals but providing work experience.

    Ah well, that’s OK then. And I bet it promises never to let it happen again, honestly, truly. I guess in the same vein, a plantation owner in deepest Georgia, some 200 years ago, might have said that he wasn’t exploiting his slaves, but that they had reached a mutually beneficial arrangement whereby one provided his labour in return for food and shelter from the other ………………….. come to think of it, at least it is possible to argue that food and shelter do represent some form of compensation ………………. whereas today’s slaves, well ……….

    “The only ones that won’t be paid are because they don’t want to be paid. They want to do this voluntarily, [to] get the work experience.

    This firm has some massive cajones (sideline, can a company have balls?) . The arrogance is just a reflection of the blind tunnel vision with which these greedy corporate bastards operate in today’s nasty, vicious little Britain.

    In a statement Prince said: “The London Bridge incident should never have happened but was to some extent outside our control, the coach drivers insisted on leaving.

    Oh, I see, in other words: “It was other working class people that were to blame, not our wonderful company, which was created with the well-being of mankind as its sole raison d’etre. If these other working class types had not buggered off, our slaves would have enjoyed the enjoyed the luxury of a coach seat in which to sleep before working a 14 hour shift. In fact, I believe that not all the coaches were full so some people would even have had a double seat.”

    “I am deeply concerned that a private security firm is not only providing policing on the cheap but failing to show a duty of care to its staff and threatening to withdraw an opportunity to work at the Olympics as a means to coerce them to work unpaid.”

    Just plain wrong Mr. Prescott. While I applaud your actions on this matter (whatever your motives), time and again, whether it be railway privatisation, PFI’s in the health service, private water companies, Spanish construction companies milking our airports to keep an insolvent company afloat by not providing snowploughs – whatever, it has been proven that these moves to privatisation cost more to society as a whole than a fairly remunerated public organistaion.

    In conclusion, this despicable company, and indeed any others acting similarly, should be immediately disbarred from receiving a single further money from the public purse “

  44. Chris Tandy says :

    I merely want to thank you, Eddie, for shining light on this shameful episode of darkness. Keep it up. I’ve never used twitter before. Your posts are justification for me to start.

      • Ant says :

        I’m living in Spain at the moment (originally from UK) and this story has stirred up some debate among my Spanish friends. The upshot is, that most people I’ve mentioned it to suggest that there would be protests in the streets over something similar happening here.

        I’ve already witnessed countles protests over changes to conditions and the unemployment rate – especially among youngsters (16-26 yr olds). I’ve also witnessed pensioners grappling with the police. Here the unemployment rate is 24% across the board but 49.8% among young people. But I can tell you, hand on heart, nobody would put up with the kind of exploitation you’ve exposed.

        Good on ya for raising it. I hope now the Jubilovely celebrations are finished and when the MPs get their arses back to Parliament that this will be the first of Milliband’s 6 questions to the tossers sitting opposite.

      • eddiegillard says :

        I hope they do but expect they won’t but thank you for posting.

  45. L Redgrave says :

    I received “training” from CP UK a few years ago.
    Let me start by saying the
    Company is a joke! I Enrolled on a close protection (CP) course as unfortunately the SIA do not deem the Royal Military Police Close Protection unit; where I qualified as worthy of there qualification yet the foreign and commonwealth office were quite happy for me to deploy to various embassy’s around the world. Anyway to gain my civilian SIA badge I had to attend an SIA recognised training programme for a 3-4 day course paid for by the MoD.
    I arrived at a tired out former shop on a back street in Hindley Wigan First impression was not a good one and I thought things can only get better!!
    I was ushered to a small make shift class room on the first floor to be greeted by the instructor (more about them later) who introduced himself as a right hard tw@t (no joke)! Also in the class
    room were other students who had paid upwards of £2000 for a full CP course lasting in the region of 2 weeks. There was a pretty even split in the room half were pumped up tough guys bored of working the doors and the other half job seekers on some kind of a grant paid by the government.
    My course began by the instructor asking my previous qualification (which made him look silly) before sending me out with four other students to teach them how to do a reconnaissance visit. Not correct me if I am wrong but surely that was his job!!
    Each venue I visited were aware of the company. One such venue was the Lowry hotel in Manchester. I spoke with the head of security t the hotel who was well are of the company and Molly Prince. In his words he told me “you seem like a nice fella who knows the job, if I were you I would get the hell away from that company and if Molly Prince turns up here with here doormen again pushing our customers out of lifts etc I will bar the company from using this hotel for good!!

    And so this went on…
    On the final day Prince ordered a range rover be hired as she would be a VIP for the evening while the students were put through the paces and tested. She was driven around Manchester with a friend and a team of body guards (students/doormen). She shopped in the town centre before being driven back to the 5* Lowry where she changed.
    Her and her friend were then taken back in to Manchester where she went on the p!ss until the small hours before being driven back.

    That was the final test for the students CPUK now sanctioned them as CP operators worthy of an SIA badge! Better still Prince enjoyed a night out costing thousands all paid for by the students fees!!

    I honestly can’t believe this outfit is still running, and am even more shocked they are contemplating allowing them to provide staff for the Olympics.

    What a joke !!!

  46. Joa says :

    There is another angle to this story, where companies have unfair access to “free labour” they are also undercutting employers who are willing to pay the going rate. So who had their bid undercut at the Queen’s Jubilee. I disagree with giving employers free labour but it is a good idea to consider this problem from other angles too. The treatment of these people is a disgrace on top of the fact that they were on workfare or “apprenticeships”.

  47. Moog says :

    This is what we will discover:

    A few managers/directors will have made a mint out of this fiasco.
    The ‘poor sods’ in wet ponchos will get nothing.
    Someone in government will apologise for current contracting arrangements and promise a ‘review’. Nothing will change.
    The SIA will face some tough questions and reply with boilerplate PR bull. Nothing will change.
    Some Tory peer will be caught in the headlights of wrong place/wrong time and have to answer some awkward questions. It won’t really be their fault.
    A minister will start stuttering on Today and explain that this is an isolated incident and workfare/slave labour is really an excellent idea for poor people. At the same time a ministerial colleague will be explaining why executive remuneration needs to increase in order to properly incentivise the right people.
    Molly/Mary will keep her head down and despite all the promises of change, will be found running a different company and driving around in another black Range Rover in about three years time, when all this is forgotten.

    • Chris Tandy says :

      Molly was stuttering away on ‘Today’ this morning, and certainly did not inspire confidence. Hard to believe she’s a company director. Actually, she sounded more like the Wigan barmaid I believe she once was.

    • Faringdon says :

      So true.

  48. Nick says :

    Would that “campsite” have been on the lovely Blunts farm landfill site

    http://www.wandsworthguardian.co.uk/news/804019.landfill_cheats_must_be_punished/

  49. Nick says :

    Also

    “We can confirm that Blunts Farm Estates Limited are contemplating locating caravans at Blunts Farm over the Olympic period next year. A recognised camping club was approached some 12 months ago about supporting the location but they felt the site was unsuitable. They confirmed to TBAG that they felt the site was of a ‘valley nature’ and thanks to the excess dumping, the land was saturated making camping unsuitable.”

    from

    http://www.theydonbois-actiongroup.co.uk/page9.htm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: