The following details have been supplied by PCS HQ:
The poorest and most vulnerable in society will be hardest hit by cuts to national and local services
The government’s brutal public spending cuts are not only unjust and unnecessary, they will deepen inequality on a scale we have not seen for generations.
The poorest and most vulnerable in society will be hardest hit, while tax breaks worth more than £24 million are given to business.
It is now clear that women, and black and disabled people will suffer disproportionately from the cuts, showing the government’s pompous pronouncement of a ‘fair’ budget to be a hollow lie.
Research by the House of Commons Library for shadow work and pensions secretary Yvette Cooper suggests 72% of cuts would be borne by women, who are more likely to be hit by reductions in benefits and tax credits as they form the majority of carers.
Cuts to national, regional and local services will have a devastating effect on minority ethnic communities which already suffer the highest rates of poverty and unemployment in the UK. Attacks on disability benefits will take away the essential support required by disabled people to live independently.
Government failed to assess impact of cuts
As public sector workers, we already have the evidence of unacceptable pay gaps between both women and men, and black and white workers. Women, who account for 68% of public sector workers, and black and disabled workers, who are often in the lowest paid jobs, now face a pay freeze and job losses, leading to increased poverty in old age. Ratcheting up harsh absence management regimes will also have a disproportionate impact on disabled workers.
By law, the government should have carried out and published an equality impact assessment to consider the likely effects on people in terms of disability, gender and race, and remove any negative or adverse impact which amounts to unlawful discrimination.
Not only has this not been done, but the government is slashing the budget of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, the only body with statutory powers to take enforcement action when an EIA has not been carried out.
We are all affected by public spending cuts, both as workers and in the services we provide. In response to the government’s intention to make ordinary people pay the price for an economic crisis which we did not cause, PCS has launched the biggest campaign in the union’s history. For it to succeed, we need to use every means at our disposal – media and parliamentary lobbying, organising, our industrial strength and the law.
8.9.10
100 Days of Attacks
The following details have been supplied by the PCS HQ:
Slashing public services and vilifying public servants has been the hallmark of the first 100 days of the coalition government.
One of the government’s first acts was to announce that £6.25 billion in public spending would be cut immediately. This was trailed in the media as simply cutting back on the use of first-class travel, glossy advertising and IT contracts.
In reality, it meant the abolition of several government agencies, including the Qualifications and Curriculum Development Agency and Becta, employing more than 800 staff between them, and damaging cuts at others.
Support for the regions is being severely slashed with plans to abolish the Government Office Network and close or significantly reduce funding for Regional Development Agencies.
Up to 450 job cuts are under threat in the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills as the department and its partner organisations make cuts of £836 million in this financial year.
The Department for Culture, Media and Sport announced it would contribute £61 million to the cuts. All major museums and galleries were told that 3% had been taken out of their current budgets.
The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs announced it would contribute £162 million to the first wave of cuts.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission was told in June it had to cut 15% from its £60 million budget this year leaving it unable to properly fulfil its functions.
The Department for Work and Pensions’ share of this year’s cuts was £535 million, with £335 million claimed as a ‘saving’ from the abolition of the Future Jobs Fund and ending employer subsidies.
Rather than cutting jobs, the government should be creating them to stimulate growth.
Slashing public services and vilifying public servants has been the hallmark of the first 100 days of the coalition government.
One of the government’s first acts was to announce that £6.25 billion in public spending would be cut immediately. This was trailed in the media as simply cutting back on the use of first-class travel, glossy advertising and IT contracts.
In reality, it meant the abolition of several government agencies, including the Qualifications and Curriculum Development Agency and Becta, employing more than 800 staff between them, and damaging cuts at others.
Support for the regions is being severely slashed with plans to abolish the Government Office Network and close or significantly reduce funding for Regional Development Agencies.
Up to 450 job cuts are under threat in the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills as the department and its partner organisations make cuts of £836 million in this financial year.
The Department for Culture, Media and Sport announced it would contribute £61 million to the cuts. All major museums and galleries were told that 3% had been taken out of their current budgets.
The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs announced it would contribute £162 million to the first wave of cuts.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission was told in June it had to cut 15% from its £60 million budget this year leaving it unable to properly fulfil its functions.
The Department for Work and Pensions’ share of this year’s cuts was £535 million, with £335 million claimed as a ‘saving’ from the abolition of the Future Jobs Fund and ending employer subsidies.
Rather than cutting jobs, the government should be creating them to stimulate growth.
Week of Events by Young Activists
Week of events by young activists
This government is intent on making workers, and particularly young people, pay for a crisis created by frivolous casino banking.
The government’s cuts affect all young people in society:
- Connexions funding has been cut by 50% in some areas
- One in five young people are currently unemployed
- Thousands of university places have been lost
- Future Jobs Fund has been scrapped, which guaranteed work or training for unemployed young people.
It is dedicated to campaigning on young members’ issues. The Branch will be looking at holding events.
Aims for the week:
- Increasing activity among PCS activists under 27 Developing skills to recruit young members
- Building long-term key links with other trade union youth sections and student campaigns
- Defending jobs, pay, pensions and civil and public services.
TUC Lib Dem Lobby - Liverpool
The Government’s cuts are already damaging jobs and services.
Much worse will come in October’s spending review.
Ministers tell us that there is no alternative. But the cuts won’t just hit vital services, they threaten economic recovery.
Coalition policies are not just about reducing the deficit, but undermining publicly accountable quality services.
Take education. The school buildings programme has been cut to pay for new academies and so-called free schools that threaten every other school.
Before polling day Conservatives told us that frontline services would be spared and the vulnerable protected. Liberal Democrats said that they would oppose early cuts that hit the economy.
Both pledges have been broken.
- Join unions, the TUC, teachers, pupils, parents and public sector workers in a lobby of delegates to the Lib Dem annual conference.
- Tell them just how unpopular and damaging the cuts will be.
- Explain the alternative of a fair tax system and giving the economy every help to grow.
Sunday 19 September 2010
Event co-ordinated by the North West TUC. For more information contact: Alan Manning, TUC Regional Secretary, | amanning@tuc.org.uk | 0151 236 5432 www.tuc.org.uk/northwest
7.9.10
PCS LGBT Seminar
PCS LGBT Seminar
19, 20 & 21 November 2010
Jury’s Inn Birmingham
The PCS National LGBT Seminar is aimed at all LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bi-Sexual and Transgender) members. It is a residential seminar and travel and accommodation costs are met centrally by PCS HQ.
There will be engaging workshops and discussion groups as well as some interesting fringe events to ensure a lively and stimulating event.
The evenings provide an opportunity to meet and socialise with LGBT members from across the UK and from many different departments and agencies from within PCS.
The seminar helps encourage LGBT members to get active with PCS interests and campaigns.
Please circulate this briefing as widely and as sensitively amongst members and encourage them to apply.
Please Note: ALL seminar correspondence will now be issued via email.
Application Forms are available from the PCS website in Equality under Events (here), or you can also visit the PROUD website for an application form.
The closing date for application forms to be returned is Thursday 28 October to:
PCS, BEPS Department, 160 Falcon Road, London SW11 2LN.
Black History Month
Black history month (BHM) is held in UK every October and every February in United States of America and Canada.
The aims are to:
The aims are to:
- Promote knowledge of the Black History, Cultural and heritage.
- Disseminate information of positive of Black contributions to British Society.
- Heighten confidence and awareness of Black people to their cultural heritage.
The origins of BHM go back to 1926 when Carter G. Woodson, editor for thirty years of the journal of Negro History, established African Caribbean celebrations in America. In UK the BHM has now grown to over 6,000 events.
Other people also wonder why we need a Black History Month, but the reality is that Black History is an often hidden history, and one that has been written out of mainstream British history.
Black people have always been at the forefront of the human development, but too often ignored. It is a time to reflect on the achievements and remember the black people who have challenged the norm and struggled to make the world a better place. If we want an inclusive society we need an inclusive history. Awareness of Black history breaks down barriers and leads to co-operation on all sides and progress for all.
We ensure the next generation of black people living in UK have respect and are valued by society and ourselves. It is important that we promote and develop positive images and structures and challenge racist ideology in mainstream institutions i.e. Public Services, politics, judiciary and including the armed forces.
The duty in The Equality Bill includes powers for Ministers to require public bodies to report on equality issues and anticipates that public bodies with over 150 employees will be required to publish annually details of their ethnic minority employment rate - If you are in an ethnic minority you are 13% less lightly to find work than a white person.
PCS members could think how Black History Month fits in with their Union's work and with the Union's priorities of fighting job cuts, for restoration of national pay bargaining and the equality agenda in general.
PCS is committed in the fight against any form of discrimination and challenge on all fronts also to celebrate diversity and multiculturism and reject far right groups.
The Branch will have information on Black History month in the coffee area of Warbreck House canteen, please contact the Warbreck office on x61186 for further details.
Civil Service Cuts Loom Large...
The Edinburgh Evening News recently published an article on exit packages and cuts for Civil Servants.
The artcile can be found here.
The artcile can be found here.
Civil Service Myths
The Government recenty published an article aimed to bust some Myths about Civil Servants and the Civil Service.
The article can be found here.
The article can be found here.
Government Threatens to Break pre-Election Promise Over Winter Fuel Allowance
This article supplied by the National Pensioners Convention:
Britain’s biggest older people's organisation, the National Pensioners Convention (NPC), has criticised the government for breaking pre-election promises by threatening to remove the winter fuel allowance from millions of pensioners.
Reports in the media have suggested that ministers are considering a number of options including:
- Raising the age of entitlement to the allowance from 60 to 66 earlier than has already been proposed in 2020
- Paying the allowance at 75, in line with the TV licence
- Means-testing the allowance and paying it only to those on benefits
Dot Gibson, NPC general secretary said: "The winter death rate amongst older people is a national scandal and getting worse. Last winter over 36,700 pensioners died of cold related illnesses – a staggering 13 pensioners every hour. Yet the government is now considering taking the winter fuel allowance away from millions of households which will only make matters worse.”
“This issue really goes to the heart of the debate as to whether the welfare state should be available to everyone. We have seen in pensions and care that a means-tested system is not as effective or efficient as a universal benefit in getting help to those who need it most. Of course wealthy pensioners get the winter fuel allowance as well as the very poorest – but the fairest way of dealing with the issue is to claw back that money using the taxation system.”
“Up to 3m pensioner households are already spending more than 10% of their income on fuel bills, and are living in fuel poverty. What older people need now is more money – not less. They need to be reassured that when the cold weather comes they will not be financially punished for keeping warm in winter. The government must give them confidence that they will be able to pay their bills by immediately ruling out any changes to the winter fuel allowance.”
Deregulation's Deadly Reality Gulf
The following has been supplied by the TUC:
A 'deregulatory blitzkrieg' by the coalition government could create the conditions linked to incidents like the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster engulfing BP.
'Abuse of power', an article in the new issue of the workers' health and safety magazine Hazards notes: 'Observers increasingly accept the disaster was a product of inadequate regulation, oversight and enforcement. It caused incalculable economic and environmental damage, has strained relations between the US and the UK and has led for calls for directors of BP to face criminal charges.' But it says while the Treasury faces a loss of billions in revenue from the cash-strapped multinational, 'the coalition has embarked on a deregulatory blitzkrieg.'
On 1 July, the business department (BIS) announced 'a tough new Cabinet committee with the job of reducing the heavy burden of red tape on business', chaired by business secretary Vince Cable. Last week Cable announced a 'fundamental shift' in policy, with plans to introduce a one-in, one-out system for any new regulations that impose costs on businesses. The BIS news release was headed: 'New rules to hand over powers to individuals and companies by cutting red tape and bureaucracy.' In a response to the proposal, the Forum of Private Business (FPB) included health and safety in its 'most costly' concerns. Coalition initiatives announced earlier include a review of health and safety regulation and a 'Your Freedom' online 'dialogue', where the public can nominate 'unnecessary' laws they would like axed, including a specific section on cutting business regulation.
Both business groups and the Conservative Party have said they consider health and safety regulation a 'burden' which should be reduced.
According to Hazards magazine: 'Hand-wringing by prime minister David Cameron over the 'sadness' of the Gulf disaster is a seriously unsatisfactory alternative to protecting lives, livelihoods and the environment. To do that the government must behave responsibly, and that means more than just demanding responsibility from business. It means less time spent appeasing regulation averse boardrooms and more time regulating them. What business calls 'red tape' is for many workers their lifeline.'
A 'deregulatory blitzkrieg' by the coalition government could create the conditions linked to incidents like the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster engulfing BP.
'Abuse of power', an article in the new issue of the workers' health and safety magazine Hazards notes: 'Observers increasingly accept the disaster was a product of inadequate regulation, oversight and enforcement. It caused incalculable economic and environmental damage, has strained relations between the US and the UK and has led for calls for directors of BP to face criminal charges.' But it says while the Treasury faces a loss of billions in revenue from the cash-strapped multinational, 'the coalition has embarked on a deregulatory blitzkrieg.'
On 1 July, the business department (BIS) announced 'a tough new Cabinet committee with the job of reducing the heavy burden of red tape on business', chaired by business secretary Vince Cable. Last week Cable announced a 'fundamental shift' in policy, with plans to introduce a one-in, one-out system for any new regulations that impose costs on businesses. The BIS news release was headed: 'New rules to hand over powers to individuals and companies by cutting red tape and bureaucracy.' In a response to the proposal, the Forum of Private Business (FPB) included health and safety in its 'most costly' concerns. Coalition initiatives announced earlier include a review of health and safety regulation and a 'Your Freedom' online 'dialogue', where the public can nominate 'unnecessary' laws they would like axed, including a specific section on cutting business regulation.
Both business groups and the Conservative Party have said they consider health and safety regulation a 'burden' which should be reduced.
According to Hazards magazine: 'Hand-wringing by prime minister David Cameron over the 'sadness' of the Gulf disaster is a seriously unsatisfactory alternative to protecting lives, livelihoods and the environment. To do that the government must behave responsibly, and that means more than just demanding responsibility from business. It means less time spent appeasing regulation averse boardrooms and more time regulating them. What business calls 'red tape' is for many workers their lifeline.'
11.8.10
Reply from the Cabinet Office
The Branch wrote to Ben Wallace MP regarding the proposed changes to the compensation scheme. There has now been a reply from him and an enclosure from the Cabinet Office Minister, Rt Hon Francis Maude MP.
The document can be viewed here.
10.8.10
Show Solidarity With Electricity Workers In Iraq
From PCS HQ:
In a repressive action reminiscent of Saddam Hussein's treatment of trade unionists, the Iraqi police, acting on the orders of the Oil Minister raided and shut down trade unions across the electricity sector on 21 July.
The Iraqi trade union movement is calling on trade union members everywhere to raise their voices in protest.
Please visit the PCS website here for more information and to find out how to campaign against this.
In a repressive action reminiscent of Saddam Hussein's treatment of trade unionists, the Iraqi police, acting on the orders of the Oil Minister raided and shut down trade unions across the electricity sector on 21 July.
The Iraqi trade union movement is calling on trade union members everywhere to raise their voices in protest.
Please visit the PCS website here for more information and to find out how to campaign against this.
Support Trade Unionists in Swaziland - Oppose The Public Services Bill
From PCS HQ:
The Swaziland Government wants to create a law that would make it illegal for anyone it employs to discuss issues they consider to be ‘political’ or associate with a group they deem to be ‘political’.
This will have a massive impact on the rights of trade unionists and political activists.
Please visit the PCS website here for more information and to find out how you can campaign against this.
The Swaziland Government wants to create a law that would make it illegal for anyone it employs to discuss issues they consider to be ‘political’ or associate with a group they deem to be ‘political’.
This will have a massive impact on the rights of trade unionists and political activists.
Please visit the PCS website here for more information and to find out how you can campaign against this.
4.8.10
A Reply from the Minister for Employment
The Branch Secretary of the PCS Fylde Central Benefits and Services Branch recently wrote to Eric Ollerenshaw MP regarding the potential effects of Government cuts locally.
Mr. Ollerenshaw duly forwarded the correspondence to the Minister for Employment for a response.
The letters received can be viewed here.
28.7.10
The Coalition attack on our jobs, services and communities: The NW TUC Response
The programme set out by the Coalition Government, particularly in its emergency budget is economically reckless and socially divisive. The NW TUC will play its part in defending our jobs, services and communities.
This statement sets out our key responses and outlines our campaign plan.
This statement sets out our key responses and outlines our campaign plan.
- Cuts now will make the recession worse. Private sector as well as public sector jobs depend on public spending. Poorer regions are especially dependent on public spending.
- The government sees cuts as the only way we can reduce the deficit. It is not. We should tax those who did well from the boom, not penalise those that did nothing to cause the crisis. Government needs to invest in growth not stifle the recovery.
- The coalition is breaking its promises that the cuts will be fair as they will hit front-line services; the poor and vulnerable; increase inequality; open up a new North/South divide; and let the rich off the hook.
- Some in the coalition have a long-standing political project to slash the state and are using the deficit as an excuse. Right-wing politicians and think tanks called for cuts when the economy was booming. Their agenda is driven by ideology rather than economic reality.
- Tax-payers are right to ask for value for money. Academy and Free schools, increased privatisation and ever more complex internal markets will deliver less for more.
Our campaign web site http://www.proudtoservethepublic.org.uk will carry the latest news, campaign resources and links to other material and nationally the TUC’s “Cuts Watch” is carrying almost daily features - http://www.touchstoneblog.org.uk/category/cuts-watch/
Campaign Plan
Lobbying of MPs and Councillors in their constituencies: Local trade unionists will be lobbying MPs and councillors – particularly Lib Dems in the run up to the Comprehensive Spending Review.
Lib Dem National Conference
Is this year in Liverpool and we will be organising a range of events and activities to particularly challenge rank and file delegates to reject the right wing agenda of the Coalition.
The NW TUC Campaign, Proud to Serve the Public will be holding a march and rally on the 18 September and there will be lobbying and other actions throughout the conference.
No to austerity – Priority for jobs and growth!
The European TUC is calling a European Day of activity on 20 September, unions nationally will be sending delegations to the Euro Demonstration in Brussels demonstrating against the austerity measures adopted recently by many European countries, and to demand recovery plans in favor of quality jobs and growth.
Speak up for Public services – nationwide action
We will be supporting the national rally and lobby of parliament called by the Public Service Liaison Group for the 19 October, the eve of the announcement of the Comprehensive spending review.
As part of that period of activity we will be coordination regional and local activities on the 22 and 23 October.
There is an alternative!
In November we will be holding a major conference for union officers and reps from private and public sector unions, voluntary and community organisations, service users to seek to understand the nature of the attacks and to develop our alternative strategies.
National march and rally
Our plans will be geared towards a massive response from the North West and participation in the planned national march and rally in the spring of 2011.
13.7.10
Controversy Over Fitness to Work Tests
The following article has been supplied by the TUC.
Iain Duncan Smith has denied reports that ministers are considering trebling 'fitness to work' tests on people claiming incapacity benefit. The work and pensions secretary said the government has at the moment 'absolutely no intention' of changing the 10,000 a week rate begun under Labour.
Over 2.5m people are on incapacity benefit or employment support allowance - costing about £12.5bn a year. The Guardian reported that ministers were considering trebling the rate at which 'work capability assessments' of people on employment support allowance from the current 10,000 a week.
Concerns were raised after comments this week from the chancellor, George Osborne, who signalled that efforts to take more of those on incapacity benefit off welfare will form a significant part of plans to cut the deficit. 'Incapacity benefit and employment and support allowance is a very large budget,' he said: 'We have got to look at all these things, make sure we do it in a way that protects those with genuine needs, those with disabilities, protects those who can't work but also encourages those who can work into work.' But Mr Duncan Smith told MPs said he knew there had been 'some speculation in the media' but the government intended to stick with its plan to launch a 'work programme' in 2011. 'We have absolutely no intention of changing this current plan', he said, adding the rate of assessments would remain at '10,000 claimants a week over the period.'
Under assessments carried out under Labour on new employment support allowance claimants between October 2008 and August 2009, 39 per cent were deemed 'fit for work' and a further 37 per cent withdrew their claim before the test was complete. But welfare campaigners say those who have been assessed as fit for work include people with advanced Parkinson's disease or multiple sclerosis, or with severe mental illness, or awaiting open heart surgery.
Iain Duncan Smith has denied reports that ministers are considering trebling 'fitness to work' tests on people claiming incapacity benefit. The work and pensions secretary said the government has at the moment 'absolutely no intention' of changing the 10,000 a week rate begun under Labour.
Over 2.5m people are on incapacity benefit or employment support allowance - costing about £12.5bn a year. The Guardian reported that ministers were considering trebling the rate at which 'work capability assessments' of people on employment support allowance from the current 10,000 a week.
Concerns were raised after comments this week from the chancellor, George Osborne, who signalled that efforts to take more of those on incapacity benefit off welfare will form a significant part of plans to cut the deficit. 'Incapacity benefit and employment and support allowance is a very large budget,' he said: 'We have got to look at all these things, make sure we do it in a way that protects those with genuine needs, those with disabilities, protects those who can't work but also encourages those who can work into work.' But Mr Duncan Smith told MPs said he knew there had been 'some speculation in the media' but the government intended to stick with its plan to launch a 'work programme' in 2011. 'We have absolutely no intention of changing this current plan', he said, adding the rate of assessments would remain at '10,000 claimants a week over the period.'
Under assessments carried out under Labour on new employment support allowance claimants between October 2008 and August 2009, 39 per cent were deemed 'fit for work' and a further 37 per cent withdrew their claim before the test was complete. But welfare campaigners say those who have been assessed as fit for work include people with advanced Parkinson's disease or multiple sclerosis, or with severe mental illness, or awaiting open heart surgery.
Unions slam 'work until you drop' move
The following article has been supplied by the TUC.
Unions have condemned government proposals to raise the retirement age, which could leave former workers in some of the poorest parts of the country receiving less than two years pension on average before they die.
Announcing plans to raise the state pension age to 66 and to abolish the default retirement age, work and pensions secretary of Iain Duncan Smith said: 'People are living longer and healthier lives than ever, and the last thing we want is to lose their talent and enthusiasm from the workplace due to an arbitrary age limit. We also need to recognise that to meet the challenge of providing an affordable, stable pensions system in a society with ever increasing life expectancy, people will need to work longer.'
But GMB national pensions officer, Naomi Cooke, said there weren't the jobs for older workers, adding: 'Increasing the pension age to 66 will lead to Glaswegian men living only two years beyond pension age while those in Kensington & Chelsea can still expect a 22 year retirement.
Given those living in areas of the lowest life expectance are most reliant on their state pension it is obvious who is hit hardest by the government's latest regressive announcement.' Construction union UCATT said the majority of construction workers are forced to retire before the age of 65 as they are no longer able to perform their jobs due to ill health or injury.
General secretary Alan Ritchie said: 'By increasing the retirement age the ConDems are effectively forcing many construction workers to work until they drop.' He added: 'Construction workers are particularly vulnerable to premature death, not only does heavy manual labour take a long term toll on the body, but construction workers are now the group most at risk of developing asbestos related diseases such as the incurable lung cancer mesothelioma. Given the long latency period of these diseases, they often manifest themselves when workers near retirement or soon after they retire.'
Dave Prentis, general secretary of UNISON, said: 'It may be a choice for the fit and healthy to keep on going for another year at work, but for some, work takes a terrible toll on their health.
Many workers across the public and private sector do very physically demanding jobs where carrying on until 66 is not a safe or practical option.'
Unions have condemned government proposals to raise the retirement age, which could leave former workers in some of the poorest parts of the country receiving less than two years pension on average before they die.
Announcing plans to raise the state pension age to 66 and to abolish the default retirement age, work and pensions secretary of Iain Duncan Smith said: 'People are living longer and healthier lives than ever, and the last thing we want is to lose their talent and enthusiasm from the workplace due to an arbitrary age limit. We also need to recognise that to meet the challenge of providing an affordable, stable pensions system in a society with ever increasing life expectancy, people will need to work longer.'
But GMB national pensions officer, Naomi Cooke, said there weren't the jobs for older workers, adding: 'Increasing the pension age to 66 will lead to Glaswegian men living only two years beyond pension age while those in Kensington & Chelsea can still expect a 22 year retirement.
Given those living in areas of the lowest life expectance are most reliant on their state pension it is obvious who is hit hardest by the government's latest regressive announcement.' Construction union UCATT said the majority of construction workers are forced to retire before the age of 65 as they are no longer able to perform their jobs due to ill health or injury.
General secretary Alan Ritchie said: 'By increasing the retirement age the ConDems are effectively forcing many construction workers to work until they drop.' He added: 'Construction workers are particularly vulnerable to premature death, not only does heavy manual labour take a long term toll on the body, but construction workers are now the group most at risk of developing asbestos related diseases such as the incurable lung cancer mesothelioma. Given the long latency period of these diseases, they often manifest themselves when workers near retirement or soon after they retire.'
Dave Prentis, general secretary of UNISON, said: 'It may be a choice for the fit and healthy to keep on going for another year at work, but for some, work takes a terrible toll on their health.
Many workers across the public and private sector do very physically demanding jobs where carrying on until 66 is not a safe or practical option.'
More Myths from Self Appointed Right Wing Bodies Exposed
"Median pay in the Public Sector is higher than that of the Private sector"
While that is true (due to the over-representation of professionals like doctors, teachers etc in the public sector as most semi-skilled roles have been privatised), it is not true of the civil service.
In the civil service, median pay is lower than the private sector:
"The average annual salary in the Civil Service is £22,850. This is based on full-time civil servants as at 31 March 2009. This salary is £2,120 less than the national average for the private sector, which was £24,970 in April 2009.
National average based on median annual earnings for full-time employees, year ending 5 April 2008, ASHE 2009.
Around 63 per cent of civil servants earn less than £25,000 a year"
http://www.civilservice.gov.uk/about/facts/mythbusters/index.aspx#
...and pay increases since 1997 have been lower than in the private sector:
Page 61 of http://www.civilservice.gov.uk/Assets/21st-Century-Civil-Service-March-2010_tcm6-36188.ppt shows since 1999 average pay increase in the private sector has been 47% versus 39% in the civil service.
A good metaphor: "Today, my insurance company have cancelled my home contents insurance policy, as tomorrow they plan to burgle my house"
While that is true (due to the over-representation of professionals like doctors, teachers etc in the public sector as most semi-skilled roles have been privatised), it is not true of the civil service.
In the civil service, median pay is lower than the private sector:
"The average annual salary in the Civil Service is £22,850. This is based on full-time civil servants as at 31 March 2009. This salary is £2,120 less than the national average for the private sector, which was £24,970 in April 2009.
National average based on median annual earnings for full-time employees, year ending 5 April 2008, ASHE 2009.
Around 63 per cent of civil servants earn less than £25,000 a year"
http://www.civilservice.gov.uk/about/facts/mythbusters/index.aspx#
...and pay increases since 1997 have been lower than in the private sector:
Page 61 of http://www.civilservice.gov.uk/Assets/21st-Century-Civil-Service-March-2010_tcm6-36188.ppt shows since 1999 average pay increase in the private sector has been 47% versus 39% in the civil service.
A good metaphor: "Today, my insurance company have cancelled my home contents insurance policy, as tomorrow they plan to burgle my house"
1.7.10
Pay Comparators - A Response To Statements From Self Appointed Right Wing Bodies
Members may have seen details in the media from non-elected organizations attacking Public Sector and Civil Service Pay. Most of these articles make false claims and assumptions about Civil Service Pay, incorrectly stating that Civil Servants are well paid in comparison to the private sector and the rest of the public sector.
Pay in the Civil Service (DWP) is lower than that of comparable jobs in the private sector with pay gaps of more than £5,000 between the civil service and private sector. However true like-for-like comparisons between public and private sector jobs are inherently difficult and the ‘average’ figures such stories use are skewed by the fact that many traditionally low-paid public sector jobs have been privatised in recent years.
Also missed is the fact that PCS members are suffering a double whammy. Civil service statistics published on 20th January 2010 show that our members are often paid less than their private sector and other public sector counterparts. This supports the work Income Data Services (IDS) has done for PCS in 2009.
IDS’s comparative study shows that pay awards in the civil service are so different from one Department to another, it colours the reality of low pay and lower pay compared to other employers.
Administrative officers across the civil service (48% of all staff in 2009) delivering a range of services such as getting people back into work, tax credits and passports are paid £4,608 (21%) less than their colleagues doing comparable jobs in the private sector.
Compared to the rest of the public sector the gap is £4,045 (19%) and for the financial sector the figure is £3,330 (16%).
Executive Officers who typically work in a supervisory role or a job which requires a vocational qualification are paid £4,783 (18%) less than the private sector and £3,945 (15%) less than the financial sector.
Compared to rest of the public sector the gap is £4,503 (17%). This is a key grade in the Civil Service and many of our hardworking members at EO are undervalued by comparison to similar roles elsewhere.
Higher executive officers who manage teams of people are paid £5,338 (16%) less than their counterparts in the financial sector and £4,305 (13%) less than those working in the private sector. Compared to rest of the public sector the gap is £1,873 (6%).
Administrative assistants who typically undertake clerical duties such as processing benefit claims, tax credits and self assessment forms earn £979 (6.5%) less than the private sector and £572 (3.6%) less than the rest of the public sector.
The IDS study received a lukewarm reception from the Cabinet Office and Treasury and no serious discussion of the findings has yet taken place.
However, the report does support PCS’s arguments in the 2010 National pay claim, that Civil Servants are not the protected elite of the public sector that the media suggests.
It also shows that the Treasury scrutiny of awards and insistence that pay progression, equal pay and other parts of pay are included in the overall costs, hide the poor increases on basic pay year on year.
This is a robust piece of work. The IDS job evaluation system has been used for comparison with the national statistics figures for roles in the wider economy.
The new civil service statistics for the first time reveal that the lower ‘average’ salary for a civil servant is £22,850 compared to £24,970 in the private sector and £27,686 in the public sector as a whole.
The higher public sector average is partly down to the effect of lower paid jobs, such as security and messaging services, being contracted out.
With 63% of civil servants earning less than £25,000, it is clear that by any comparison our members are poorly paid. And this supports our campaign for national pay bargaining.
Pay in the DWP
The former Chancellor announced a new pay cap of 1 percent pay increases for the next three years in the Public Sector. Pay cuts and pay freezes have been a common feature for civil servants as the Government has sought to drive down pay over the past few years, with all of the DWP staff receiving a 0% pay rise last year and 1% this year.
There has not been a golden decade of pay rises in the DWP with people getting on average a one percent pay rise over the past three years; however we are being asked to pay for the financial crisis none of which was our doing.
In reality, because of the fact that, uniquely in the Public Sector, pay progression in the Civil Service is costed out of Annual Pay rounds, this means negative pay rises, i.e. pay cuts of -1%, or alternatively no pay progression. Pay Progression is the time that it takes to move from scale Minima to scale Maxima. This used to be as little as 4 to 8 years in the 1980’s and is distinct from the Pay Rise element. This is how much the pay scale increases by; it is sometimes also called the "cost of living rise".
To explain this; without pay progression, two people doing the same identical jobs, but one is paid up to £5,000 per annum less than the other, in perpetuity.
A pay freeze as now announced by the new Government for any earning more than £21, 000 (and a measly £250 per annum for those below £21, 000) would therefore be a pay cut in real terms due inflation and also due to pay progression not being funded separately.
Pay in the Civil Service (DWP) is lower than that of comparable jobs in the private sector with pay gaps of more than £5,000 between the civil service and private sector. However true like-for-like comparisons between public and private sector jobs are inherently difficult and the ‘average’ figures such stories use are skewed by the fact that many traditionally low-paid public sector jobs have been privatised in recent years.
Also missed is the fact that PCS members are suffering a double whammy. Civil service statistics published on 20th January 2010 show that our members are often paid less than their private sector and other public sector counterparts. This supports the work Income Data Services (IDS) has done for PCS in 2009.
IDS’s comparative study shows that pay awards in the civil service are so different from one Department to another, it colours the reality of low pay and lower pay compared to other employers.
Administrative officers across the civil service (48% of all staff in 2009) delivering a range of services such as getting people back into work, tax credits and passports are paid £4,608 (21%) less than their colleagues doing comparable jobs in the private sector.
Compared to the rest of the public sector the gap is £4,045 (19%) and for the financial sector the figure is £3,330 (16%).
Executive Officers who typically work in a supervisory role or a job which requires a vocational qualification are paid £4,783 (18%) less than the private sector and £3,945 (15%) less than the financial sector.
Compared to rest of the public sector the gap is £4,503 (17%). This is a key grade in the Civil Service and many of our hardworking members at EO are undervalued by comparison to similar roles elsewhere.
Higher executive officers who manage teams of people are paid £5,338 (16%) less than their counterparts in the financial sector and £4,305 (13%) less than those working in the private sector. Compared to rest of the public sector the gap is £1,873 (6%).
Administrative assistants who typically undertake clerical duties such as processing benefit claims, tax credits and self assessment forms earn £979 (6.5%) less than the private sector and £572 (3.6%) less than the rest of the public sector.
The IDS study received a lukewarm reception from the Cabinet Office and Treasury and no serious discussion of the findings has yet taken place.
However, the report does support PCS’s arguments in the 2010 National pay claim, that Civil Servants are not the protected elite of the public sector that the media suggests.
It also shows that the Treasury scrutiny of awards and insistence that pay progression, equal pay and other parts of pay are included in the overall costs, hide the poor increases on basic pay year on year.
This is a robust piece of work. The IDS job evaluation system has been used for comparison with the national statistics figures for roles in the wider economy.
The new civil service statistics for the first time reveal that the lower ‘average’ salary for a civil servant is £22,850 compared to £24,970 in the private sector and £27,686 in the public sector as a whole.
The higher public sector average is partly down to the effect of lower paid jobs, such as security and messaging services, being contracted out.
With 63% of civil servants earning less than £25,000, it is clear that by any comparison our members are poorly paid. And this supports our campaign for national pay bargaining.
Pay in the DWP
The former Chancellor announced a new pay cap of 1 percent pay increases for the next three years in the Public Sector. Pay cuts and pay freezes have been a common feature for civil servants as the Government has sought to drive down pay over the past few years, with all of the DWP staff receiving a 0% pay rise last year and 1% this year.
There has not been a golden decade of pay rises in the DWP with people getting on average a one percent pay rise over the past three years; however we are being asked to pay for the financial crisis none of which was our doing.
In reality, because of the fact that, uniquely in the Public Sector, pay progression in the Civil Service is costed out of Annual Pay rounds, this means negative pay rises, i.e. pay cuts of -1%, or alternatively no pay progression. Pay Progression is the time that it takes to move from scale Minima to scale Maxima. This used to be as little as 4 to 8 years in the 1980’s and is distinct from the Pay Rise element. This is how much the pay scale increases by; it is sometimes also called the "cost of living rise".
To explain this; without pay progression, two people doing the same identical jobs, but one is paid up to £5,000 per annum less than the other, in perpetuity.
A pay freeze as now announced by the new Government for any earning more than £21, 000 (and a measly £250 per annum for those below £21, 000) would therefore be a pay cut in real terms due inflation and also due to pay progression not being funded separately.
29.6.10
Academies Bill Campaign
The coalition government is rushing legislation through Parliament which removes the need for governing bodies to consult with parents, staff, the local authority or other local schools before applying to becoming an academy.
The Secretary of State for Education, Michael Gove, has written to all schools about the bill and separately to all schools with an ‘outstanding’ Ofsted judgement, inviting them to register an interest, with a view to becoming an Academy by September 2010.
PCS is campaigning alongside the NUT and other school staff unions to urge MPs and peers to counter the worst aspects of the legislation and try to stop the bill.
Please email your MP and ask them to show their support for the campaign by signing the Early Day Motion on the Academies bill.
To keep in touch with campaign developments or, in particular, if you are a school governor or would like more information about the consequences of academy status please go to the NUT website.
The Secretary of State for Education, Michael Gove, has written to all schools about the bill and separately to all schools with an ‘outstanding’ Ofsted judgement, inviting them to register an interest, with a view to becoming an Academy by September 2010.
PCS is campaigning alongside the NUT and other school staff unions to urge MPs and peers to counter the worst aspects of the legislation and try to stop the bill.
Please email your MP and ask them to show their support for the campaign by signing the Early Day Motion on the Academies bill.
To keep in touch with campaign developments or, in particular, if you are a school governor or would like more information about the consequences of academy status please go to the NUT website.
Tory Review Wrong From The Start
The following has been supplied by the TUC.
The outcome of a government health and safety review, which seems to have been pre-ordained by the time David Cameron kicked off the process last week, has been strongly criticised by the TUC.
The prime minister announced on 14 June that Lord Young was to undertake the review. By 19 June, the former Tory employment and trade secretary was telling the Times 'People occasionally get killed, it's unfortunate but it's part of life' and declaring health and safety regulations protecting office workers were 'nonsense'. The Tory peer added that police and paramedics should be excluded from health and safety laws. He said the emergency services were 'paid for doing a job that involves risk.'
However, critics say Lord Young revealed an astonishing disregard for the facts in his error-strewn comments. TUC general secretary Brendan Barber commented:
'We would have hoped that, at the very least, any proposals for a review of health and safety would be based on the evidence rather than a selection of myths and distortions peddled by the media, more for their entertainment value than anything. Health and safety regulation is about saving lives and protecting workers from injury and illness and Lord Young needs to start listening to both workers and the families of those who have fallen victim to a lack of regulation and enforcement in the past.'
He added: 'There can be no justification whatsoever for giving those whose job is to protect us, such as firefighters and the police, less protection under the law. This is giving out a message that the lives and health of our emergency workers are of less value than those they are trying to help. We know only too well that these people already risk their lives every day to keep us safe. Is the government now going to remove the laws that say their employer has to give them the training, equipment and support they need to protect them as is suggested?'
Lord Young's review is expected to report in July.
Don't play politics with safety
'In the year when the cost of cutting corners on health and safety killed oil rig workers, polluted an ocean and threatens the very existence of BP, our prime minister, (without a dissenting squeak from his coalition partners) claims we need to end the 'compensation culture' in health and safety.' He indicated it is not just industrial workers that have reason to be concerned with the prime minister's health and safety call for a 'sensible new approach'.
Writing online for Community Care magazine, he notes there is a 'direct threat' to the working conditions of social workers. 'What recent health and safety legislation has done is to force employers to work to prevent accidents and ill health rather than pay out compensation,' he added. 'They are now required to actively engage in risk management and are supposed to involve their workforce and safety representatives in doing so. Health and safety representatives have guaranteed rights to inspect and intervene.'
Mr Kline concludes: 'There is not much 'new politics' about this review, led as it is by Lady Thatcher's former favourite minister Lord Young. It is a return to very old politics where life was cheap and accidents were inevitable.'
