Why? For one thing people would have career growth and knowledge sharing

Lower cost resources could be leveraged for some items than others

Purchasing power for licensed software could occur

it depends. Admistrative work (church secretary) and janitorial work, may be required to do other things that are not secretarily or jannitorial.  We share a building with ANglcians, and it has an appartment for the Priest, which is now used by Janitorial staff who will oepn the building at various times, and provide security at alltimes.  

Howevr if a church only uses their secretary or janitor for specific tasks that all janitors and secretaries do, than it would be a good idea. in big cities where churches are no longer tied inot the surronding community as they used to be.

Umm, no opening a door and security items or items specific to a congregation would be part of the agreement

I have never been exposed to churches that have any staff other than clergy. The organist gets an honorarium, as does the secretary (who basically does bulletins only). The church members clean the church, mow the grass, etc.... So, there is nothing for me to say in this topic.

Our paid staff consists of minister, RE coordinator (half time), and office manager/secretary (half time). I can't see contracting out any of them. Office manager handles a lot of of confidential files and is the rental agent so I'm not sure we would contract that kind of work out.

Our pianists have been on an honorarium basis for many years though that may be changing now to a more contractual relationship since we have formalized them as "co-Music Directors". However I'm not involved with that aspect of things any more so I don't know for sure.

Custodial services are contracted with the property committee responsible for managing that relationship. That only covers interior, though. Exterior we look after ourselves save for snowplowing, which is contracted.

Mendalla

We have a big church. Two full time ministers, one part time, full time organist , two full time sextons and one part time, a full time administrator and a part time book keeper.

I think we get knowledge, loyalty, ministry fromall employees. Much more than contract work. The sextons, while primarily in charge of the building offer a valuable ministry service to the many members who drop by weekly.

Our church is open six days a week till ten each night, houses a nursery school as well as many community groups.

Our church has no janitorial staff because we, the people of our church, clean our church building.

I like the idea of the people of the church donating their time and skills towards work on the church building. Why, one of my Grandfathers and his contemporaries actually helped build the UCCanada building the family attended. Later in the building's history, the people of that church got together and built a wheelchair ramp when one was needed.

Hmm, folks I think thatched I need to explain purchase of service

I suspect that this, if I am understanding it correctly, may work better in some areas than others. I'm thinking it would work well for congregations where these positions may not be full time. In my congregation we have a full time janitor, a full time office manager and a part time assistant, so it may not work so well.

Ok, so let me explain purchase of service.

Picture a central organization which has building maintenance.

You currently are using a custodian who is responsible for everything, but, really, your load is lower at some times of the year and higher at others.  You have some activity which is weekly, some which is daily, some which is yearly, some which is emergency.   you may have a secondary person who also does work

You currently have an administrative assistant or building manager.  This person is responsible for a lot of items, but really our load is lower at some times of the year and higher at others.  You have some activity which is weekly, some which is daily, some which is yearly, some which is emergency.   you may have a secondary person who also does work

Many of you, if you have email, already have a purchase of service at a very low cost.

You are paying a set amount of money and expect that email will work.

You have another one with your phone company, and your internet provider.

You may have one where someone comes in regularly to tune your pianos or organ.  I am guessing you haven't acquired a full-time tuner because you so rarely require the need.

I know I touched a sore point with people based on the comment that employees care more than contractors -- I would argue the point that is not correct and I have seen contractors provide a better level of service in part because they are contractors.

Confidentiality is confidentiality.  I also suggest that your employees are a high risk for confidentiality issues.

If you are using your administration person as a social worker, then i suggest your misusing hte resource, unless that person is trained in that field or pastoral care.

If we had the option of a central organization I think that would do wonders for us - both for custodial and church secretary.

But, being in a small community, there is not such a service.

It would especially work well with the church secretary position.  Pinga, you mention career progression . . . I think in some cases people use our secretary position (11 hours per week) as a stepping stone to a full-time, better paid position - and we are constantly hiring.  There is no career progression within us, so the career progression is in another office or company.

exactly, beloved.  If they could move up to bigger churches or step down to smaller ones, or job share , then you might find happier, more satisfied employees.

I recognize also that works in S. Ontario with lots of churches may not work in rural.

It might even enable better services as well.  For example. many churches have admin support only on certain days, or just in the morning. Having admin services shared could increase the hours an administratkor can answer the phone, and do other work. 

