The following has been supplied by the TUC:
Every year, two million men and women die
worldwide as a result of work-related injuries and diseases. Workers' Memorial
Day held annually on 28 April, is a day when all over the world workers and
their representatives conduct events, demonstrations, vigils and a host of
other activities to remember this toll. The TUC
says in the UK
over 20,000 people die prematurely every year as a result of injuries or
accidents caused by their work. This year it has called on unions and safety
campaigners to make 28 April a day of action to defend health and safety from
attacks by the press, politicians and employers. The union body is concerned
that the UK's
workplace safety record could be about to get worse as a direct result of
government policies. Not only do funding cuts - both to the Health and Safety
Executive (HSE)
and to local authorities - mean there will be fewer official safety
inspections, the government has also said that workplaces like shops, offices,
schools, docks and farms no longer need to be routinely visited. TUC
adds that 'health and safety bashers' should be reminded what safety law is
really all about - not pointless regulation but necessary protection to stop
employers taking risks with workplace safety and which prevents people from
being killed, injured or made ill as a result of their work. TUC
general secretary Brendan Barber said: 'Sensible employers who are happy to
work closely with unions improving safety and occupational health at work don't
see safety regulation as an intrusive burden. But rogue employers, who are
happy to cut corners and take risks with their employees' safety, do. It's
these reckless employers that we need to target and the government's rhetoric
will only encourage yet more of them to think they can get away with unsafe
workplaces - without fear of ever getting a visit from the HSE or
their local council.' UK
events have been organised in over 50 towns and cities from Aberdeen to
Penzance.
25.4.12
DWP Group Executive Committee Elections 2012
From Today (Thursday
26th April 2012) onwards members should start to receive their DWP
Group Executive Committee Election ballot paper.
The DWP Group Executive is an important body within PCS
negotiating and campaigning on items such as:
Departmental Pay
Conditions of Service, Annual Leave, etc
Health and Safety matters such as screens, risk assessments
across the Department.
The Branch Executive Committee and the Annual General
Meetings support the following list of candidates and would urge you to vote
for them:
Group President
Fran Heathcote
Vice President (5):
Helen Flanagan; Martin Cavanagh; Adam Khalif; John McInally;
Katrine Williams
Asst Secretaries (7):
Paul Barton; David Burke; Christine Cuthbert; Sam Hall; Jim
Holmes; Tom Penn; Dave Richards
Organiser:
Derek Thomson
Treasurer:
Bashir Chilwan
Journal Editor:
Alan Smith
Committee (21):
Ian Bartholomew; Kevin McCafferty; Alison Carass;
Marie McDonough; Tony Church; Dave Owens; Jason Ferraby; Mark Page; Steve
Swainston; Ian Pope; Jimmy Gill; Carol Revell; Janice Godrich; Dean Rhodes;
Sharon Green; Annette Rochester; Gavin Hartley; Sian Ruddick; Glen Hatwood;
Steve West; Martin Jones.
Bird-brained Daily Mail tells another hair-raising lie
The following has been supplied by the TUC:
If you want facts served
along with your news and you are a Daily Mail reader, you'll have been left
sadly wanting over the last few days. A headline on 13 April condemned the
Health and Safety Executive (HSE) after its
Myth Busters Challenge Panel 'failed to come to a decision on the seagull in
the pond case'. But HSE's panel had no need to respond to the Daily Mail's
complaint, because a fire brigade's refusal to rescue a seagull had nothing to
do with either HSE or workplace health and safety. HSE chair Judith Hackitt said the watchdog preferred to make decisions on
the basis of facts, not 'hearsay', adding 'it is clear that it was not about
health and safety at all.' A London Fire Brigade (LFB) spokesperson confirmed: 'The RSPCA called us out as an emergency. Our
firefighters rushed to the scene only to realise they'd been called out to a
seagull with a plastic bag round its leg which was swimming around quite
happily and wasn't in any distress. This clearly wasn't an emergency so the
firefighters left it to a local animal rescue charity to deal with and swiftly
left the scene.' LFB added: 'Often, by the time our firefighters arrive
at an incident, someone has waded in to try and rescue an animal only to get
into danger themselves, so we send enough crews to deal with whatever we may
find. The safety of the public and our firefighters is always our priority.'