22.6.10
Department For Work And Pensions Group Executive Committee Elections 2010
Election of Vice Presidents, Group Assistant Secretaries, Group Organiser, Group Journal Editor and Group Treasurer
Number of eligible voters: 86,574
Total number of votes cast: 8,285
Turnout: 9.6%
Election of Vice Presidents
Number of votes found to be invalid: 137
Total number of valid votes to be counted: 8,148
Result (5 to elect)
BROWN, Alan: 3,703 ELECTED
McINALLY, John: 3,509 ELECTED
CAVANAGH, Martin: 3,450 ELECTED
WILLIAMS, Katrine: 3,270 ELECTED
MARTIN, Laura: 3,212 ELECTED
BARROWCLOUGH, Rachel: 3,041
GALLIGAN, Christine: 3,002
CAMPBELL, Moira: 2,745
COX, Joe: 2,734
BRYSON, Rob: 2,121
BROWNE, Marjorie: 1,723
HULME, Christine: 1,693
McDONALD, Charlie: 1,616
Election of Group Assistant Secretaries
Number of votes found to be invalid: 284
Total number of valid votes to be counted: 8,001
Result (7 to elect)
PENN, Tom: 4,100 ELECTED
WILLIAMS, Rob: 4,078 ELECTED
BARTON, Paul: 3,958 ELECTED
HALL, Sam: 3,859 ELECTED
CUTHBERT, Christine: 3,786 ELECTED
BURKE, David: 3,672 ELECTED
RICHARDS, David: 3,378 ELECTED
McGOWAN, John: 2,937
LAIDLAW, Beverley: 2,714
FULLER, Howard: 2,525
BIRD, Nick: 2,263
REAY, Tony: 1,974
POWER, Declan: 1,962
Election of Group Organiser
Number of votes found to be invalid: 1,160
Total number of valid votes to be counted: 7,125
Result (1 to elect)
HEATHCOTE, Fran: 4,513 ELECTED
HOWS, Lynne: candidate withdrawn
Election of Group Journal Editor
Number of votes found to be invalid: 1,197
Total number of valid votes to be counted: 7,088
Result (1 to elect)
SMITH, Alan: 4,715 ELECTED
DIAMANTIS, Nick: 2,373
Election of Treasurer
Number of votes found to be invalid: 333
Total number of valid votes to be counted: 7,952
Result (1 to elect)
CHILWAN, Bashir: 3,331 ELECTED
WITHERS, Angela: 2,838
PRENDERGAST, Nigel: 1,783
Election of President and Group Executive Committee
Number of eligible voters: 87,429
Total number of votes cast: 6,987
Turnout: 8%
Election of President
Number of votes found to be invalid: 399
Total number of valid votes to be counted: 6,588
Result (1 to elect)
AITCHISON, Jane: 3,332 ELECTED
BREEN, Diane: 2,010
WRIGHT, Annette: 1,246
Election of Group Executive Committee
Number of votes found to be invalid: 164
Total number of valid votes to be counted: 6,823
Result (21 to elect)
KHALIF, Adam: 4,430 ELECTED
POPE, Ian SS: 3,627 ELECTED
GODRICH, Janice JCP: 3,143 ELECTED
GREEN, Sharon PDCS: 3,053 ELECTED
ROBINSON, Sarah PDCS: 2,995 ELECTED
ALSTON, Dave JCP: 2,965 ELECTED
FLANAGAN, Helen JCP: 2,963 ELECTED
REVELL, Carol CMEC: 2,937 ELECTED
JONES, Martin PDCS: 2,833 ELECTED
CARASS, Alison JCP: 2,812 ELECTED
OWENS, Dave JCP: 2,794 ELECTED
THOMSON, Derek JCP: 2,779 ELECTED
HARTLEY, Gavin PDCS: 2,761 ELECTED
SANDHU, Jagdeep JCP: 2,752: ELECTED
McDONOUGH, Marie JCP: 2,695 ELECTED
RUDDICK, Siân JCP: 2,657 ELECTED
SALT, Lesley JCP: 2,633 ELECTED
FERRABY, Jason JCP: 2,601 ELECTED
WEST, Steve JCP: 2,596 ELECTED
GILL, Jimmy JCP: 2,565 ELECTED
SAMUEL, Willie SS: 2,519 ELECTED
SHEAHAN, Nigel JCP: 2,418
CAMPBELL, Moira CMEC: 2,255
ANDERSON, Elaine CMEC: 2,171
COX, Joe CMEC: 2,102
BARROWCLOUGH, Rachel PDCS: 2,072
BRYSON, Rob JCP: 2,020
WITHERS, Angela CMEC: 2,011
HAWTING, Elaine CMEC: 1,983
BUCHANAN, Tony JCP: 1,976
GALLIGAN, Peter JCP: 1,974
WRIGHT, Annette PDCS: 1,912
KANG, Gurmit JCP: 1,910
MCBRIDE, David JCP: 1,896
JACKSON, Steven CMEC: 1,873
NIMMO, Alan CMEC: 1,827
HILL, Mark CMEC: 1,774
WELCH, David JCP: 1,772
DOUGHTY, Pete JCP: 1,746
MCGINLEY, Con JCP: 1,743
ANDERSON, Lee PDCS: 1,739
FULLER, Howard JCP: 1,680
BROWNE, Marjorie JCP: 1,532
ANDREWS, Trevor JCP: 1,475
HUZZARD, Rosie JCP: 1,460
PUTTOCK, John JCP: 1,348
BIRD, Nick JCP: 1,289
MCDONALD, Charlie JCP: 1,199
CATTEN, Sue JCP: 1,195
BISHELL, Tom JCP: 1,172
LAIDLAW, Bev JCP:1,159
HULME, Christine JCP: 1,144
DIAMANTIS, Nick JCP: 1,094
ELLIS, Mervyn JCP: 1,086
RAFTERY, Theresa JCP: 1,081
THOMPSON, George JCP: 1,080
LEDERER, Jackie JCP: 1,042
MAHONEY, John JCP: 1,041
HAWKINS, Martin JCP: 1,034
COCKROFT, Simon JCP: 1,022
RICHARDSON, Jenny JCP: 985
HOWS, Lynne JCP: candidate withdrawn
Number of eligible voters: 86,574
Total number of votes cast: 8,285
Turnout: 9.6%
Election of Vice Presidents
Number of votes found to be invalid: 137
Total number of valid votes to be counted: 8,148
Result (5 to elect)
BROWN, Alan: 3,703 ELECTED
McINALLY, John: 3,509 ELECTED
CAVANAGH, Martin: 3,450 ELECTED
WILLIAMS, Katrine: 3,270 ELECTED
MARTIN, Laura: 3,212 ELECTED
BARROWCLOUGH, Rachel: 3,041
GALLIGAN, Christine: 3,002
CAMPBELL, Moira: 2,745
COX, Joe: 2,734
BRYSON, Rob: 2,121
BROWNE, Marjorie: 1,723
HULME, Christine: 1,693
McDONALD, Charlie: 1,616
Election of Group Assistant Secretaries
Number of votes found to be invalid: 284
Total number of valid votes to be counted: 8,001
Result (7 to elect)
PENN, Tom: 4,100 ELECTED
WILLIAMS, Rob: 4,078 ELECTED
BARTON, Paul: 3,958 ELECTED
HALL, Sam: 3,859 ELECTED
CUTHBERT, Christine: 3,786 ELECTED
BURKE, David: 3,672 ELECTED
RICHARDS, David: 3,378 ELECTED
McGOWAN, John: 2,937
LAIDLAW, Beverley: 2,714
FULLER, Howard: 2,525
BIRD, Nick: 2,263
REAY, Tony: 1,974
POWER, Declan: 1,962
Election of Group Organiser
Number of votes found to be invalid: 1,160
Total number of valid votes to be counted: 7,125
Result (1 to elect)
HEATHCOTE, Fran: 4,513 ELECTED
HOWS, Lynne: candidate withdrawn
Election of Group Journal Editor
Number of votes found to be invalid: 1,197
Total number of valid votes to be counted: 7,088
Result (1 to elect)
SMITH, Alan: 4,715 ELECTED
DIAMANTIS, Nick: 2,373
Election of Treasurer
Number of votes found to be invalid: 333
Total number of valid votes to be counted: 7,952
Result (1 to elect)
CHILWAN, Bashir: 3,331 ELECTED
WITHERS, Angela: 2,838
PRENDERGAST, Nigel: 1,783
Election of President and Group Executive Committee
Number of eligible voters: 87,429
Total number of votes cast: 6,987
Turnout: 8%
Election of President
Number of votes found to be invalid: 399
Total number of valid votes to be counted: 6,588
Result (1 to elect)
AITCHISON, Jane: 3,332 ELECTED
BREEN, Diane: 2,010
WRIGHT, Annette: 1,246
Election of Group Executive Committee
Number of votes found to be invalid: 164
Total number of valid votes to be counted: 6,823
Result (21 to elect)
KHALIF, Adam: 4,430 ELECTED
POPE, Ian SS: 3,627 ELECTED
GODRICH, Janice JCP: 3,143 ELECTED
GREEN, Sharon PDCS: 3,053 ELECTED
ROBINSON, Sarah PDCS: 2,995 ELECTED
ALSTON, Dave JCP: 2,965 ELECTED
FLANAGAN, Helen JCP: 2,963 ELECTED
REVELL, Carol CMEC: 2,937 ELECTED
JONES, Martin PDCS: 2,833 ELECTED
CARASS, Alison JCP: 2,812 ELECTED
OWENS, Dave JCP: 2,794 ELECTED
THOMSON, Derek JCP: 2,779 ELECTED
HARTLEY, Gavin PDCS: 2,761 ELECTED
SANDHU, Jagdeep JCP: 2,752: ELECTED
McDONOUGH, Marie JCP: 2,695 ELECTED
RUDDICK, Siân JCP: 2,657 ELECTED
SALT, Lesley JCP: 2,633 ELECTED
FERRABY, Jason JCP: 2,601 ELECTED
WEST, Steve JCP: 2,596 ELECTED
GILL, Jimmy JCP: 2,565 ELECTED
SAMUEL, Willie SS: 2,519 ELECTED
SHEAHAN, Nigel JCP: 2,418
CAMPBELL, Moira CMEC: 2,255
ANDERSON, Elaine CMEC: 2,171
COX, Joe CMEC: 2,102
BARROWCLOUGH, Rachel PDCS: 2,072
BRYSON, Rob JCP: 2,020
WITHERS, Angela CMEC: 2,011
HAWTING, Elaine CMEC: 1,983
BUCHANAN, Tony JCP: 1,976
GALLIGAN, Peter JCP: 1,974
WRIGHT, Annette PDCS: 1,912
KANG, Gurmit JCP: 1,910
MCBRIDE, David JCP: 1,896
JACKSON, Steven CMEC: 1,873
NIMMO, Alan CMEC: 1,827
HILL, Mark CMEC: 1,774
WELCH, David JCP: 1,772
DOUGHTY, Pete JCP: 1,746
MCGINLEY, Con JCP: 1,743
ANDERSON, Lee PDCS: 1,739
FULLER, Howard JCP: 1,680
BROWNE, Marjorie JCP: 1,532
ANDREWS, Trevor JCP: 1,475
HUZZARD, Rosie JCP: 1,460
PUTTOCK, John JCP: 1,348
BIRD, Nick JCP: 1,289
MCDONALD, Charlie JCP: 1,199
CATTEN, Sue JCP: 1,195
BISHELL, Tom JCP: 1,172
LAIDLAW, Bev JCP:1,159
HULME, Christine JCP: 1,144
DIAMANTIS, Nick JCP: 1,094
ELLIS, Mervyn JCP: 1,086
RAFTERY, Theresa JCP: 1,081
THOMPSON, George JCP: 1,080
LEDERER, Jackie JCP: 1,042
MAHONEY, John JCP: 1,041
HAWKINS, Martin JCP: 1,034
COCKROFT, Simon JCP: 1,022
RICHARDSON, Jenny JCP: 985
HOWS, Lynne JCP: candidate withdrawn
Government aims to remove safety rules
The following details have been supplied by the TUC:
The TUC has said a review of UK health and safety regulation announced this week by David Cameron will undermine the 'already limited' legal protection of UK workers. He said the prime minister was pandering to the businesses that are responsible for hundreds of thousands of workers falling sick each year. The review is to be headed by Lord Young and repackages an ongoing review by the former Tory employment and trade secretary initiated by David Cameron pre-election. The prime minister said: 'The rise of the compensation culture over the last ten years is a real concern, as is the way health and safety rules are sometimes applied. We need a sensible new approach that makes clear these laws are intended to protect people, not overwhelm businesses with red tape.' TUC general secretary Brendan Barber said he was 'surprised the government is addressing the 'compensation culture' again as successive reports show there is no such thing and claims have been falling over the past ten years.' He added: 'This will not be an open and frank review aimed at achieving better regulation. Instead it is an attempt to undermine the already limited protection that workers have by focusing on the needs of business.' The TUC leader concluded: 'Businesses are responsible for a working culture that injures a quarter of a million workers every year and makes a further half a million employees ill. The review should by investigating this instead. Rather than focusing solely on the 'needs of business', the government should protect workers by increasing inspections and enforcement action against employers who put their staff at risk by ignoring existing laws, as well as introducing a legal duty on directors to protect their workers.' The review findings are due in July.