We have contracted custodial services from an outside company for many years - works well for us, for the various reasons pinga stated above.  We also contract out snow plowing & shovelling in the winter. 

Our organist & choral director are on annual 'fee for service' contracts, rather than being 'employees'. 

Our church office admin person (almost full time) is an employee of our congregation - she works 10 months of the year, with July & August off;  we hire someone (often a student) for less hours in July & August as workload demand is less; this works well for all involved. 

If the argument is that contracting out (out sourcing) is a viable way to set up a new Cafe site, then who manages the contract and the funding issues?  It is too much for volunteers.  Hence the need to hire at least one F/T person to coordinate operations, volunteers and financial administration.

Redhead, that is not what this thread is about.  I am just explaining how purchase of service works.

Doing a great job Pinga.

Where Beloved's congregation seems to be "constantly hiring," our congregation is at the other end of the spectrum. We seem to do a good job of keeping our staff happy. Our office administrator has been with us for about 25 years! Within the past 5 years we've hired both a new office assistant and janitor, but their predecessors had both been with us for over 20 years. I don't think these people ever have truly quiet days, but it's true that their workload does go up around Christmas and Easter. Our office administrator does have training in pastoral care, which many administrators do not. Having said all of that, we are a larger congregation - I can see how many smaller congregations, especially those in urban areas, could benefit from Pinga's suggestion.

It could be partially that I am aware of the skillset required to do office administration and how , though some keep current, others do not and they do not have peers or a team to help them come current.

I have seen ungodly mechanisms and ineffective tools which just drive the operational cost of running a church and the challenge of ministers.

Ditto re custodians.

We can and shoudl consider are churches being fair to their staff if they are sole providers with no support mechanisms?

A purchased service allows for someone to have oversight of that employee.

Dependent on the service agreement, there can be no oversight....such as for your email , internet or mail delivery.  Those are services you have purchased where you pay x amount of money and expect y to occur.  There is no oversight required other than if you are unhappy with eh service you seek a different supplier.

in the case of snow removal, there may be more, or in the case of other types where you have some sort of a check or trigger mechanism "  It snowed, service needs to be provided" "elevator is broke, you need to fix it"

I am part of a small congregation. We have just moved and are renting from another denomination. I am not sure how it will work out right now. When we shared a building with another denomination, we also shared other things related to building maintenance. We had a shared photocopier that was leased. We shared a custodian who came in once a week or so. The lawn maintenance and snow removal was shared between the two congregations. We would take two months in the summer, and they would take the other two months. If grass happened to grow longer than four months we would sort it out. We did have a contracted admin for awhile until the people doing the work ended the contract due to life changes. We now have a part-time admin person for a few hours per week.

The idea of a central agency or organization to provide some services is attractive. It may also be one of those "seemed like a good idea at the time" kind of things. Hospitals have been contracting out housekeeping, laundry and dietary with mixed results. I have worked with those staff who were employees of the hospital and in situations where they were contracted workers. There is often better value for money when they are hospital employees. Often contracted workers are exploited and paid poorly. I am not convinced it is the best option.

Our congregation though, is not in a position to hire employees. We only have a half-time minister we do a lot of the work that needs to be done.

There is a difference between a contractor and a contracted purchase of service.

A contractor is just someone who you bring in and does work in your existing structure and instead of being an employee, they are a contractor.

A purchase of service may have employees or contractors, but you have a contract with the provider to provide service.

In a company that I am aware of, there are fulltime employees who have been, imho, mishandled and do crappy service delivery.  they are an embarassment to the organization theyare a part of.  contractors were loaned from one of the service teams and ran circles around them. those contractors are employees of the contracting house.

So, ......i think it can go both ways. 

Poor management and accountability, whether of a contracted purchase of service, a contractor or an employee will allow shoddy work to continue.

note: management doesn't have to be extensive.  Use some metrics, do surveys, measure key deliverables.

There also difference in the benefits/costs between large organisations like Hospitals, and smaller ones like churches.  For example a main cost saving in hosptials/universities etc is lower salaries and benefits, espicially if one is replacing a union. While as I understand it, in small organisations it allows for more hours, and better pay for employees , as well as a way to increase one skills, all the while still lowering the overall cost to the church, and a improvement in services.

It would be great for presbyteries to discuss this sort of 'bulk buying' strategy.

 My experience with this sort of 'resource sharing' is in Eastern Canada, where some (Maritime Conference) pastoral charges pool/share administrative services (as in: one person is hired to do the admin) for payroll and other paperwork required for a pastoral charge between a number of churches; three or four, typically.

