In a message dated 05/04/98 18:16:09 GMT, Ahmad wrote:
<< When you say we did pretty well with KC's mess in 1990, what exactly
was that that we did?>>
We made it work against all the odds. It was clear later that KC didn't
think we could.
<< What other lessons we mustn't forget?>>
All the ones we should have learned and didn't.
<< Oh, having the review body recommendations ignored year on year, or
the pay award being staged year on year. Seeing my real income go down
year on year is something I won't forget quickly.>>
These are a few of them. We could have stuck out in 1990 but no-one had the
stomach for the fight. We cettainly shoukld have made the first interference
with the RB a resignation issue but now that interference is the norm I fear
we have left it a bit late.
<<We did pretty well since 1990. etc etc>>
I meant in the practical sense. I agree it was a financial disaster but that
was because KC undestood how the pool worked and we didn't bother to work it
out. He knew that we were going to pay for the "Bentleys". We were too thick
to work it out.
The same applies to the current fuss over telephone advice to TRs. It is
only when we can get the pool dumped and agree to negotiate realistic fees for
the work that HMG wants us to do that things will improve. I think PCGs offer
us the best chance to do this now. Its not perfect but what ever is. (Do
tell Ahmad - see previous reply)
Mike
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|