Review must debunk 'burdens' myth
Unions have warned that essential regulation and enforcement of health and safety must not be abandoned by the government. Prospect health and safety officer Sarah Page said the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) union welcomed the review ordered by David Cameron, but said 'it must be clear that there is a world of difference between petty bureaucracy enacted under the label of health and safety and HSE regulation designed to prevent deaths and disease in the workplace.' She added that the review should 'debunk the myth of the 'burden' of health and safety that masks the wider picture; last year alone about 1,180 people were fatally injured at work or in work road incidents, and thousands made ill or diseased.' Chris Keates, general secretary of teaching union NASUWT, said: 'The NASUWT believes that health and safety regulation needs to be strengthened, not weakened by attempts to chip away at the already inadequate health and safety inspection and enforcement regime by prioritising profit and cost over of the safety of teachers and pupils.' Hilda Palmer of the Hazards Campaign was also critical. She said: 'There is a lack of evidence or fact to support the need or value of cutting regulation of health and safety, a lack of balance in failing to mention the burden on workers hurt or made ill, and on the families of those killed, and a failure to mention the massive cost of up to £30 billion per year of bad health and safety, the majority of which employers externalise onto all of us.'Judith Hackitt, the chair of the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), said in a letter to Lord Young that too many people use health and safety as an excuse. HSE says health and safety is often invoked to disguise someone's real motives - concerns over costs or complexity, or an unwillingness to honestly defend an unpopular decision.
Controversial MP is new safety minister
A member of parliament referred to in the press as a Conservative Party 'attack dog' and who before becoming an MP worked for a union-busting PR firm that creates front organisations for polluting industries is the new health and safety minister. Chris Grayling, who was shadow Home Secretary before the election, is now minister of state at the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP). He reports to DWP secretary of state Iain Duncan Smith. Mr Grayling, who has been MP for Epsom and Ewell since 2001, started his career as a BBC and Channel 4 journalist before moving into public relations. His website notes he became 'a director in the Employee Communication practice at international communications firm Burson-Marsteller. He ended his time there as the firm's European Marketing Director.' The company is well-known in trade union, health and safety and environmental activist circles. Burson-Marsteller is one of the more high profile 'union busting' firms and has acted on behalf of asbestos, tobacco, nuclear and chemical firms on regulatory and compensation issues. It is also regarded as a pioneer in the creation of 'astroturf' organisations, supposedly grassroots lobbying organisations that in fact support industry arguments. In the award-winning book 'Doubt is their product', academic David Michaels - who is now the head of the US government's Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) - notes that among the company's creations is the cleverly named 'Foundation for Clean Air Progress.' He writes: 'The organisation is run by Burson-Marsteller, the PR firm, using funds provided by the petroleum, trucking and other polluting industries.'
The TUC has said a review of UK health and safety regulation announced this week by David Cameron will undermine the 'already limited' legal protection of UK workers. He said the prime minister was pandering to the businesses that are responsible for hundreds of thousands of workers falling sick each year. The review is to be headed by Lord Young and repackages an ongoing review by the former Tory employment and trade secretary initiated by David Cameron pre-election. The prime minister said: 'The rise of the compensation culture over the last ten years is a real concern, as is the way health and safety rules are sometimes applied. We need a sensible new approach that makes clear these laws are intended to protect people, not overwhelm businesses with red tape.' TUC general secretary Brendan Barber said he was 'surprised the government is addressing the 'compensation culture' again as successive reports show there is no such thing and claims have been falling over the past ten years.' He added: 'This will not be an open and frank review aimed at achieving better regulation. Instead it is an attempt to undermine the already limited protection that workers have by focusing on the needs of business.' The TUC leader concluded: 'Businesses are responsible for a working culture that injures a quarter of a million workers every year and makes a further half a million employees ill. The review should by investigating this instead. Rather than focusing solely on the 'needs of business', the government should protect workers by increasing inspections and enforcement action against employers who put their staff at risk by ignoring existing laws, as well as introducing a legal duty on directors to protect their workers.' The review findings are due in July.
Review must debunk 'burdens' myth
Unions have warned that essential regulation and enforcement of health and safety must not be abandoned by the government. Prospect health and safety officer Sarah Page said the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) union welcomed the review ordered by David Cameron, but said 'it must be clear that there is a world of difference between petty bureaucracy enacted under the label of health and safety and HSE regulation designed to prevent deaths and disease in the workplace.' She added that the review should 'debunk the myth of the 'burden' of health and safety that masks the wider picture; last year alone about 1,180 people were fatally injured at work or in work road incidents, and thousands made ill or diseased.' Chris Keates, general secretary of teaching union NASUWT, said: 'The NASUWT believes that health and safety regulation needs to be strengthened, not weakened by attempts to chip away at the already inadequate health and safety inspection and enforcement regime by prioritising profit and cost over of the safety of teachers and pupils.' Hilda Palmer of the Hazards Campaign was also critical. She said: 'There is a lack of evidence or fact to support the need or value of cutting regulation of health and safety, a lack of balance in failing to mention the burden on workers hurt or made ill, and on the families of those killed, and a failure to mention the massive cost of up to £30 billion per year of bad health and safety, the majority of which employers externalise onto all of us.'Judith Hackitt, the chair of the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), said in a letter to Lord Young that too many people use health and safety as an excuse. HSE says health and safety is often invoked to disguise someone's real motives - concerns over costs or complexity, or an unwillingness to honestly defend an unpopular decision.
Controversial MP is new safety minister
A member of parliament referred to in the press as a Conservative Party 'attack dog' and who before becoming an MP worked for a union-busting PR firm that creates front organisations for polluting industries is the new health and safety minister. Chris Grayling, who was shadow Home Secretary before the election, is now minister of state at the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP). He reports to DWP secretary of state Iain Duncan Smith. Mr Grayling, who has been MP for Epsom and Ewell since 2001, started his career as a BBC and Channel 4 journalist before moving into public relations. His website notes he became 'a director in the Employee Communication practice at international communications firm Burson-Marsteller. He ended his time there as the firm's European Marketing Director.' The company is well-known in trade union, health and safety and environmental activist circles. Burson-Marsteller is one of the more high profile 'union busting' firms and has acted on behalf of asbestos, tobacco, nuclear and chemical firms on regulatory and compensation issues. It is also regarded as a pioneer in the creation of 'astroturf' organisations, supposedly grassroots lobbying organisations that in fact support industry arguments. In the award-winning book 'Doubt is their product', academic David Michaels - who is now the head of the US government's Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) - notes that among the company's creations is the cleverly named 'Foundation for Clean Air Progress.' He writes: 'The organisation is run by Burson-Marsteller, the PR firm, using funds provided by the petroleum, trucking and other polluting industries.'
10.6.10
Final Conference Update
Due to a small technical hitch, the final conference report was a little delayed.
It can now be found here.
It can now be found here.
25.5.10
Civil service cuts will hit frontline services
The extra £6.25 billion of cuts to government spending announced today (24 May) will inevitably damage public services, PCS says.
Massive spending on consultants is one area PCS has campaigned against for many years and the union has welcomed the commitment by the coalition government to reduce this. But with some departments being told to axe hundreds of millions of pounds from their budgets for this year, the union does not believe this can be done without hitting vital public services.
Other than a £600m cut for non-departmental public bodies and some commitments to renegotiate contracts and cut spending on travel and advertising, it is not clear what areas of government will bear the brunt of these cuts. The union also fears today’s announcement is just a taste of much worse things to come.
At its annual conference last week, the union agreed to launch a far-reaching campaign, including with other public sector unions, to not only oppose the cuts, but to make the case for the alternative. If the government were serious about tackling the deficit it would act immediately to close the widening tax gap which sees more than £120 billion lost to the UK economy every year.
PCS general secretary Mark Serwotka said: “We have serious concerns about the staff in many government agencies who will have read in the media at the weekend that their jobs could be at risk, but have been given little information since.
“We do not accept that huge spending cuts are necessary or desirable, and we do not believe it is credible for the government to say it can protect public sector jobs and services while taking the axe to departments in this way.
“These cuts will damage the economy, will undoubtedly lead to people losing their jobs, and will put the delivery of vital public services at serious risk at a time when they are most needed. A recruitment freeze now, when tens of thousands of civil service posts have been cut in the last few years, will further add to workloads and put at risk the services our members provide to the public.
“We would welcome the opportunity for a full and honest debate about the public sector and its role in the economy, but the government appears intent on short-circuiting that by cutting first and asking questions later.”
Massive spending on consultants is one area PCS has campaigned against for many years and the union has welcomed the commitment by the coalition government to reduce this. But with some departments being told to axe hundreds of millions of pounds from their budgets for this year, the union does not believe this can be done without hitting vital public services.
Other than a £600m cut for non-departmental public bodies and some commitments to renegotiate contracts and cut spending on travel and advertising, it is not clear what areas of government will bear the brunt of these cuts. The union also fears today’s announcement is just a taste of much worse things to come.
At its annual conference last week, the union agreed to launch a far-reaching campaign, including with other public sector unions, to not only oppose the cuts, but to make the case for the alternative. If the government were serious about tackling the deficit it would act immediately to close the widening tax gap which sees more than £120 billion lost to the UK economy every year.
PCS general secretary Mark Serwotka said: “We have serious concerns about the staff in many government agencies who will have read in the media at the weekend that their jobs could be at risk, but have been given little information since.
“We do not accept that huge spending cuts are necessary or desirable, and we do not believe it is credible for the government to say it can protect public sector jobs and services while taking the axe to departments in this way.
“These cuts will damage the economy, will undoubtedly lead to people losing their jobs, and will put the delivery of vital public services at serious risk at a time when they are most needed. A recruitment freeze now, when tens of thousands of civil service posts have been cut in the last few years, will further add to workloads and put at risk the services our members provide to the public.
“We would welcome the opportunity for a full and honest debate about the public sector and its role in the economy, but the government appears intent on short-circuiting that by cutting first and asking questions later.”
22.5.10
PCS National Conference - Day 3
The sun finally shone brightly on last day of the ADC which seemed unfair as the delegates would be leaving after the close of the conference at about 12:30 to return to offices and branches to fight the cuts that everyone knew were about to be announced by the new ConDem coalition.
There would be little time to catch the rays just enough to catch the train and head to all points of the compass. Appropriately given the cuts we knew were heading our way the first session of the day was that on Pay; Motion A109 which rejected the 2010 pay remit of limiting pay rises to between 0% and 1%. The motion called on the NEC to co-ordinate action to see that a reasonable pay rise for all areas across the public sector including working with other unions to achieve out goal of fair pay ina national bargaining environment.
Motion A110 discussed the absurd practice of pay leapfrogging whereby new recruits were being employed on maximum pay rates which long serving staff have little or no hope of ever achieving. Why does this happen you might ask and the answer, not unsurprisingly, is that it is impossible to recruit staff on the wages the Civil Service pay the rest of us. Conference agreed that this practice should be opposed by a policy of rejecting these flexible starting pay rates.
Our Branch's motion on annual leave "35 days for all on recruitment" was remitted to the NEC as it was felt that such a objective could be difficult to achieve with all other elements of the pay campaign. If nothing is done to move towards this in a few years time we will be back with the motion again.
A similar motion A122 on negotiating an increase from 30 days to 35 days for those with service of 25 years was lost as some felt it discriminated on age.
Finally and before the guillotine fell Motion A114 was carried instructing the NEC to campaign for a maximum 35 hour week without loss of pay, no extra holidays (yet) but fewer working hours in every week is now policy.
Before Caroline Lucas MP was to speak and address the conference, environmental issues were debated. Caroline is Britain's first Green MP and represents Brighton and so it was appropriate that she be there to hear the debates. She congratulated the Union for its passion on Green issues and pointed out that being Green does not mean supporting public sector cuts or cuts in industry. She recognised the value and benefit of public sector jobs being carried out by our members and that creation of employment in the new renewable (Green industries) was a way to work our way out of deficit and recession.
She heard the conference pass motions on union involvement in the Climate Campaign and the "Million green jobs initiative (Motion A115). Motion A116 condemning the closure of Vesta's onshore wind turbine plant on the Isle of Wight was carried as was A117 supporting the Climate Solidarity Project.
In the Social and Economic session Motion A629 was carried and called for continued support for anti-fascist organisations to oppose the BNP and similar organisations. Similarly Motion A121 instructing the NEC to gather information about properly organising against the far right and to issue guidelines on personal safety at rallies and how to respond to the behaviour and tactics of the far right at those rallies was also carried.
Motion A122 debated the issue of the financial crisis and was carried calling on the NEC to organise forums of trade unions to popularise the alternatives to making workers pay for a crisis we did not create. ON a similar vein Motion A123 was passed and requires the NEC to actively campaign for the "Tobin Tax" on every banking transaction to raise billions in revenue and reverse public spending cuts.
