Thugs have targeted bosses at Cityclean, the council-run rubbish and recycling service, with threats to staff and their families and slashed tyres reported to the police.
The Labour leader of Brighton and Hove City Council said that anyone trying to undermine continuing efforts to improve the working culture at the Cityclean depot in Hollingdean would not succeed.
Councillor Bella Sankey said that the council remained steadfastly determined to tackle historic problems that had affected Cityclean.
And she ssid that thd latest incidents of criminal behaviour were now being investigated by Sussex Police.
These include Cityclean managers having their car tyres cut, the council said, and direct threats of serious harm made to staff and their households.
Sussex Police said: “We can confirm we have received these reports and our inquiries are ongoing. Anyone with information is asked to contact police online or by calling 101.”
The council started taking disciplinary action in a string of cases immediately after the publication of an independent report by barrister Aileen McColgan last November.
The report was published after a three-month investigation and included testimonies from more than 70 witnesses.
It was commissioned after Councillor Sankey called for an independent inquiry when whistle-blowers came forward alleging sex discrimination, racial harassment and other abuses.
The report found that many of the individuals accused of these and other inappropriate behaviours were among a group of around 10 white men.
They were described by witnesses as having been particularly protected by the local GMB branch within the council.
Earlier this year, Dave Russell, a former employee and GMB rep at the depot, was charged with having a samurai sword and is due to stand trial later this year. He denies the charge.
Since the publication of the McColgan report, the council said that it had continued taking significant steps to improve the situation, including starting disciplinary action against staff suspected of being involved.
At present, the council has taken out 99 separate disciplinary actions at Cityclean since 2023.
A total of 37 members of staff have now left the organisation since the McColgan report was published while others remain suspended pending the results of continuing HR procedures.
Councillor Sankey said that the council had passed the concerning recent examples of potentially criminal behaviour to Sussex Police and would continue to do.
She said: “When the depth of bullying, aggression, racism, misogyny and homophobia at the depot was exposed by the (McColgan) report, I promised colleagues and residents we would take a zero-tolerance approach to this behaviour and begin the tough job of transforming our service into a high-quality and reliable one
“The thuggery of a few in response to the decisive action being taken will not deter us. In fact it strengthens my resolve to root out this appalling behaviour.
“Any potential criminal behaviour, like the shocking incidents we have seen directed at colleagues in recent weeks, will be reported to Sussex Police.
“Our staff deserve a safe working environment, free from intimidation, and our residents deserve an excellent service and we will do everything necessary to deliver both.”
Well, as long as the thugs are in a union eh ?
Horrible that people are being targeted in this way.
This article from earlier this year makes it sound like the way things were handled by councillors in 2019 has come back to the council to bite them. If it were the case that decisions made by councillors “contributed to the climate of bullying, harassment and intimidation at Cityclean” I can’t understand why councillor conduct is not being investigated alongside those doing the bullying and causing criminal damage: https://www.brightonandhovenews.org/2024/04/25/councillors-gave-jobs-back-to-three-workers-sacked-by-managers/
If it were the case that councillors turned a blind eye in the past to bad and potentially criminal / bullying behaviour, (as the article earlier this year suggests), it’s not OK and surely needs looking at – either by standards processes at the council, or the police – depending on the exact nature of the “deals” mentioned in the article.
Awful that officers are being targeted like this in the meantime. Important that Bella Sankey’s “zero tolerance” extends to looking at the allegations made against councillors in media articles like the ones in the April article – it’s not enough to just tackle bullies and thugs and not investigate claims of people potentially allowing it to continue previously by turning a blind eye. If it doesn’t extend to that then I’m worried that she is putting protecting councillor colleagues’ poor decision making in the past, over and above genuine service change – and am worried this continues to put staff at risk.
There is never a justification for violent and destructive behaviour.
Benjamin – 100% agree with your comment that there is never a justification for violent and destructive behaviour.
Also think there is no justification for the type of political interference which it’s suggested undermined attempts to take action before in (referenced in the article in the link I posted before). If those allegations have any substance, and if there is any substance to the “doing deals” the article refers to, those claims need to also be investigated.
The comment “Any potential criminal behaviour, like the shocking incidents we have seen directed at colleagues in recent weeks, will be reported to Sussex Police.” is an odd comment – just makes it sound like the council doesn’t always bother reporting potential criminal behaviour to the police – if not why not?
If councillors didn’t report potentially criminal behaviour to the police before, what did they not report, which of them didn’t report it, and why not?
Surely ANY potentially criminal behaviour should ALWAYS be reported to the police and it would be a failure of public office if this didn’t happen in the past. This should not need to be said.
I think that comment stems from unless it is explicitly stated, people assume it is not the case, Cathy.
GMB the gift that keeps giving.
And Labour are about to make it even easier to strike. The Tories were vile but we are about to see a replay of the 1970’s under this totalitarian mob.
Could you explain your thesis please?
Particularly the link between a) localised illegality, b) the right to withdraw labour and c) totalitarianism (potentially as it relates to the “mob” which is contradictory).
The 37 staff who have left . Did they leave due to the report ?
I guess they left because they could see where things were heading. However must congratulate Bella on standing firm. Until we kick the GMB out of town this will continue I fear.
