AN EMAIL sent to Wirral Council’s staff today warns the entire workforce faces being fired and re-hired.

Back in November, the Globe revealed a leaked document showed the authority was preparing for just such a contingency if its 4,800 staff did not agree to major changes.

At the time it was seen as a worst case scenario and was only to be considered if all else failed.

It appears the town hall is now fast-approaching that crisis point.

The emailed message from council chief executive Graham Burgess says despite extensive negotiations, trade unions have indicated they’re not prepared to sign an agreement over revising employees’ contracts.

The move includes workers taking four days’ unpaid leave per year, major cuts in overtime opportunities and reduced car allowance.

Mr Burgess wrote: “This decision leaves the council with a serious and growing gap in our budget.

“As no collective agreement has been reached, this leaves the council with no choice but to take steps to prepare to dismiss and re-engage all employees.”

The chief reveals he was “extremely disappointed” with the union’s decision, especially given that the council reduced savings made from initial terms and conditions proposals significantly - from £4.2m to £3.7m.

He says the “dismiss and re-engage” option is a step already taken by several other councils over the years: “but was always our absolute last resort, and one that we strived to avoid through extensive negotiations over the past six months.”

The email stresses no council employee will be made compulsorily redundant, through any potential dismissal and reengagement process.

All staff who accepts their amended contract will be re-employed without any break in service.

“Dismissal and reengagement is not a step that we take lightly, and I understand that this will be a worrying time for all employees.

“We remain committed to continued negotiations with the trade unions, even if we are forced to issue dismiss and reengage letters, we will continue to seek an agreement.”

Council leader Cllr Phil Davies said: “I must admit this decision by the union has come as a bit of a surprise.

“We have been negotiating for many weeks and I was under the impression the union had got what they considered to be the best deal for their members.

“A ballot was held asking whether members wanted to pursue industrial action and the result came back ‘no.’

“So we have reached an impasse.”

Councillor Davies explained any move by the authority towards “dismiss and re-engage” would take time as 90 days’ notice would have to be given.

He continued: “This means predicted savings we have anticipated in the budget would not be met. If we cannot find the £3.7m we need, then other avenues would have to be explored and more difficult decisions taken.

“I am anxious to avoid making cuts in other areas of the budget.

"I have said to our full-time officials that my door is always open. We need to sit around the table and find agreement.”

Conservative group leader Cllr Jeff Green said the council is a shambles.

He said: "This goes to the heart of matter, which is the competence of this administration.

"They made the judgement that the staff would just accept anything they decided - and it's now been shown they got that completely wrong.

"We are now in the totally ludicrous position of having to fire and re-hire all our staff, once again turning this borough into a national laughing stock."

Oxton Liberal Democrat councillor Stuart Kelly said: "This is a truly appalling policy decision.

"It is clear that Graham Burgess brought forward savings proposals for this year's budget, linked to staff terms and conditions, which were undeliverable in the real world.

"This sort of macho management has no place in the modern workplace, the tactic of mass sackings failed in Liverpool in the 1980s and will fail now in the 21st century.

"The Labour leader and group should be ashamed of themselves that they are allowing this policy to go forward or even be considered."

The crisis comes as a result of the council's struggle to cut more than £40m from its annual spending which, it says, is necessary after reductions in funding from central government.