party on, dudes

Tony recently asked why, if many of its staff are good, Stoke-on-Trent City Council is so bad. As one of the people employed by that organisation, I feel that question deserves an answer, but it will be too long to fit in a comment on his post.

By way of introduction, I consider that my immediate colleagues and I provide a good service that is welcomed by the residents we work with. Our posts are funded by central government, so we don't cost the Council tax payers of this city a penny.

Today, Steve Robinson, appointed as Chief Executive and Council Manager last November, addressed two huge groups of employees to tell us his plan for the council over the next three to five years. He has already met with all of the managers, and now, over the course of several weeks, he's meeting the rest of the 12,000 staff.

It's impossible to disagree with much of what he said. The Council has to improve, and it's up to every single one of us to provide an excellent service for residents. Steve talked at great length about the Council's values and the aim of achieving excellence. Indeed, he said the word "excellent" so many times it felt like a scene from Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure. Perhaps he'll suggest that we change the organisation's name to Wyld Stallyns-on-Trent City Council.

It's not hard to mock. One of his early e-mails to all staff talked of "one city, one council, one voice", which is highly reminiscent of Adolf Hitler's "one folk, one reich, one fuhrer". Today's event had a huge red curtain across the front of the stage and posters in the Council's colour scheme of red and black. It was easy to imagine long banners down the walls with huge swastikas on them.

Steve stood at a lectern in front of the curtain and orated like a leader at his party conference, complete with the usual tricks of rhetoric: the rule of three, asking questions to gain attention then answering them, and establishing a bond with the audience against a common foe (the few who aren't willing to change).

At the end, he asked everyone to stand up. He then asked, in three separate but similar ways, for anyone who didn't share his vision to sit down. Not surprisingly, no-one did. That kind of manipulation, the simplistic "you're either for us or against us" choice, excluding all other options and viewpoints, and peer pressure must have been what led to Hitler's rallies. (Sitting at the back, I chose not to stand in the first place.)

I found this working the crowd offensive, but I was interested in what he omitted to say. It's all very well to make glib, politician's statements about the need to improve, then try to sweep people along with you. He didn't, however, address how his laudable aims could fit with the long-term policy of not replacing staff who leave, capped off with the recent invitation of applications for voluntary redundancy. Staff are suffering from low morale and feel bruised from repeated re-organisation. In response to a question about how we had seen all this before, all Steve could say was, "Yes, but this time it's different."

I don't want Steve's job. He has a lot to do to achieve his aims, and it's easy to sit at the back and criticise. I like this city and the people who live here. I want to carry on providing a good service, and I want this Council to improve, but it's hard to respect a leader who thinks he can trick us into doing what he wants.