This failure of the Daily Mail to concern itself with the facts came hot on the
heels of the paper's 9 April exclusive about a supposed ban on high heels for
hairdressers 'under nanny state proposals being drawn up in Brussels.' The
story was quickly kicked into touch by the TUC when it revealed employment minister Chris Grayling planned to use this
as ill-founded 'evidence' to ridicule health and safety in an 18 April speech
to the Policy Exchange. The minister had earlier told the Daily Mail: 'This
kind of stupidity has to stop. It makes no sense and I will do everything I can
to stop it.' In fact, the European Commission has no intention to regulate on
high heels and the paper's claims are completely unfounded. TUC said rather than check the facts, the Daily Mail and the minister had
lent damaging credibility to baseless claims in a scaremongering press release
from the National Hairdressers' Federation, an industry lobby group.
TUC cops safety minister in high heels scandal
The following has been supplied by the TUC:
Health and safety minister
Chris Grayling has been criticised for intending to use 'rubbish' stories
invented last week by the tabloids to justify an attack on workplace safety
rules. The criticism by the TUC came after
comments included in a speech released by the minister, scheduled for delivery
at an 18 April Policy Exchange conference. Mr Grayling was intending to say:
'It baffles me that at a time when we face a huge jobs challenge across Europe,
that someone thinks it is sensible for the EU to be spending time legislating
to ban high-heeled shoes in a hairdressers.' The minister opted to remove the
contentious sentence after a pre-emptive criticism from TUC head of safety Hugh Robertson was posted on TUC's Stronger Unions blog an hour before the minister was set to deliver
the speech, and which revealed the European Commission has no intention to do
anything of the kind. 'What is happening is that discussions are taking place
between the employers' and workers' representatives at European level through
the organisations Coiffure EU and UNI Europa Hair & Beauty over proposals that they want to put to the
European Commission on improving the appalling occupational health issues in
this industry,' Robertson wrote. 'These proposals have not gone to the
Commission yet and there is no suggestion from them that they plan any kind of
legislation. Also the proposals do not mention high heels. They do mention
preventing skin disorders, musculoskeletal diseases and the needs of pregnant
workers. Having read the proposals they make some genuinely positive proposals
around issues like substituting dangerous chemicals and protective equipment.'
As far as footwear goes, all the draft says is: 'Workers shall wear suitable
clothes for their activities or workwear clothing and, in particular, shoes
with non-slip soles.' Robertson says it took less than five minutes to
establish the press reports were 'rubbish'. His blog posting concludes: 'The
problem is not that health and safety has gone mad, it is that employers are
able to destroy the health of their workers with impunity because those who are
meant to be protecting us are no longer willing to stand up for us. As a
result, when sensible groups of employers, like those in hairdressing, are
prepared to put their head above the parapet and say that they want to do
something about it they will be far less likely to do so in the future for fear
of getting ridiculed.'
Workers' Memorial Day is days away!
Workers' Memorial Day, 28 April, is nearly upon us, and looks set to send a serious message to the government about its deadly safety plans. The TUC's call for a Day of Action to Defend Health and Safety is being heard nationwide, with events planned all the way from Penzance to Aberdeen, and Newport to Newcastle. TUC says with safety facing an unprecedented attack from the government, the national action will 'make it clear that we want clear commitments and action from those who should be protecting us.' It adds: 'Join any events in your area on that day and demonstrate that we will not give up our right to a safe workplace.' The message is being heeded outside the usual union and safety activist circles, too. This week UK-based IOSH - the world's biggest organisation representing safety professionals - is urging its members and staff to take up the issue. It has launching a new social media campaign, 'What does Workers' Memorial Day mean to you?', to mark the day. IOSH is calling on people to take pictures of themselves and their teams, holding up signs that describe what they see as the important message of the day. IOSH chief executive Rob Strange OBE said: 'We wanted to find a way of showing support to those people for whom Workers' Memorial Day has most poignancy, as well as for those who might need a reminder of why occupational safety and health is absolutely crucial. This campaign gets to the heart of the matter.' He added: 'We believe it's important that organisations like IOSH campaign and call for better occupational safety and health around the globe, in a bid to drive up standards and drive down statistics which currently show that too many people aren't returning home after work each day.' TUC head of safety Hugh Robertson commented: 'This is a welcome initiative from IOSH that illustrates the growing recognition of the importance of the day. We hope that as many people as possible will provide pictures of the reality of working life, in both the UK and abroad.'
19.4.12
NEC Elections - Ballot Starts on Thursday 19th April 2012
The National Executive Committee elections within PCS are now taking place.
NEC
The ballot papers for the PCS National Elections should be issued circa Thursday 19th April 2012, which means that very shortly you will be afforded the opportunity to elect the people who will represent PCS at the highest level within the union.