A144, which had been moved forward in the agenda then called on the NEC to continue the campaign to repeal the anti-trade union laws (watch out for more of these to come from the new coalition government. Back on track in the agenda A124 was passed calling on support for the immediate restoration of the link between pensions and earnings and to oppose any raise in the state retirement age. The branch intervened on the next motion A125 which was calling for engagement with the "commission on ownership" set up to consider "Mutualisation" a form of worker democracy and to draw up a plan for workers democracy in the civil and public sector. The NEC were calling for remission on this matter and the branch's intervention which opposed remission and supported the motion may have swung matters when it was stated that unlike management who could not organise a booze up in a brewery we could all do a better job.
Remission was lost and the motion was carried. Chris however was told off by Grant for using profane language in his intervention as the phrase was slightly different when not in print.
Two more motions were passed in this section A126 calling for the opening of negotiations to raise the current redundancy threshold and A127 calling for an increase in the level of carers allowance and a removal of the restrictions which prevent pensioners from claiming the benefit. As the conference drew towards its conclusion those motions that had been lost to the guillotine in their various sections were given the opportunity to be heard, those motions put by the branch that had been lost were however not included in the chosen list which was A614 (noting the victimisation of reps in CSA Hastings), A78 (equality assessment of PCS subs), A68 (campaign against law changes which would prevent extradition of war-criminals from UK), A46 (Trade Union education in schools), A96 (access to Thompsons legal advice) and A137 (Free telephone numbers for benefit claimants to replace 0845 numbers). All the motions were carried despite resistance from the NEC to A96.
The vote of thanks to all those involved in the conference was given with the usual sprinkling of conference in-jokes, it got a laugh on the day but would mean little here so the humour isn't repeated....except...When the conference was asked to send its best wishes to Mark Serwotka in his hospital bed by wishing his beloved Cardiff City a win in the Championship playoffs certain voices were raised (loudly) to cry "Come on you Pool!".
Having already sent our apologies to Mark in his get well card saying "get well soon – sorry about Saturday" all we had to hope for was that Success at Wembley for the right team would ensue.
Now off to the train station for the trip home...or for some...to London for tomorrow's excitement.
Written by Chris Wade
There would be little time to catch the rays just enough to catch the train and head to all points of the compass. Appropriately given the cuts we knew were heading our way the first session of the day was that on Pay; Motion A109 which rejected the 2010 pay remit of limiting pay rises to between 0% and 1%. The motion called on the NEC to co-ordinate action to see that a reasonable pay rise for all areas across the public sector including working with other unions to achieve out goal of fair pay ina national bargaining environment.
Motion A110 discussed the absurd practice of pay leapfrogging whereby new recruits were being employed on maximum pay rates which long serving staff have little or no hope of ever achieving. Why does this happen you might ask and the answer, not unsurprisingly, is that it is impossible to recruit staff on the wages the Civil Service pay the rest of us. Conference agreed that this practice should be opposed by a policy of rejecting these flexible starting pay rates.
Our Branch's motion on annual leave "35 days for all on recruitment" was remitted to the NEC as it was felt that such a objective could be difficult to achieve with all other elements of the pay campaign. If nothing is done to move towards this in a few years time we will be back with the motion again.
A similar motion A122 on negotiating an increase from 30 days to 35 days for those with service of 25 years was lost as some felt it discriminated on age.
Finally and before the guillotine fell Motion A114 was carried instructing the NEC to campaign for a maximum 35 hour week without loss of pay, no extra holidays (yet) but fewer working hours in every week is now policy.
Before Caroline Lucas MP was to speak and address the conference, environmental issues were debated. Caroline is Britain's first Green MP and represents Brighton and so it was appropriate that she be there to hear the debates. She congratulated the Union for its passion on Green issues and pointed out that being Green does not mean supporting public sector cuts or cuts in industry. She recognised the value and benefit of public sector jobs being carried out by our members and that creation of employment in the new renewable (Green industries) was a way to work our way out of deficit and recession.
She heard the conference pass motions on union involvement in the Climate Campaign and the "Million green jobs initiative (Motion A115). Motion A116 condemning the closure of Vesta's onshore wind turbine plant on the Isle of Wight was carried as was A117 supporting the Climate Solidarity Project.
In the Social and Economic session Motion A629 was carried and called for continued support for anti-fascist organisations to oppose the BNP and similar organisations. Similarly Motion A121 instructing the NEC to gather information about properly organising against the far right and to issue guidelines on personal safety at rallies and how to respond to the behaviour and tactics of the far right at those rallies was also carried.
Motion A122 debated the issue of the financial crisis and was carried calling on the NEC to organise forums of trade unions to popularise the alternatives to making workers pay for a crisis we did not create. ON a similar vein Motion A123 was passed and requires the NEC to actively campaign for the "Tobin Tax" on every banking transaction to raise billions in revenue and reverse public spending cuts.
A144, which had been moved forward in the agenda then called on the NEC to continue the campaign to repeal the anti-trade union laws (watch out for more of these to come from the new coalition government. Back on track in the agenda A124 was passed calling on support for the immediate restoration of the link between pensions and earnings and to oppose any raise in the state retirement age. The branch intervened on the next motion A125 which was calling for engagement with the "commission on ownership" set up to consider "Mutualisation" a form of worker democracy and to draw up a plan for workers democracy in the civil and public sector. The NEC were calling for remission on this matter and the branch's intervention which opposed remission and supported the motion may have swung matters when it was stated that unlike management who could not organise a booze up in a brewery we could all do a better job.
Remission was lost and the motion was carried. Chris however was told off by Grant for using profane language in his intervention as the phrase was slightly different when not in print.
Two more motions were passed in this section A126 calling for the opening of negotiations to raise the current redundancy threshold and A127 calling for an increase in the level of carers allowance and a removal of the restrictions which prevent pensioners from claiming the benefit. As the conference drew towards its conclusion those motions that had been lost to the guillotine in their various sections were given the opportunity to be heard, those motions put by the branch that had been lost were however not included in the chosen list which was A614 (noting the victimisation of reps in CSA Hastings), A78 (equality assessment of PCS subs), A68 (campaign against law changes which would prevent extradition of war-criminals from UK), A46 (Trade Union education in schools), A96 (access to Thompsons legal advice) and A137 (Free telephone numbers for benefit claimants to replace 0845 numbers). All the motions were carried despite resistance from the NEC to A96.
The vote of thanks to all those involved in the conference was given with the usual sprinkling of conference in-jokes, it got a laugh on the day but would mean little here so the humour isn't repeated....except...When the conference was asked to send its best wishes to Mark Serwotka in his hospital bed by wishing his beloved Cardiff City a win in the Championship playoffs certain voices were raised (loudly) to cry "Come on you Pool!".
Having already sent our apologies to Mark in his get well card saying "get well soon – sorry about Saturday" all we had to hope for was that Success at Wembley for the right team would ensue.
Now off to the train station for the trip home...or for some...to London for tomorrow's excitement.
Written by Chris Wade
21.5.10
PCS National Conference - Day 2
Following on from yesterday's business the delegation had a hard decision to make. After several conversations with the National Treasurer Chris Baugh and assurances that the Branch (and others) would receive permission to purchase branch banners without the need for the sort of fundraising we had mentioned in our motion A81 for later in the day. With the assurances given the decision was taken to withdraw the motion and allow the business of the conference to progress without being delayed by a unnecessary debate when we had our first victory of the day.
Chris Baugh had the first section of the day to present when he outlined the 2010 Organising Strategy to the conference before debate opened on the motions of the day with A40 a debate on campaigns and organising and the views of branches were taken towards how to progress the move to standing Trade Union candidates in elections.
There was opposition to this and although the motion called for a further year of preparation before proposals were put to the ADC next year there were branches opposed in principle to standing TU candidates. However, following conferences first card vote, the motion was passed by 153,470 to 86,799 with 917 abstentions.
A43 which called for procedures to be set down for how constituencies would choose candidates rather than the NEC was in the end remitted as being too soon, no decision actually having been taken to stand such candidates. The debates took up considerable time and the rules section where the branch had two motions was soon upon us but not before conference unanimously agreed motion A44 calling for support and re-instatement for sacked and victimised Land Registry union rep Jane Brooke.
In the Rules section A56 calling for a set percentage of 0.6 % of gross wages to be taken as members subscription without a maximum cap was lost. A57 deleted expired appendices from the rule book and then Martin moved and won the debate on motion A58 calling for the election of member trustees. A lengthy debate ensued on motion A60 which called for shortened debates in future where no clear opposition existed with the motions moving direct to the vote after the motion was moved and seconded. It was ironic that a motion intended to shorten debate took so long.
This led us into the Health and Safety debates; A63 was carried and called for Crown Immunity to be removed from Government departments as this was being used by employers to avoid legal obligations to engage in meaningful health and safety structures.
A64 was passed calling for departments to adopt the International Stress Management Standards which are accepted by the HSE as the approach to be taken in dealing with Work Related Stress. The last motion to be heard in the Health and Safety section was A65 which called for an agreed maximum working temperature was remitted to the NEC on the grounds of the instruction to provide industry standard monitors to all branches.
Lively debates ensued in the Affiliations section where A70 calling for affiliation to the "Right to Work" campaign was agreed before Motions A71 and A72 were debated. These discussed affiliating to the Venezuela Solidarity Campaign and disaffiliation from the Hands off Venezuela campaign. As you can imagine, with such opposing views the debate was quite lengthy and no other affiliation discussions were heard.
The 2010 Financial report was presented to Conference and can be found on the PCS website.
The final section of the day was the Services and Structures debate where Grant was to move motion A88 on behalf of the branch. The motion called for organisation between branches where site closures such as Lytham were made more complex by the various branches represented there. The motion recognised the need for all branches to be organised to present a unified resistance to such closures and the motion was passed.
The first motion in the section was A85 but was remitted to the NEC. It was intended to re-dress the serial leavers and re-joiners to the Union where some staff abuse the representation of the union, joining when in trouble and leaving when they felt the union had solved their problems. Motion A86 was passed calling for an updated equality data exercise to assist in addressing under-representation of minority groups in the Union.
A87 on pay for Union employees was lost as it called for pay cuts for our full time officials and staff. A88 was carried, as I mentioned before, as was A90 on de-recognition of PCS in negotiating rights where those rights are gifted to or swapped with sister unions following departmental re-organisation. The motion called for full consultation with members before this was done in future and conference agreed. Another remitted motion was A91 moved by Treasury Solicitors calling for facility time for branches where they become responsible for their own pay negotiations.
The role of Lay Tutors was recognised in A92 which called for lay tutors to be treated ad ULRs for the purpose of delivering training courses and for associated time to be given for that role, this motion too was carried.
A93 was lost when nit sought to stop the practice of listing the number of nominating branches alongside candidates' names in ballot papers. The last motion to be heard was A94 calling for the use of e-mail and electronic submission for conference delegates and nominations. This was carried before conference closed for the day and delegates headed back to their hotels to prepare for the PCS Social later that evening.
Written by Chris Wade
Chris Baugh had the first section of the day to present when he outlined the 2010 Organising Strategy to the conference before debate opened on the motions of the day with A40 a debate on campaigns and organising and the views of branches were taken towards how to progress the move to standing Trade Union candidates in elections.
There was opposition to this and although the motion called for a further year of preparation before proposals were put to the ADC next year there were branches opposed in principle to standing TU candidates. However, following conferences first card vote, the motion was passed by 153,470 to 86,799 with 917 abstentions.
A43 which called for procedures to be set down for how constituencies would choose candidates rather than the NEC was in the end remitted as being too soon, no decision actually having been taken to stand such candidates. The debates took up considerable time and the rules section where the branch had two motions was soon upon us but not before conference unanimously agreed motion A44 calling for support and re-instatement for sacked and victimised Land Registry union rep Jane Brooke.
In the Rules section A56 calling for a set percentage of 0.6 % of gross wages to be taken as members subscription without a maximum cap was lost. A57 deleted expired appendices from the rule book and then Martin moved and won the debate on motion A58 calling for the election of member trustees. A lengthy debate ensued on motion A60 which called for shortened debates in future where no clear opposition existed with the motions moving direct to the vote after the motion was moved and seconded. It was ironic that a motion intended to shorten debate took so long.
This led us into the Health and Safety debates; A63 was carried and called for Crown Immunity to be removed from Government departments as this was being used by employers to avoid legal obligations to engage in meaningful health and safety structures.
A64 was passed calling for departments to adopt the International Stress Management Standards which are accepted by the HSE as the approach to be taken in dealing with Work Related Stress. The last motion to be heard in the Health and Safety section was A65 which called for an agreed maximum working temperature was remitted to the NEC on the grounds of the instruction to provide industry standard monitors to all branches.
Lively debates ensued in the Affiliations section where A70 calling for affiliation to the "Right to Work" campaign was agreed before Motions A71 and A72 were debated. These discussed affiliating to the Venezuela Solidarity Campaign and disaffiliation from the Hands off Venezuela campaign. As you can imagine, with such opposing views the debate was quite lengthy and no other affiliation discussions were heard.
The 2010 Financial report was presented to Conference and can be found on the PCS website.
The final section of the day was the Services and Structures debate where Grant was to move motion A88 on behalf of the branch. The motion called for organisation between branches where site closures such as Lytham were made more complex by the various branches represented there. The motion recognised the need for all branches to be organised to present a unified resistance to such closures and the motion was passed.