Over 35 years, every bulk buying approach I have seen in the United Church, save one, failed. The one what worked was heating oil. The local PetroCanada dealer got about two dozen churches in a buying group and we saved money. Every other such group buy I know of or have been a part of in the churc has failed because of lack of volume or organizational issues. The use of purchased services, on the other hand, can lead to expoitation, unfair wages and lack of benefits. It then becomes a justice issue. Choose you poison.

Sure, it can. It can also not lead to it, but employees can lead to that...and deadend jobs, or people being kept because of relationship rather than because they actually do their job.

There is this for some purchases & services - http://www.buyingunited.ca/

But for services - why do some people default to it only being a church oriented or church organized group?  I don't think this is a necesary delineation. 

Carolla, I concur, it doesn't have to be.   I think people in churches think they are unique and have no commonality with other congregations, let alone other denominations or organizations.

In the large down-town church I attend, we have a full-time office administrator.  She has been with us for years.  She is busy all the time - some days more so than others but the otherwise slow days are 'catch-up' days.   She doesn't belong to our congregation or denomination, but she knows her job and how a church works, and is also the front-line rep for our church.  I don't think an outside organization could provide someone as efficient (especially since knowing the who's who, and what's what, is part of the job).   Volunteers help out during the odd day she needs off - and during busy times.  Perhaps we do have paid help during Annual Report time. 

In the large down-town church I attend, we have a full-time office administrator.  She has been with us for years.  She is busy all the time - some days more so than others but the otherwise slow days are 'catch-up' days.   She doesn't belong to our congregation or denomination, but she knows her job and how a church works, and is also the front-line rep for our church.    Volunteers help out during the odd day she needs off - and during busy times.  Perhaps we do have paid help during Annual Report time. 

I don't think an outside organization could provide someone as efficient (especially since knowing the who's who, and what's what, is part of the job).

/
In the small church I previously attended, the secretary was only paid for six hours a week (mainly to get the bulletin ready). It could be a perfect job for a student to get some office practice, or for a retired person looking to pick up a bit of extra money. It also seemed to work best when the person was also a member of the congregation and looked upon it as being a paid volunteer who willingly gave of his time and talent, and was paid what the church could afford. It didn't work when one minister decided that it should be someone from outside the congregation working a set number of hours. The person hired had no interest in finding out how the congregation worked, and no commitment to the job. When that minister left the position gradually reverted back to its original job description. Again I don't think an outside firm would be able to do the job as well as a committed member of the congregation.

It might be different for janitorial services - but would they have the flexibility? Sometimes churches have weddings, funerals, or dinners late on a Saturday and the building has to be set to rights for Sunday morning.

You presume that it couldn't be a pool.  People that get church communities, get seniors.

If the presumption is that you know people and have been there for years, how do you associate with new people, what happens if the person leaves.

The same excuses are given for why people in our field can't be contractors or from a service provider.  I can tell you, that most of the reasons hide incompetency and risk, and do nothing to provide good service that a service provider can't do.

When we talk about cost, and we talk about service, but htere are a few sacred cows that have emotional baggage around them and one of them is administrative or operational support.

What about justice?

The UCC constantly talks about doing justice for people.  How is continuing the societal trend of giving out bit work, part time, to a few people, no doubt at lower wages, doing justice and good for the society.  One person said recently, that "a Job is a Job."  Well, no its not!  A $10.95 position, part time, with no benefits is hardly to be considered providing employment and providing a stable base for society. 

How many times have we - the church - wrung our hands about the plight of the young, or the inexperienced, in trying to get employment?  How many times have we called on some level of government to lift up those in need of employment and provide sustainable, decent chances to work.  Its hardly a good model for a group that calls themselves Christian to then turn and seek to get what they want, cheapest way possible, and on the backs usually, of those who can least afford to work cheap. 

To that end, our Council chooses to hire all the people who are needed as staff and put all the staff on the ADP payroll service.  The ministers, the musicians, the secretarial, the treasurer, the custodians.  Now, not all are full time.  But all are paid and are usually provided a minimum of 2% pay increase per year.  This conscious decision comes about when we read a certain creed that says, ``To seek justice and resist evil.`

Be careful where you tread, the road may lead downhill.

Yup, what Matt said.

Matt, you presume purchase of service is low wage....or a bad thing.