The National body deals with issues such as:
- National Pay Bargaining (campaigning for the restoration)
- The Civil Service Pensions Scheme
- The Cuts in Civil Service Jobs
As you can see from the above it is vitally important that the people we elect are prepared to advance members’ interests.
The Branch recommends (as agreed at the Annual General Meeting) that you participate in the elections and furthermore that you vote for the following candidates:
President:
Janice Godrich (Guest speaker at our 2008 AGM)
Deputy/Vice Presidents (4):
Sue Bond; Kevin McHugh; Paula Brown; John McInally
National Executive Committee:
(General Constituency - 30)
Ian Albert; Kevin Greenway; Lorna Merry; Mark Baker; Sam Hall; Chris Morrison; Clive Bryant; Zita Holbourne; Ian Pope; Ian Crossland; Jon Jamieson; Andy Reid; Alan Dennis; Andy Jennings; Dave Richards; Mike Derbyshire; Emily Kelly; Glen Siddall-Butcher; Mary Ferguson; Adam Khalif; Derek Thomson; Helen Flanagan; Neil License; Karen Watts; Cheryl Gedling; Marion Lloyd; Hector Wesley; Jackie Green; Dominic McFadden; Paul Williams.
The Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS) Fylde Central Benefits and Services Branch recommends that you vote for the aforementioned candidates in the PCS National Executive Committee Elections 2012.
17.4.12
Challenge the TaxPayers’ Alliance
Clifford Singer helped create the False Economy website falseeconomy.org.uk that will challenge the government’s case for cuts. Here he explains the need to challenge the TaxPayers’ Alliance’s media dominance.
During the summer of 2010, the TaxPayers’ Alliance (TPA) released a report on speed cameras which appeared to show the introduction of cameras in the early 1990s had made roads more dangerous than they would have been otherwise. Leaving aside the mystery of why speed cameras have joined the TPA’s pantheon of villains, along with the more predictable ‘benefit scroungers’ and trade unionists, the report had several characteristics typical of a TPA publication. It came with a serious-looking appendix that explained its seemingly impartial methodology, it gained lots of media coverage and it had political influence – one month later many councils began switching off their speed cameras following road safety budget cuts.
It was typical in one other way too: it was complete nonsense. While the mainstream media was content to accept the report at face value, some less credulous bloggers pointed out that according to the TPA’s projections, in the absence of speed cameras accident deaths would have fallen to zero by 2013, and then continued into negative numbers after that. If it wasn’t for those automated yellow boxes of evil, we would be enjoying the spectacle of the dead being resurrected within the next three years.
On its website, the TPA states: “We’re not a think-tank. We’re a do-tank”.
Pseudo-analysis such as its speed camera report certainly bears out the first part of that statement. But that didn’t stop readers of the influential ConservativeHome website naming the TPA as their favourite think-tank. The TPA has also boasted – through ConservativeHome – of the large number of its policies now adopted by the coalition.
Softening up electorate for cuts
Before the 2010 General Election, the TPA played an important role in softening up public antipathy towards public spending cuts. In September 2009 the TPA drew up, with the Institute of Directors, plans for an annual £50 billion a year of public spending cuts.
The alliance, which launched seven years ago, describes itself as a ‘grassroots alliance’ of ‘ordinary taxpayers’ despite an academic advisory council of Thatcherite acolytes like Patrick Minford and Ruth Lea.
The most enthusiastic coverage comes from Tory tabloids such as the Daily Mail and Express. But it also gets airtime from the BBC and other broadcasters – who should know better.
It is important to challenge the TPA’s media dominance. The alliance is particularly successful at packaging stories for cash-strapped local and regional media. Of course it helps to have £1 million a year behind you – but the point is that we need to make the case for public services.
Need for transparency in all sectors
The TPA has successfully argued for transparency and accountability in the public sector. Rather than arguing against this, we should be arguing for the same rules to apply to the private sector.
The TPA’s concern with transparency deserts it when it comes to its own finances. Its last full accounts, for 2006, record an income of £130,000 – hardly enough to sustain its current 10 full-time staff and offices in London and Birmingham. Since then, it has published ‘abbreviated’ accounts, meaning income and expenditure are withheld, although the Guardian reported its income in 2009 was £1 million. Donors are kept secret.
One source of TPA funding has been the shadowy Midlands Industrial Council. The MIC was founded in 1946 as a pressure group to fight the Attlee government’s nationalisation plans and to champion free enterprise. It has donated about £3 million to the Conservative Party since 2001, much of it targeted at marginal parliamentary seats in the Midlands.