It’s a shame though that local Labour politicians muddied the waters by accepting a donation from the GMB ahead of their 2023 local election campaign to print and dsitibute election material – especially if it were the case that the issues about bullying and harassment accusations were well known amongst councillors at that time.
Bella also used GMB office space during her own by election campaign in December 2022. I don’t think it’s a good look to cosy up to unions when they are offering cash, support and freebies like using union offices, when they don’t appear to have taken any meaningful action, or stood firm and investigated allegations of councillors undermining officer decisions in the past. Why won’t she tackle this problem.
Yes – action needs to be taken against bullies and thugs, but anyone who turned a blind eye and allowed it to happen for so long should also be investigated. Until Bella is prepared to do that – I don’t think congratulations are in order.
I’m sure it’s purely coincidence that Nancy Platts – whose entire political career was financed by trade unions made a dodgy deal with the GMB in 2019.
In the same way it’s a coincidence the GMB have put in a big equal pay claim over 6 months after Unison settled.
Bella Sankey deserves a lot of credit for taking on the bully boys of the GMB. And if the GMB union continues to ignore the behaviour of its reps, it needs to be derecognised within the council.
As mentioned in my comment above – current Labour councillors have received support from the GMB, including Bella (who presumably benefitted from GMB’s £4,200 May 2023 donation for printing of local election material and who also used a GMB office herself during her own campaign). It isn’t just something in the past that’s linked to Nancy Platt’s administration. Even recently, Bella is on public record making statements that ALL Labour councillors are proud union members, but a lot of them don’t actually state which ones they are members of on their register of interests online.
It’s fine for councillors to be members of unions, and unions can be a good thing – but when councillors don’t declare, or refuse to declare, whether they are a GMB member during a debate on issues linked to Cityclean and GMB problems that have come up – that’s not OK. There needs to be full transparency on stuff like this, and there’s not.
I’m not excusing the behaviour of the thugs in this article – action definitely needs to be taken. I’m just genuinely aghast that there’s been no proper investigation of what went wrong in relation to councillor decisions made in 2019, which it seems led to officers being undermined according to reports, and is connected to this issue not being tackled 5 years ago when there was the opportunity to do it.
Nationally the GMB were in the top 20 list of donors to the Labour Party nationally for the first three months of 2024, donating £290,125.00 to the party ahead of the General Election. It’s true to say that the GMB may not have made any individual or direct donation to Labour MP candidates ahead of May 2024 election – but funding streams between unions and political parties don’t always seem to be that clear, which is why I think declarations of councillors’ membership at a local level are important when discussing council business that is connected to the work a particular union does.
I think Labour are trying to clean up lately. Gmb picket line cheerleaders Nancy platts and lloyd russell moyle were not allowed to stand as kemptown mps. Nancy would have had the management removed from city clean and let the gmb reps run the place but Bella seems to be taking a different approach.
Tricky to preach tolerance and welcome and being a “city of sanctuary” when the refuse collection service is being run as an oppressive fiefdom.
Dr Brighton, has the Labour Party paid GMB back the donation they got from them last year? I’m assuming not – but if they produce evidence to say it was paid back I’ll eat my hat and stand corrected. Accepting money at election time and distancing yourself after doesn’t sound like a different approach to me.
No idea as I am not a member of the labour party or a local councillor. I am witnessing labour councillors standing up to bad behaviour from gmb reps which I don’t think has happened before though
It’s an issue of governance, but it was Lloyd in Kemptown that took money from the GMB. Hove wouldn’t touch their money with a barge pole. Which is why as you say, many members are glad Lloyd and Nancy are history.
Being a union member isn’t really the problem. What was – was the use and abuse of Personnel Appeals. Far too many useful idiots in the Greens and Labour to make it a fair process, another thing Bella stopped.
The money was used for local election purposes though – why it went through Lloyd’s office in itself is weird when the donation explicitly says it was for the local elections ie councillors not MPs.
The Labour Party also had a member of their local election campaign based in the GMB’s Church Road office during their 2023 election campaign. It’s in council minutes from March this year only because in December Bella Sankey made a statement for the public record that “the GMB has contributed nothing to the election of any of our current Labour group members” and she was challenged on the accuracy of her statement. She then conceded “I can confirm a donation was given by the GMB to the Kemp Town Constituency Labour Party, some of which was used towards the May 2023 election campaign and the Labour Party organisers for the local elections also had use of the GMB office for that election.”
Bella did go on to say that as she did not become Leader until after May that she was unaware of the donation to Kemp Town CLP, but she must have been aware that she used the GMB office during her own election campaign just 6 months before that, as there was (a now deleted) photo of her on Twitter sat in the GMB office for a phone banking session. Presumably she (or some councillors at least) also knew that Labour Party “organisers” were using the GMB office during the May 2023 campaign. Perhaps she didn’t know, but it’s all very opaque when stuff like this really shouldn’t be, it should be clear and declared. People in public office should be accountable.
Agree there’s no problem being a union member – that’s not the issue. You shouldn’t be able to just pick and choose when it’s politically convenient to be open and transparent about union membership though and distance yourself at other times.
On a plus side, I do think the action taking place now is good – just doesn’t go far enough imo. Proper investigation of the political interference should happen, and Bella has only tackled the member appeal panels, she’s stopped short of investigating political interference beyond that from what I’ve seen in webcasts and online articles.