Impending staff cuts at Dulwich Picture Gallery

[Tinky Winky]

Seen this?

https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/stop-staff-cuts-at-the-dulwich-picture-gallery

[Townleygreen]

shocking. signed and shared.

[Robert Poste's Child]

That does sound outrageous and I've signed the petition.

However, I also looked at the DPG website, which lists 34 members of staff, only two of whom look like they might be in the team involved, so I assume there are more who are not listed plus existing volunteers. This does look like a large staff for a relatively small gallery, but if all the positions are needed they should be staffed and paid properly. When you restructure, it's the role that is redundant, so they can't simply bring in less qualified people at a lower rate or it would trigger claims for unfair dismissal.

[Sue]

Surely they can't bring in people on a wage of ?2.73 an hour?

That must be illegal, surely.

Have I missed something?

[Bellenden Belle]

Nope -

Perfectly legal.

https://www.gov.uk/apprenticeships-guide/pay-and-conditions

Sue Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Surely they can't bring in people on a wage of

> ?2.73 an hour?

>

> That must be illegal, surely.

>

> Have I missed something?

[healey]

The apprentice minimum pay scheme is a scam.

[Tinky Winky]

Robert Poste's Child Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> That does sound outrageous and I've signed the

> petition.

>

> However, I also looked at the DPG website, which

> lists 34 members of staff, only two of whom look

> like they might be in the team involved,

The gallery attendants aren't pictured.

[Loz]

DPG is hardly an evil multi-national. I suspect money is tight and they are responding as best they can.

Maybe if all this signatories to this petition, rather than just criticise, put their hand in their pocket and became Friends of DPG then perhaps the gallery would have the money to keep things the way they are.

[Tinky Winky]

What makes you think that the signatories aren't Friends of DPG?

[Loz]

Tinky Winky Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> What makes you think that the signatories aren't Friends of DPG?

What makes you think they all are?

[Robert Poste's Child]

I can't see a figure for the total actual headcount that's at risk. How many people are likely to lose their job altogether, and how many to be put on new Ts&Cs?

[Tinky Winky]

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Tinky Winky Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > What makes you think that the signatories aren't

> Friends of DPG?

>

> What makes you think they all are?

Nothing. But i know at least 2 friends that have signed this.

[Tinky Winky]

Robert Poste's Child Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I can't see a figure for the total actual

> headcount that's at risk. How many people are

> likely to lose their job altogether, and how many

> to be put on new Ts&Cs?

From the Facebook page "Save Jobs at Dulwich Picture Gallery":

Senior Management at Dulwich Picture Gallery propose to make over half of the current visitor services team redundant, as part of the gallery?s cost-cutting programme.19 members of the front-of-house team will face redundancy. Those retaining their jobs will be asked to sign new annualised hours contracts which will force them to work any hours stipulated by management without over-time rates. The expected impact will be a lower annual income for visitor services staff.

[nxjen]

So to clarify, are you saying there will be 19 redundancies or that out of the 19 there will be some redundancies?

[Bellenden Belle]

I imagine change in t&cs is the introduction of zero-hour contracts. Lots of arts organisations have them and whilst I think they are grim, I imagine DPG is struggling with cuts to funding like many.

[ernesto]

shame they is not still part of the fabulously wealthy but totally driven by altruism dulwich estate any longer

[Robert Poste's Child]

Tinky Winky Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Robert Poste's Child Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I can't see a figure for the total actual

> > headcount that's at risk. How many people are

> > likely to lose their job altogether, and how

> many

> > to be put on new Ts&Cs?

>

> From the Facebook page "Save Jobs at Dulwich

> Picture Gallery":

>

> Senior Management at Dulwich Picture Gallery

> propose to make over half of the current visitor

> services team redundant, as part of the gallery?s

> cost-cutting programme.19 members of the

> front-of-house team will face redundancy. Those

> retaining their jobs will be asked to sign new

> annualised hours contracts which will force them

> to work any hours stipulated by management without

> over-time rates. The expected impact will be a

> lower annual income for visitor services staff.

Thanks, Tinky Winky; hadn't seen the actual figure. So if 19 = over half of the team then I guess the total number put at risk would be 30-something? Or is it a team of 19 put at risk and the expected number of redundancies is lower than that?

[hpsaucey]

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> DPG is hardly an evil multi-national. I suspect

> money is tight and they are responding as best

> they can.

>

> Maybe if all this signatories to this petition,

> rather than just criticise, put their hand in

> their pocket and became Friends of DPG then

> perhaps the gallery would have the money to keep

> things the way they are.

Loz - you've inspired me to both sign the petition AND become a friend of DPG.

I work in a Museum and have done for the past 14 years so seen a fair few general changes across the sector. Yes money is extremely tight in most of them and becoming increasingly so. I don't know the situation here but often staff cuts are the first thing suggested to make savings. Many places have staff cut back to the bone these days.

HP

[Loz]

hpsaucey Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Loz - you've inspired me to both sign the petition AND become a friend of DPG.

I'm pleased, hpsaucey. It's all too easy to sign a petition. Good to see someone willing to put their hand in their pocket as well.

[hpsaucey]

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> hpsaucey Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Loz - you've inspired me to both sign the

> petition AND become a friend of DPG.

>

> I'm pleased, hpsaucey. It's all too easy to sign

> a petition. Good to see someone willing to put

> their hand in their pocket as well.

Ta! Very skint pocket lol ....

[DaveR]

Typical pointless petition. There's no evidence that DPG are doing this for fun - what does everybody suggest they do instead? If they don't have the dough they can hardly keep everyone, on exactly the same terms, and slowly go broke.

[StraferJack]

Anyone able to put an estimate on how much this will save the gallery per annum?

[ernesto]

flog some of their turgid art

eta : not any kind of dig at the staff .

[Robert Poste's Child]

StraferJack Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Anyone able to put an estimate on how much this

> will save the gallery per annum?

Hard to say based on the available info. Presumably the front-of-house people are majority part-time and/or shift workers, so as a ballpark figure 19 redundancies less any statutory pay-offs - maybe ?200K plus further savings over time due to new Ts&Cs / reduced benefits?

It will be interesting to see how this develops as those who are at risk seem to be members of Unite so will presumably have union backing.

[StraferJack]

So wouldn't a combination of less onerous new t&cs, more input from sponsors, reductions in senior salaries and sale of one or two works be a better solution?