Why won’t the TPA open its books?
As it told MPs who tried to prevent their expenses being published: “If you have nothing to hide then you’ve got nothing to fear.”
During the summer of 2010, the TaxPayers’ Alliance (TPA) released a report on speed cameras which appeared to show the introduction of cameras in the early 1990s had made roads more dangerous than they would have been otherwise. Leaving aside the mystery of why speed cameras have joined the TPA’s pantheon of villains, along with the more predictable ‘benefit scroungers’ and trade unionists, the report had several characteristics typical of a TPA publication. It came with a serious-looking appendix that explained its seemingly impartial methodology, it gained lots of media coverage and it had political influence – one month later many councils began switching off their speed cameras following road safety budget cuts.
It was typical in one other way too: it was complete nonsense. While the mainstream media was content to accept the report at face value, some less credulous bloggers pointed out that according to the TPA’s projections, in the absence of speed cameras accident deaths would have fallen to zero by 2013, and then continued into negative numbers after that. If it wasn’t for those automated yellow boxes of evil, we would be enjoying the spectacle of the dead being resurrected within the next three years.
On its website, the TPA states: “We’re not a think-tank. We’re a do-tank”.
Pseudo-analysis such as its speed camera report certainly bears out the first part of that statement. But that didn’t stop readers of the influential ConservativeHome website naming the TPA as their favourite think-tank. The TPA has also boasted – through ConservativeHome – of the large number of its policies now adopted by the coalition.
Softening up electorate for cuts
Before the 2010 General Election, the TPA played an important role in softening up public antipathy towards public spending cuts. In September 2009 the TPA drew up, with the Institute of Directors, plans for an annual £50 billion a year of public spending cuts.
The alliance, which launched seven years ago, describes itself as a ‘grassroots alliance’ of ‘ordinary taxpayers’ despite an academic advisory council of Thatcherite acolytes like Patrick Minford and Ruth Lea.
The most enthusiastic coverage comes from Tory tabloids such as the Daily Mail and Express. But it also gets airtime from the BBC and other broadcasters – who should know better.
It is important to challenge the TPA’s media dominance. The alliance is particularly successful at packaging stories for cash-strapped local and regional media. Of course it helps to have £1 million a year behind you – but the point is that we need to make the case for public services.
Need for transparency in all sectors
The TPA has successfully argued for transparency and accountability in the public sector. Rather than arguing against this, we should be arguing for the same rules to apply to the private sector.
The TPA’s concern with transparency deserts it when it comes to its own finances. Its last full accounts, for 2006, record an income of £130,000 – hardly enough to sustain its current 10 full-time staff and offices in London and Birmingham. Since then, it has published ‘abbreviated’ accounts, meaning income and expenditure are withheld, although the Guardian reported its income in 2009 was £1 million. Donors are kept secret.
One source of TPA funding has been the shadowy Midlands Industrial Council. The MIC was founded in 1946 as a pressure group to fight the Attlee government’s nationalisation plans and to champion free enterprise. It has donated about £3 million to the Conservative Party since 2001, much of it targeted at marginal parliamentary seats in the Midlands.
Why won’t the TPA open its books?
As it told MPs who tried to prevent their expenses being published: “If you have nothing to hide then you’ve got nothing to fear.”
Daily Mail insane crowing on seagull rescue
The following was supplied by the TUC:
A Health and Safety Executive (HSE) myth busting challenge panel launched this week to counter the 'health and safety gone mad' stories that appear routinely in the press has had an inauspicious start. The Daily Mail, which has a history of running myth-propagating stories about health and safety 'jobsworths' and killjoys, was near the front of the queue with a referral to the panel. The paper wanted HSE's view on an incident last week when 25 fire-fighters called by RSPCA to rescue a gull decided it wasn't a justified use of resources, but stuck around in case a member of the public got in to difficulty in their own rescue bid. When HSE said it would take five days to get a response from the panel, the Daily Mail had got its headline: 'The Mail contacted the new health and safety Myth Buster panel and were told... Give us five days and we'll say if the firemen did the right thing.' However Judith Hackitt, the Chair of HSE, said on the day the mail story appeared "We have now had chance to examine the facts in this case and it is clear that it was not about health and safety at all. The fire service itself has made clear that their decisions at Carshalton were not based on health and safety factors. We endorse this view.' ' The panel's high profile launch a day earlier had been welcomed by health and safety minister Chris Grayling. He said: 'Common sense is the key to successful health and safety. The Myth Busters Challenge Panel will advise people where they think local authorities, insurance companies or schools have got it wrong.' But the Hazards Campaign had warned the panel was addressing the wrong problem. Before the gull left HSE's panel pondering its position, spokesperson Hilda Palmer had warned: 'The HSE is in danger of creating its own myths by wasting time and resources on this myth-busting exercise.' She called on HSE to 'get its priorities right and bust the real pernicious myths' around health and safety such as 'only 171 people were killed at work last year when the figure is nearer 50,000.' She added the government and HSE were promoting deadly myths of their own, including 'that the docks, quarries, agriculture, manufacturing and transport are all so 'low hazard' that preventive lifesaving inspections are banned despite the fact that the death rates are well above average.'