I had thought that churches were about doing good work.  That good work includes ensuring appropriate management of costs and resources.

We have heard time & time again how church doesn't treat their staff fairly. M&P committees not adequately prepared to do reviews or career paths.  

Have you ever considered that the service provider may actually treat their employees more fairly than the chruch would.

That is a completely bad argument Pinga.  Staffing agencies charge a very high hourly rate and pay the person doing the work between 11 and 15 dollars an hour.  The agency takes the other 15 to 20 dollars cherged per hour.   Contract wages through agencies are very low.  I know that as fact. 

So no, contracting work does not make economical sense, nor does it make sense in a social justice way, and it does not make sense in a capital based society. 

It only makes sense to people trying to save money,  and exploit others.

Redhead, I use contractors as well, and they make very good money and the contracting gets a cut, but, no where near what you are talking about. 

Exploitation only works if there are no other possibilities or locations to get work.

I am also not suggesting that a purchase of service is the kind you speak of. 

It could be the presbytery hiring a pool of resources which are then contracted to churches.

Honestly, and I mean this seriously Redhead, do you have any grasp of the real world?

Actually, i do have the grasp of the real world.  And I know for fact, as an example that a PSW gets paid an average 15 dollars an hour, while the agency fee is 30- 35 dollars an hour.  Same goes with secretarial and admin staff.  BTW, understanding costs and the real world makes me a solid grant writer.

There are groups of people with skillsets that are exploited through agency/outsourcing employment methods, that include no benefits, etc, 

And to add insult to injury: when someone in that position becomes ill, suddenly healthcare costs become an issue and everyone gets into a tizzy around the costs of medical care.  It is a crazy conundrum. 

It is a bullshit argument to support contractual service, IF a society wants to function in a caring way.  Cutting back on costs also means under employment and exploitation.

Redhead, as someone who uses contract service based on project work, and I pay big time $$$ as a purchase of service, I can tell you that the situation that you speak of is not the only model.  The people getting paid make good money.  The only reason that I am not doing it is a requirement for flexbility for my Dad and that I was foolish enough to not go earlier.  Had I , I would have made a lot more money over y career. Now, I have to hold out for pension.

There are companies with employees.  We contract them to provide people. 

We are a company that provides services fully made up of engineers.  our engineers make very good money.  The purchses get a good service.

Lol, you have no idea of what I am talking about.

That is ok, I get it....you aren't aware, and aren't willing to become aware either, that there are other models than the one you know of.

anyhow, if anyone is ever interested in doing a purchse of service or trying one in their area by forming a consortium or working it through presbytery, feel free to open the dialogue.

For a few summers I worked as an 'office overload' person.  I was one of the 'girls in the white gloves' sent out to offices to do secretarial work - sometimes for a half-day, more often for two weeks to cover vacations or sick time - or to provide an extra set of hands during a particularly busy time.  Sometimes I did little more than answer the phone and/or occasionally type a letter.  Sometimes I was busy from the moment I walked through the door until I left at night - with no one taking the time to show me where the bathroom was.   After the first few times I stopped taking pride in my work - with little or no on-th-job training - with different expectations at every assignment - with no career path - and generally no one on the job site caring enough to even learn my name (I'd be gone in a few days) - there seemed little incentive.    I was paid a little above minimum wage.  I'm sure that the company I worked for received a whole lot more for my services.   God - I'm glad those days are past.    I think it is similar with 'molly maid' people.  Those women who scrub your toilet get paid a pittance of the amount you pay for their services.   (It is probably different for professionals doing contract work.  My daughter was self-employed in the IT industry for awhile.  She did very well, as long as she had a reliable contract with a certain company - and a few little jobs on the side.)

yup, what seeler said very well.

I know what contract/ temporary people get paid, and lack benefits, job security, how people are treated, and building career paths. 

And when one " uses" contract employment , it is exploitation.

Hiring temporary or contracted work actually costs more per hour and benefits the agency ( and the owners of such an agency) rather than the people doing the work.  It is an illogical and counter-productive approach to operating a business, an organization, an institution or a caring society.  People who work independently through contractual work may recieve a higher hourly contract, but work is not guaranteed, nor are benfits.

This way of functioning is a modern fiefdom.