The first motion in the section was A85 but was remitted to the NEC. It was intended to re-dress the serial leavers and re-joiners to the Union where some staff abuse the representation of the union, joining when in trouble and leaving when they felt the union had solved their problems. Motion A86 was passed calling for an updated equality data exercise to assist in addressing under-representation of minority groups in the Union.
A87 on pay for Union employees was lost as it called for pay cuts for our full time officials and staff. A88 was carried, as I mentioned before, as was A90 on de-recognition of PCS in negotiating rights where those rights are gifted to or swapped with sister unions following departmental re-organisation. The motion called for full consultation with members before this was done in future and conference agreed. Another remitted motion was A91 moved by Treasury Solicitors calling for facility time for branches where they become responsible for their own pay negotiations.
The role of Lay Tutors was recognised in A92 which called for lay tutors to be treated ad ULRs for the purpose of delivering training courses and for associated time to be given for that role, this motion too was carried.
A93 was lost when nit sought to stop the practice of listing the number of nominating branches alongside candidates' names in ballot papers. The last motion to be heard was A94 calling for the use of e-mail and electronic submission for conference delegates and nominations. This was carried before conference closed for the day and delegates headed back to their hotels to prepare for the PCS Social later that evening.
Written by Chris Wade
20.5.10
PCS National Conference - Day 1
The Delegates third full day in Brighton saw the commencement of the National Conference with Union President, Janice Goodrich, giving her address to conference. In it she thanked the membership for the support in the campaigns against the Compensation scheme cuts and sent her and conferences best wishes to Mark Serwotka who is in hospital having tests for a heart problem. Mark will apparently review the events of the day in a DVD and in his absence Hugh Lanning (Deputy General Secretary) made the presentation of the 2010 PCS Annual Report and included references to the High Court victory.
Protecting public services was the heading for the first section of the day motion A1 was passed calling for a coalition of Public Sector Trade Unions to campaign together in common campaign activities. Joint action to protect public services being a major plank of this motion despite the failure of other Civil Service Unions in recent months to join with PCS in working towards our victory.
A624 took the collaborations of unions to the international level, calling for closer links and support with our sister unions in Greece where Public Sector workers are facing a struggle more desperate than our own in their current Economic Crisis. This motion was also passed as were A609 and A611. A609 dealt with outsourcing pilots in HMRC and A611 with the movement of responsibility for learning and skills to the CSCB and Cabinet Office.
Returning to the original schedule motion A3 was passed calling for a reversal of office closures and staff cuts and a reversal of the move towards offices based on telephony whilst realising that to achieve this may require industrial action.
Despite the new governments statement that National Identity Cards were to be scrapped before they came into existence conference passed A4 dealing with the jobs of those staff in IPS. DEFRA staff made redundant barely six months after being transferred to "Interserve" in 2009 led to motion A5 being passed calling for revised and effective guidance to be negotiated. The section closed on time and with all motions having been heard with A6 also passed calling for the wasted money spent using favoured contractors to provide services such as travel to be saved before jobs were cut.
High Lanning then addressed conference before the next session dealing with the Civil Service Compensation Scheme and Pensions. He told conference that when the victory was announced to members in the PCS flash text scheme the negotiators for the Cabinet office had to leave the room when they, who are PCS members themselves, received the message. He then outlined the next steps in the campaign to defend redundancy terms now that the Government are considering their response.
A647 recognised the necessity of maintaining pressure in the campaign especially with a new government no keener to negotiate with Civil Servants. Any new scheme will now have to be approved by a ballot of members as the motion was carried by the conference, as was motion A660 which called for legal and other challenges to recover the wages lost by staff that were forced to take strike action in response to the government's illegal actions.
A9 condemned the treatment of disabled staff under the scheme when they worked within "host" employers such as charities where the scheme limited their reckonable service because of this duality of employment. Carrying this motion and calling for negotiation of better treatment for disabled staff the section came to an end.
MP John McDonnell the head of the PCS parliamentary group then addressed the conference and used his annual address to not only report on the action of the group, the moves to include new MPs and grow the influence of it but also to launch his candidacy for the Labour Party leadership. John will need nominations from 33 Labour MPs to get his name on the ballot and all PCS members can help by contacting their MP (if a Labour one) and calling them to nominate John.
After the Lunch break Equality motions were debated.
A12 agreed that the establishment of PCS regional equality networks had proved vital in increasing the participation of members in passing the motion conference called for reasonable paid time off for members to attend these regional meetings.
A13 was also carried calling for equality proofing of all union goods and services to ensure that the marketing material members receive from PCS and its partner organisations.
A14 committed conference to inviting the authors of "The Spirit Level" to attend meetings and to publicise their findings to members.
A15 was lost when voted upon, it called for the NEC to be censured for failing to implement last year's Motion A47. The Branch intervened on this motion to oppose it in an impromptu speech before motions A277, A18 and A19 were carried, these motions called for a return to access to Access to Work for employees in the civil service, an end to discrimination in the PRP system for Senior Civil Servants and for the NEC to report back on and publicise the inequalities in the Civil Service across all Government departments.
Following this section Commercial Sector matters were discussed.
Martin intervened on A25 calling on the NEC to report how it intends to organise in the PCS Commercial Sector and how improvements to conditions of services could be achieved. The practices of in-shoring and out-shoring of Civil Service jobs were addressed and condemned in Motions A26 and A27. Both were carried before Charles moved the branch's motion on pay in BBW which was also carried by conference.
The last two motions in the section A29 and A30 were remitted to the NEC to address wages for outsourced work and the secrecy sometimes imposed by employers in negotiations about redundancy.
The communications awards were then presented, see the PCS website for more details, before conference moved onto the last section of the day Personnel Policy.
A31 called on the NEC to negotiate for a clear policy dealing with medical retirement, while A320 called for sick absences to be removed from the disciplinary and dismissal procedures. Both motions were carried as was A32 calling for an end to the discriminatory Civil Service Fast Track scheme and A33 calling for recognition for carers employed by Government departments.
The last motion of the day to be heard was A585 which was carried although the fairness for Apprentices in Government Departments was well on the way to being achieved in pre-existing negotiations.
Leaving the conference hall the delegation headed off through the mists of Brighton to fringe meetings supporting victimised reps and to prepare the speeches for tomorrow.
Written by Chris Wade
Protecting public services was the heading for the first section of the day motion A1 was passed calling for a coalition of Public Sector Trade Unions to campaign together in common campaign activities. Joint action to protect public services being a major plank of this motion despite the failure of other Civil Service Unions in recent months to join with PCS in working towards our victory.
A624 took the collaborations of unions to the international level, calling for closer links and support with our sister unions in Greece where Public Sector workers are facing a struggle more desperate than our own in their current Economic Crisis. This motion was also passed as were A609 and A611. A609 dealt with outsourcing pilots in HMRC and A611 with the movement of responsibility for learning and skills to the CSCB and Cabinet Office.
Returning to the original schedule motion A3 was passed calling for a reversal of office closures and staff cuts and a reversal of the move towards offices based on telephony whilst realising that to achieve this may require industrial action.
Despite the new governments statement that National Identity Cards were to be scrapped before they came into existence conference passed A4 dealing with the jobs of those staff in IPS. DEFRA staff made redundant barely six months after being transferred to "Interserve" in 2009 led to motion A5 being passed calling for revised and effective guidance to be negotiated. The section closed on time and with all motions having been heard with A6 also passed calling for the wasted money spent using favoured contractors to provide services such as travel to be saved before jobs were cut.
High Lanning then addressed conference before the next session dealing with the Civil Service Compensation Scheme and Pensions. He told conference that when the victory was announced to members in the PCS flash text scheme the negotiators for the Cabinet office had to leave the room when they, who are PCS members themselves, received the message. He then outlined the next steps in the campaign to defend redundancy terms now that the Government are considering their response.
A647 recognised the necessity of maintaining pressure in the campaign especially with a new government no keener to negotiate with Civil Servants. Any new scheme will now have to be approved by a ballot of members as the motion was carried by the conference, as was motion A660 which called for legal and other challenges to recover the wages lost by staff that were forced to take strike action in response to the government's illegal actions.
A9 condemned the treatment of disabled staff under the scheme when they worked within "host" employers such as charities where the scheme limited their reckonable service because of this duality of employment. Carrying this motion and calling for negotiation of better treatment for disabled staff the section came to an end.
MP John McDonnell the head of the PCS parliamentary group then addressed the conference and used his annual address to not only report on the action of the group, the moves to include new MPs and grow the influence of it but also to launch his candidacy for the Labour Party leadership. John will need nominations from 33 Labour MPs to get his name on the ballot and all PCS members can help by contacting their MP (if a Labour one) and calling them to nominate John.
After the Lunch break Equality motions were debated.
A12 agreed that the establishment of PCS regional equality networks had proved vital in increasing the participation of members in passing the motion conference called for reasonable paid time off for members to attend these regional meetings.
A13 was also carried calling for equality proofing of all union goods and services to ensure that the marketing material members receive from PCS and its partner organisations.
A14 committed conference to inviting the authors of "The Spirit Level" to attend meetings and to publicise their findings to members.
A15 was lost when voted upon, it called for the NEC to be censured for failing to implement last year's Motion A47. The Branch intervened on this motion to oppose it in an impromptu speech before motions A277, A18 and A19 were carried, these motions called for a return to access to Access to Work for employees in the civil service, an end to discrimination in the PRP system for Senior Civil Servants and for the NEC to report back on and publicise the inequalities in the Civil Service across all Government departments.
Following this section Commercial Sector matters were discussed.
Martin intervened on A25 calling on the NEC to report how it intends to organise in the PCS Commercial Sector and how improvements to conditions of services could be achieved. The practices of in-shoring and out-shoring of Civil Service jobs were addressed and condemned in Motions A26 and A27. Both were carried before Charles moved the branch's motion on pay in BBW which was also carried by conference.
The last two motions in the section A29 and A30 were remitted to the NEC to address wages for outsourced work and the secrecy sometimes imposed by employers in negotiations about redundancy.
The communications awards were then presented, see the PCS website for more details, before conference moved onto the last section of the day Personnel Policy.
A31 called on the NEC to negotiate for a clear policy dealing with medical retirement, while A320 called for sick absences to be removed from the disciplinary and dismissal procedures. Both motions were carried as was A32 calling for an end to the discriminatory Civil Service Fast Track scheme and A33 calling for recognition for carers employed by Government departments.
The last motion of the day to be heard was A585 which was carried although the fairness for Apprentices in Government Departments was well on the way to being achieved in pre-existing negotiations.
Leaving the conference hall the delegation headed off through the mists of Brighton to fringe meetings supporting victimised reps and to prepare the speeches for tomorrow.
Written by Chris Wade
19.5.10
DWP Group Conference - Day 2
Day two of the Conference opened with (Emergency Motion) EM 8 condeming the decision of Jobcentre Plus management to end the contracts of many Temporary and Fixed Term Contract staff at the end of March 2010. The call to make all Fixed Term Appointees permanent was agreed by the conference along with the call to recruit all staff through fair and open competition, oppose privatisation and defend staff jobs. The theme of protecting jobs, especially AA jobs, was taken forward in Motion A195a before the conference moved on to the Conditions of service section.
Here conference passed motions A82 which called for support for part time staff by accommodating part time working patterns, job sharing and giving full reasons when refusing applications for changes to working hours. The "Wednesday is the new Monday and Friday" response or "Business Needs" will now no longer be acceptable as the Group has a policy to demand full and detailed reasons.
Following this motion A86 (moved by the branch) was passed calling for support for workplace crèches and holiday play schemes to assist working parents such as the SCAMPS play scheme twice saved by the Branch's interventions.
The value to members of flexible working was re-iterated in A87 and A97 which called for a ban on any local flexible working agreements that were less favourable than the Model agreement and a re-instatement of the ½ day flexi credit for JC+ staff, so miserly removed in 2009.
The superiority of the former DCS flexi agreement over that in the former PS was acknowledged in A101 where Katya moved the branch's motion calling for the new PDCS flexi agreement to contain the best of that enjoyed in the former PCS and then the focus moved to Call Centres in DWP CMEC.
Call Centres and CMEC both being important parts of the rest of the day's debates
A102 resolved to campaign against the extension of the new telephony model in DWP and CMEC and to continue to campaign for decent conditions for all workers in call centres.
A114 condemned the attempts made by CMEC management to negatively change our member's conditions since their move from DWP. The motion called for a restoration of flexible working, improvements in conditions, a review of the breaks policy and a new appraisal system in CMEC.
Both motions were passed as was EM9 detailing the fight to gain access to flex working in CSA Operations.
A120 arguing for protection of members from the extremes of the disciplinary procedures was also passed following debates where the horror stories of penalties imposed following simple human mistakes in dealing with information security. A128 also dealing with the excesses of the disciplinary procedures was also passed, as was A130 calling for the disciplinary procedures in line with the ACAS code.
A133 dealing with Statutory leave following European Court Judgements (20 days can be carried forward in law) was carried by conference and called for retrospective claims to cover the losses that members have suffered as the DWP has allowed its policy to lag behind the law.
