Croydon’s £204,000 per year chief exec appears to have bowed to the inevitable that the government will take over the running of the debt-laden council. By WALTER CRONXITE, Political Editor
“Her empire is crumbling around her.”
That’s how one Croydon council staffer reacted to Inside Croydon’s exclusive news report yesterday that Huw Rhys Lewis BSc, BArch, MSc, MRIBA, MAPM, MRICS had become the fourth executive director in chief exec Katherine Kerswell’s corporate leadership team to leave Fisher’s Folly in the past six months.
Significantly, Lewis is one of two six-figure salaried execs to have their departures confirmed since the government’s announcement last month that it is considering sending in Commissioners to take over the running of Croydon.
Condescending: Katherine Kerswell
After an unusual gap of a week in her usual condescending messages to council staff, the chief executive resumed her “weekly waffle” last Friday.
Front-line staff did not need to do much reading between the lines to see that after five years of failure, despite massive cuts to staff and services, Kerswell is desperately trying to moderate her position and somehow back down from the outright opposition she initially showed to the Commissioner decision.
A Commissioner, or Commissioners, are expected to be named and to arrive in south London very soon. Perhaps as soon as this week, according to Kerswell herself.
Ahead of the formal appointment, the Croydon Commissioner(s) might even take some time out to prepare themselves by watching the webcast of tonight’s meeting of full council.
It’s the only full council meeting scheduled between now and October 22 – a 14-week period when Kerswell and her top brass will escape even a modicum of public scrutiny. Just the way Kerswell and her cronies like it.
Jim McMahon, the local government minister, nor officials at the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, probably won’t have seen the message Kerswell sent to staff last Friday.
So here it is, for what it’s worth.
“This week,” Kerswell wrote, “I met with directors and heads of service to talk about the council’s current position in relation to government intervention.” It’s always reassuring to learn that someone being paid a salary of £204,000 per year is holding regular meetings with their colleagues.
Underwhelmed: government officials have not been impressed with the council’s response to Jim McMahon’s announcement
“With the improvement and assurance panel’s time with us ending on 20 July and Parliament heading into summer recess, we expect an update soon, possibly as early as next week,” meaning this week.
And Kerswell wrote: “Over the past three weeks, we have shared our views on the government’s announcement that they are ‘minded to’ appoint Commissioners and set out what we believe is more [sic] suitable next step for Croydon.”
Now, though, Kerswell, the only local authority chief exec ever to issue three Section 114 notices, has tried to pivot her position.
In her memo to staff, Kerswell wrote: “But we also know that we need to be ready if the decision is made to appoint Commissioners in whatever form that may take.”
Patronising doesn’t begin to cover Kerswell’s tone: “In this week’s meetings, we talked about what being ready really means both from an operational perspective – with our plans and procedures – but also as people.” Yep. She really did write that and then distribute it around the whole council.
“We must make sure that we are ready to work with Commissioners if they do come, to help them understand where we’ve been and where we think we’re able to go as an authority with the right support.”
Kerswell, who ordered that browsers on council-issued computers should block this website, promised to “write to you again soon as soon as we have more news”, and claimed that she wanted staff to have opportunities to express their views.
“Making time to talk to one another will continue to be absolutely essential, whatever the outcome.”
Inside Croydon is unable to confirm that there is an office sweepstake doing the rounds in Fisher’s Folly, with the winner to scoop a pool of cash based on how many more of her execrable weekly waffles Kerswell gets to write. Current favourite to win? Two.
Read more: Ministry planning one-year stay in Croydon for Commissioners
Read more: Mayor coming under pressure to sack council CEO Kerswell
Read more: From tantrum to grovel, Perry shifts posture for Commissioners
Read more: Agency spend scandal: Perry blasted for ‘ridiculous shambles’
- If you have a news story about life in or around Croydon, or want to publicise your residents’ association or business, or if you have a local event to promote, please email us with full details at inside.croydon@btinternet.com
As featured on Google News Showcase
- Our comments section on every report provides all readers with an immediate “right of reply” on all our content. Our comments policy can be read by clicking here
Inside Croydon is a member of the Independent Community News Network
How is she on a higher salary than the Mayor of London and Prime Minister? I don’t get it.
It’s always a false comparison to relate the pay of civic servants with someone who holds office as a result of an election process.
Besides, CEO of Croydon is a more difficult job.
What a shambles.
Talk about “in office but no longer in power”. La Kerswell will now have no choice but to be fully subservient to the Commissioners. If they decide she is no longer needed, does that mean another Negreedy style pay-off for her, out of Council Tax funds ?
Probably, unless they can find grounds for gross misconduct.
Like three S114s?
“This week, I met with directors and heads of service to talk about the council’s current position in relation to government intervention.” Small meeting, as most of them have run for the hills in recent weeks/days ?!