Redhead, sigh, I have contractors who quit full time to go contract through agencies

I am also paying big bucks for purchase of service

Of course I pay illy maid ore than I would an individual. I am paying for the oversight, the coverage, and the hiring practices. If they are taking too big a cut or mianage their staff then that should be addressed

I guarantee with the contract players into ploy through work they are mistreated or underpaid

Ugh, I really honestly wonder why I bother

Seler, I also had a friend who did that in university. She picked when she worked and decided if she wanted to take the job. It worked well for her

I also had a coworker back when I was a clerk who used it to decide what company she wanted to work for.

It worked great. She eventually put applications bAsed on what she witnessed and using references and experience gathered

Pinga, why you bother is that you want to defend an indefensible process:  you cannot in any way justify contract employment.  At best, if an individual is contractected, possibly that persons earns an hourly rate that is equal to the skillset.  But I know from experience and education that people who work for temporary staffing agencies get paid just above minimum wage. lack benefits, and that the agencies charge at least double (and often time more), to the organisation purchasing the contract.

Outsourcing work is a thinly veiled means of exploitation.  Paying reasonable wages and providing guaranteed employeyment to people actually helps people, and  stimulates economic growth.  Working job to job, not with a guaranteed salary and benefits, does not support economic growth or the wellness of a society.

You are so wrong, RedHead.

Listen.  Are you aware that these folks are EMPLOYEES of the location the service is bought from.

Are you even remotely listening that I have fulltime engineers in our company.  There job is to service "purchase of service" contracts at other companies.

You truly are so removed from the world of business that you have no concept of what is done out there or the validity of it.

Our restaurant used to be run by employees.  our company would hire a chef and staff.  The hiring managers had no idea of how to hire the person or oversee them.  The chef had no career path.  

Now, that is through a purchsae of service to run the cafeteria.  The chef moved on to a larger facility. Our food improved over time.  The buying power increased to the centralized location.

Our maintenance used to be a few guys who worked for us.  It is now a purchase of service of those folks who get maintenance.  It is a large group.  We still have facilities managers, but we have people who are located close to the respective facilities who come in.

This is not feifdom's, low wages, mistreated staff.

These are professionals who are managed by skilled people in their areas.

You are talking about temporary staffing positions. That is NOT a purchase of service agreement.

So do the math.  Talk to a temporary or contracted person.  Ask what he or she recieves for hourly pay, and then refer to to the fees charged.   You have to pay $$ $$ to run a project; better to hire people than to outsource work.  Pay people good money, not agencies who exploit skilled people.

So please, define purchase of service agreement clearly.

It seems to me that contracting work (no reference people, BTW), on need and  specialists sounds like temporary work

.

Even contract work is delineated, and is bound by temporary means.

It is better to hire people in your key service areas if that is what you want to be an expert in.

Think about it, do you learn everything you do?  Do you train yourself to be an electrician, plumber, firefighter, police, firefighter, doctor?

If not, why not, isn't it better to have the skills yourself, or shucks, have them been an employee of yours based on your supposition?

In the basic concept of  purchase of service agreement, you are hiring some entity to provide a service for you.  The agreement is that they manage that service.  

In the case of companies, purchase of service agreements were often on such things as snow removal.   you would say "manage my snow removal". You would have key measures:  must be removed by _______, must be removed from ________.

These have extended over the years as companies have realized that the costs and challenges of having one person or a small team responsible for something that is basically a service supporting their organization and other companies have realized that they could expand the usage of their staff in their key areas by selling it as a service to other areas.  

(Originally, we were managing a day care.  We transitioned that daycare to the Y , why we didn't have the skillset to run daycares, it was not our core competenciy, the Y nationally was moving into that area at the time)

In some cases, it is to manage facilities.  You have large firms that now manage or own properties which other companies lease.  This removes all the burdens of handling the property upkeep.  

In others it is to do things like manage customs or even shipping.  (See how Amazon now handles the shipping and selling of products for many small companies.)

Purchase of service agreements have value where the skills required are such that they are not in your company or organizations key focus areas.

**********

How is the purchase of service executed?

In the cases that I utilize this service, the service is with a company.  That company has a number of employees and, sometimes, contractors.  That company has key metrics on deliverables they must meet.  It can be hours of service, response time, etc.  In some cases the staff is on site, in other times they are remote -- it depends on the type of service being provided.

The purchase of service company has the power of numbers on their side.  they can put their best in for startup, and then move to a lower skilled (junior or education) to run it, with an escalation path.  (Again, this depends on the type of service).   Their overhead is spread across multiple companies.  They have it in their best interest to drive efficiencies, optimal buying power and have happy employees that can move up or across to other places.