Proper hours in telephony areas was the focus of A134 which closed the morning section and called on the GEC to ensure a system is put in place to allow people to work their proper hours.
The afternoon section was opened with Katya moving Motion A199 on Call Centre health and Safety, a demand for the restoration of proper baseline and regular hearing tests for staff in call centres and proper risk assessments regarding telephony equipment. Again this was passed unanimously, Katya's nervousness translating into excellent preparation clear and supportable speeches and success for the branch's motions.
A205a was passed calling for reasonable adjustments in accordance with DDA to be more supportive and creative to allow staff to remain in work.
The Health and Safety section took on a sombre mood when the debate on A206 (Staff Safety) which called on all staff to fully engage in the revised DWP Unacceptable Customer Behaviour (UCB) policy and database. Delegates remembered the death of a colleague in 1980, killed whilst working as a visiting officer. Her death is still a poignant reminder of the importance of challenging all forms of UCB.
The length and emotion of the contributions here meant that Charles was unable to speak on Fire and Bomb warden training as the section ended and business moved on to EM13 dealing with public sector spending cuts calling on the GEC to resist all cuts imposed by the new ConDem coalition.
The importance of recruitment and organising and training young members was recognised by the passing of motions A285 and A287. Conference re-iterated that retaining the links between CMEC staff and DWP staff despite the worst efforts of CMEC management was vital policy when they passed A290.
The passing of EM10 on the new Union Learning Representatives caused some contention but it was recognised by conference that the agreement whilst not perfect was considerably better than the situation currently in place.
The guillotine section saw motions A151, A154 and A159 (Special Leave, Agreement on reasonable adjustments and Revised Service hours) from the conditions of service section passed whilst A153 (treatment of casuals) was remitted to the GEC. A232 (overpayment of wages due to RM) was also remitted . A60 (facility time for Branch Equality Officers), A240(Audit of LEAN results), A242 (free telephone numbers for customers to access benefits), A22 ( Call Centre Job design) were all passes while A61 (Use of RM by reps to record facility time) ended the day with a lively debate. The GEC opposed this motion which called for further negotiations with DWP to resolve the waste of reps time caused by the RM policy but was carried by conference.
In closing the conference the Group President thanked delegates for the work here and in Branches and we left to plan our strategy for National Conference.
Written by Chris Wade.
Here conference passed motions A82 which called for support for part time staff by accommodating part time working patterns, job sharing and giving full reasons when refusing applications for changes to working hours. The "Wednesday is the new Monday and Friday" response or "Business Needs" will now no longer be acceptable as the Group has a policy to demand full and detailed reasons.
Following this motion A86 (moved by the branch) was passed calling for support for workplace crèches and holiday play schemes to assist working parents such as the SCAMPS play scheme twice saved by the Branch's interventions.
The value to members of flexible working was re-iterated in A87 and A97 which called for a ban on any local flexible working agreements that were less favourable than the Model agreement and a re-instatement of the ½ day flexi credit for JC+ staff, so miserly removed in 2009.
The superiority of the former DCS flexi agreement over that in the former PS was acknowledged in A101 where Katya moved the branch's motion calling for the new PDCS flexi agreement to contain the best of that enjoyed in the former PCS and then the focus moved to Call Centres in DWP CMEC.
Call Centres and CMEC both being important parts of the rest of the day's debates
A102 resolved to campaign against the extension of the new telephony model in DWP and CMEC and to continue to campaign for decent conditions for all workers in call centres.
A114 condemned the attempts made by CMEC management to negatively change our member's conditions since their move from DWP. The motion called for a restoration of flexible working, improvements in conditions, a review of the breaks policy and a new appraisal system in CMEC.
Both motions were passed as was EM9 detailing the fight to gain access to flex working in CSA Operations.
A120 arguing for protection of members from the extremes of the disciplinary procedures was also passed following debates where the horror stories of penalties imposed following simple human mistakes in dealing with information security. A128 also dealing with the excesses of the disciplinary procedures was also passed, as was A130 calling for the disciplinary procedures in line with the ACAS code.
A133 dealing with Statutory leave following European Court Judgements (20 days can be carried forward in law) was carried by conference and called for retrospective claims to cover the losses that members have suffered as the DWP has allowed its policy to lag behind the law.
Proper hours in telephony areas was the focus of A134 which closed the morning section and called on the GEC to ensure a system is put in place to allow people to work their proper hours.
The afternoon section was opened with Katya moving Motion A199 on Call Centre health and Safety, a demand for the restoration of proper baseline and regular hearing tests for staff in call centres and proper risk assessments regarding telephony equipment. Again this was passed unanimously, Katya's nervousness translating into excellent preparation clear and supportable speeches and success for the branch's motions.
A205a was passed calling for reasonable adjustments in accordance with DDA to be more supportive and creative to allow staff to remain in work.
The Health and Safety section took on a sombre mood when the debate on A206 (Staff Safety) which called on all staff to fully engage in the revised DWP Unacceptable Customer Behaviour (UCB) policy and database. Delegates remembered the death of a colleague in 1980, killed whilst working as a visiting officer. Her death is still a poignant reminder of the importance of challenging all forms of UCB.
The length and emotion of the contributions here meant that Charles was unable to speak on Fire and Bomb warden training as the section ended and business moved on to EM13 dealing with public sector spending cuts calling on the GEC to resist all cuts imposed by the new ConDem coalition.
The importance of recruitment and organising and training young members was recognised by the passing of motions A285 and A287. Conference re-iterated that retaining the links between CMEC staff and DWP staff despite the worst efforts of CMEC management was vital policy when they passed A290.
The passing of EM10 on the new Union Learning Representatives caused some contention but it was recognised by conference that the agreement whilst not perfect was considerably better than the situation currently in place.
The guillotine section saw motions A151, A154 and A159 (Special Leave, Agreement on reasonable adjustments and Revised Service hours) from the conditions of service section passed whilst A153 (treatment of casuals) was remitted to the GEC. A232 (overpayment of wages due to RM) was also remitted . A60 (facility time for Branch Equality Officers), A240(Audit of LEAN results), A242 (free telephone numbers for customers to access benefits), A22 ( Call Centre Job design) were all passes while A61 (Use of RM by reps to record facility time) ended the day with a lively debate. The GEC opposed this motion which called for further negotiations with DWP to resolve the waste of reps time caused by the RM policy but was carried by conference.
In closing the conference the Group President thanked delegates for the work here and in Branches and we left to plan our strategy for National Conference.
Written by Chris Wade.
18.5.10
DWP Group Conference - Day 1
After arriving in a cloudy Brighton yesterday, and with torrential rain following later, the branch delegation found themselves feeling greatly at home with the weather if not the accommodation. A definite Soul feeling for Chris, Grant was quite Mod, Katya Frilly and Martin Artistic but let's not mention Greg most definitely not a stock room!
Anyway one restless night's sleep later, I'm always nervous the night before the first day, the delegation woke to sunny skies with the promise of showers...where's the sun block?
The group President opened the conference congratulating delegates and branches on the fabulous support in the recent action in the compensation campaign which proved decisive in the recent High Court victory for the Union. Remember the decision of the Court made specific mention of the fact that the strike clearly demonstrated that the majority of Civil Servants affected by the unlawful changes were not in agreement with them.
The day moved onto the motions.
EM1 on the Contact Centre Campaign was carried, all branches involved in Contact Centre areas speaking out about the working conditions endured in CCs with the first use of unparliamentary language showing how well "Contact Centres are..." can be alliterated.
Moving onto A12 the branch delegation had the opportunity if it's first intervention in the debate on PDCS and Lean. I (Chris Wade) was able to tell the conference about the effects of LEAN at the DCPU, more work fewer staff being the outcome and the conference agreed that protection of jobs and services in areas threatened by LEAN was a priority and all action should be taken to resist the department's policy.
After the break the Pay claim motions were the focus of the conference and pay progression headed the debate and action to progress the pay talks and abolish low pay in the DWP. Unfortunately the guillotine fell before the branch's motion on honorarium for First Aiders was heard...has anyone got a plaster?
Equality issues and policy on Mental Health followed A214 detailing support for reps in dealing with cases where member's mental health problems have been held against them including investigating any potential discrimination. A215 on working patterns and A216 on Equality Data gathering were passed as was A222 on Equality Data. Conference determined to make sure that all HR policies are equality assessed.
After a short lunch break motions in the Managing Attendance section were debated, the first motion A245 dealing with natural justice, rights under DDA and an acknowledgement that people do get ill and should not be punished because of it was also passed.
A258 dealing with discounting of DDA linked absences was also passed an important policy plank of the group now being to get a fairer deal for disabled staff. While A270 called for re-education of managers regarding AM and DDA and was passed. It is noteworthy that although moved and seconded by other branches this motion like some others was written by this branch but also passed at the other branches' respective AGMs ...a mark of the influence of this branch within the wider union.
A277 on OHS advice was guillotined; this was to be seconded by our branch though like the one above, the lead branches motion was based on our own. Motions were then debated which spoke of the victimisation of PCS reps in DWP and in CMEC in particular and the support we as a Union must give to our representatives when dismissed for taking part in legitimate representation of members. A59 then going onto debate (and be passed) a motion regarding the imposition of CMEC Employee Relations Principles which are now to be resisted as an attack on PCS.
Conference ended with votes on Honorary Lifer Memberships for activists and presentations to those approved at the previous conference.
Then it was off to tea...but not before the fringe and other conference meetings that fill the evenings here in Brighton...It had been a long day but a worthwhile one.
Tomorrow will see the remaining delegates; Katya, Grant, Greg and Charles speaking on motions, more of that later.
Written by Chris Wade.
17.5.10
The Re-Run...
DWP Group Elections 2010 – The Re- RunAnother Chance To Influence Your Pay, Terms and Conditions.
From Friday 28th May 2010 onwards you should receive your DWP Group Executive Committee Election ballot paper, in the re-run election.
Part of the DWP GEC election is being re-run due to administrative errors in the first election. It was no fault of the candidates or the Branches and was frankly human error in that the incorrect election addresses were printed for some of the candidates. The PCS General Secretary (Mark Serwotka) has therefore instructed that the DWP Group Presidential and DWP Group Executive Committee part of the elections be re-run as these were the areas that were impacted by the errors.
The Branch Executive Committee and the Annual General Meetings support the following list of candidates:
Group President
Jane Aitchison
Committee
Dave Alston, Alison Carass, Jason Ferraby, Helen Flanagan, Janice Godrich, Sharon Green, Gavin Hartley, Keith Henry, Martin Jones, Adam Khalif, Marie McDonough, Dave Owens, Ian Pope, Carol Revell, Sarah Robinson, Sian Ruddick, Lesley Salt, Jagdeep Sandhu, Nigel Sheahan, Derek Thomson, Steve West.
We would encourage members to vote in the forthcoming elections and we hope that you will consider voting for the above candidates.
If you have any further questions please do not hesitate to contact your Branch office.
14.5.10
Right-leaning lobby ignorant on safety
A leading professional body has joined unions and campaigners in criticising a report by a Tory-linked think tank that calls for health and safety deregulation. The report, 'Health and safety: reducing the burden,' produced by the right-leaning Policy Exchange, 'is marred by a number of conceptual weaknesses,' according to the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health (IOSH).
In March, TUC general secretary Brendan Barber dismissed the report, saying it was 'as close to being relevant to the needs of the modern workplace as Alice in Wonderland. Anyone who believes that there is a culture of over-compliance needs some basic lessons in the reality of working life'.
IOSH is equally dismissive. It is says references to 'over compliance' aren't based on genuine requirements of safety laws. It adds that the report's authors are 'seemingly unaware' that their call for 'proportionality' on safety regulation is in fact already the legal position.
'Regrettably, this Policy Exchange report does nothing to clear up public confusion or address the root causes of risk and liability aversion,' said IOSH policy and technical director Richard Jones.
Campaign group Families Against Corporate Killers (FACK) said the report, which treads similar ground to recent Tory proposals, treats the victims of work hazards with 'contempt', adding: 'The Policy Exchange has not dealt with our burden which we carry all our lives, nor with all the costs of poor health and safety in human and financial terms, and has not bothered to consult those on the receiving end of employers' negligence.'"
In March, TUC general secretary Brendan Barber dismissed the report, saying it was 'as close to being relevant to the needs of the modern workplace as Alice in Wonderland. Anyone who believes that there is a culture of over-compliance needs some basic lessons in the reality of working life'.
IOSH is equally dismissive. It is says references to 'over compliance' aren't based on genuine requirements of safety laws. It adds that the report's authors are 'seemingly unaware' that their call for 'proportionality' on safety regulation is in fact already the legal position.
'Regrettably, this Policy Exchange report does nothing to clear up public confusion or address the root causes of risk and liability aversion,' said IOSH policy and technical director Richard Jones.
Campaign group Families Against Corporate Killers (FACK) said the report, which treads similar ground to recent Tory proposals, treats the victims of work hazards with 'contempt', adding: 'The Policy Exchange has not dealt with our burden which we carry all our lives, nor with all the costs of poor health and safety in human and financial terms, and has not bothered to consult those on the receiving end of employers' negligence.'"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)