Is the Labour Party that pushed Croydon into its first S114 by any chance related to the Labour Party that is now contemplating sending in commissioners? I think we should be told
Yes. Separate branches of the same political party of nonentities and third-rate politicians (are there any other types of politician in the UK any more?!). Four Labour MPs have been suspended by the party today for insubordination, but I had never heard of any of them, which I am wearing as a badge of honour !
According to Inside Croydon the fault lies equally with both parties
Oh no, Dave. Things have got much, much worse in the last three years. What with the £800m debt left in 2014…
Please can someone explain the legal position of why a Chief Executive is entitled to a payment in excess of a statutory redundancy payment after losing their post due to their incompetence. Negrini if she stayed on would have been clearly culpable of gross negligence and malpractice in her position without Newman’s kind generosity with Croydon Council money. Has he ever supplied a reason for his action because he himself was clearly finished when he undertook this.
Kerswell-Reid dismal performance during her term in failing to get to grips with the debt situation and planning a budget purely reliant on future handouts had led to her becoming effectively redundant. Why the hell should anyone get out a chequebook beyond statutory redundancy to let her go and be ineffective elsewhere?
I think she is 63 now. It will probably be her last job before retirement unless she has the brass neck to offer her services as a consultant or interim executive officer at another council.
When McMahon made his “minded to” announcement, Kerswell was advised to consider her position.
Instead, she’s pondered her pension pot.
You make a post redundant, not the person, usually because there’s no requirement for the work or no money. There are procedures to go through and compensation payments to be made, which won’t come to more than £21,570. Obviously you can be more generous.
You can dismiss someone for disciplinary reasons, having been through due process, but if you screw it up and they win a tribunal case you’ll be required to pay compensation, which will be a lot more than £21,570 if you’ve deprived them of a £250k pa salary.
Or you can dismiss someone for no reason, ie unfair dismissal, but you’ll need to pay severence terms generous enough to avoid a tribunal and they’ll want a decent payoff.
Your opening question is based on a misunderstanding. That’s because being dismissed from your employment for lack of capability, what you call “incompetence”, is different from being dismissed due to redundancy.
The former can be summed up as lack of skill or “can’t do”. It would typically require the employer to point out the problem to the employee and give them time and help to improve. Any moves towards ending the employee’s employment would have to take account of the Acas Code of Practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures. Dismissal in these circumstances would not require any compensation, other than notice, if paid in lieu and not worked. It would also include holiday earned up to the last day of work but not taken.
With the latter, the job is disappearing. This could be down to the whole business closing (e.g. Allders), a workplace is closing (e.g. Poundland in the Whitgift Centre closed, the one in North End stayed open) or fewer employees are needed to carry out a particular kind of work (“cuts” in any place you can think of) . The employer has to follow various processes including consultation, having a fair way to decide which employees might be made redundant and seeing if suitable alternative employment can be found in the company for staff who would otherwise be dismissed.
If an employee is made redundant, they may be entitled to redundancy pay. This is calculated using a government formula and figure that takes account of their age and how long they have worked for the employer. Many companies pay more to soften the blow and minimise pushback; some people are happy to take the money and move on, and volunteer to be made redundant.
Unless the Mayor or the Commissioners are proposing to abolish the post of Chief Executive, as Wiltshire council did in 2011, or are about to apply the Council’s capability policy and procedure to Ms Kerswell, as Commissioners did to Slough’s CEO in 2022, it’s all academic.
Thank you for taking my question seriously. With regard to Negrini the issue never occurred because of the actions of Newman. If he had not acted her position would have been untenable anyway.
With regard to Kerswell-Reid what is a Chief Executive when they are no longer able to hold Executive power. She is redundant de facto and another space occupier in a untenable position.
Rather than act with intregrity if in such a position we know this is not part of this pairs skill set and they could take various actions from developing an illness to lawyering up and nitpick over every issue or a mixture of both.
The Council should act in the best interests of the Residents of the Borough and not follow precedent and act in the best interests of the failed Chief Executive.
The Commons goes on recess for the summer next Tuesday so that’s the latest any announcements re commissioners will be made as the government will want to clear the decks and the latest a ministerial statement can be made.
The announcement will be coming much sooner than that.
LMFAO, all these execs at Croydon Council must be wondering where all these leaks are coming from.
What leaks?
Parliamentary Recess dates are announced well in advance. They aren’t state secrets.
As is the process for appointing commissioners.
If senior council execs (including the lawyers), mayor and senior councillors aren’t aware of those then they would be showing distinct lack of curiosity in the future of the council.
It’s a reference to the internal council memo from Kerswell. That you’ve just read.
Word of future career advice for Kerswell – when the client asks for a cheese burger, reply with ,”would you like fries with that?” Perhaps, that’s an appointment she would be good at.