The following details have been supplied by the PCS HQ:
In civil service and government employment the pay gap between men and women is even higher than average.
In the Department for Transport for example, women executive officers in the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) are paid 16% less than male equivalents working for the Driving Standards Agency (DSA).
PCS is challenging this pay inequality but there are many more examples from other areas of the civil service and the public sector.
We are tackling the problem in a number of ways, through:
• Collective bargaining and negotiations
• Taking forward hundreds of legal cases on equal pay issues, and
• Campaigning activity.
Read the latest from the pay unit in the PCS members’ area here.
8.9.10
Cuts Will Deepen Inequality
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.
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)