10.4.12
Government criticised for petrol panic
The following has been supplied by the TUC:
Panic-buying of fuel and mixed messages over the safe storage of petrol have exposed the irrational decision to close the government agency that specialised in public information, the union PCS has said. And firefighters' union FBU has warned a minister's advice that householders should keep jerry cans of petrol in the garage is 'wrong' and 'massively dangerous.' The comments from civil service union PCS came as the government's Central Office of Information closes its doors last week. The cabinet minister responsible for the decision to shut it down, Francis Maude, was the same minister who gave the controversial advice on storing petrol at home. Commenting last week, PCS said: 'Mixed messages from government ministers, and their politically-motivated attempts to blame the Unite union for the tanker driver dispute, have led to panic-buying at petrol stations. This could easily have been avoided if the government had planned properly and professionally how to communicate the serious issues at stake.' FBU on 30 March called on the government to make an urgent public safety announcement highlighting the dangers of petrol in the home. It says the call echoes the safety concerns of North Yorkshire fire and rescue service after Diane Hill, 46, was critically injured, suffering 40 per cent burns, when petrol she was decanting in her kitchen ignited. The union called for advice to be issued by government warning the public of the dangers of petrol handling and storage. Matt Wrack, FBU general secretary said: 'Government needs to issue urgent professionally-based advice to warn the public before we have another incident, perhaps with far worse consequences. It is important we're taking every step to ensure there are no other incidents of this kind.'
Panic-buying of fuel and mixed messages over the safe storage of petrol have exposed the irrational decision to close the government agency that specialised in public information, the union PCS has said. And firefighters' union FBU has warned a minister's advice that householders should keep jerry cans of petrol in the garage is 'wrong' and 'massively dangerous.' The comments from civil service union PCS came as the government's Central Office of Information closes its doors last week. The cabinet minister responsible for the decision to shut it down, Francis Maude, was the same minister who gave the controversial advice on storing petrol at home. Commenting last week, PCS said: 'Mixed messages from government ministers, and their politically-motivated attempts to blame the Unite union for the tanker driver dispute, have led to panic-buying at petrol stations. This could easily have been avoided if the government had planned properly and professionally how to communicate the serious issues at stake.' FBU on 30 March called on the government to make an urgent public safety announcement highlighting the dangers of petrol in the home. It says the call echoes the safety concerns of North Yorkshire fire and rescue service after Diane Hill, 46, was critically injured, suffering 40 per cent burns, when petrol she was decanting in her kitchen ignited. The union called for advice to be issued by government warning the public of the dangers of petrol handling and storage. Matt Wrack, FBU general secretary said: 'Government needs to issue urgent professionally-based advice to warn the public before we have another incident, perhaps with far worse consequences. It is important we're taking every step to ensure there are no other incidents of this kind.'
Government makes jobs less secure
The following has been supplied by the TUC:
Increasing the time before workers are protected from unfair dismissal from one year to two years could leave 2.7 million people at increased risk of losing their jobs, the TUC has warned. The TUC says the government-imposed changes, which took effect on 6 April, will increase job insecurity, discriminate against younger workers, part-time women workers and employees from black and ethnic (BME) communities, and encourage more of a 'hire and fire' culture in the UK. TUC says the reforms have been pushed through by the government despite having little support from business. TUC general secretary Brendan Barber said: 'The government's proposals to weaken unfair dismissal rights risk generating a 'hire and fire' culture in the UK and will lead to the creation of insecure employment which is here today and gone tomorrow. Cutting back on protection against unfair dismissal will do nothing to boost the economy. If people are constantly in fear of losing their jobs it will lead to even less consumer spending, and losing your job is one of the worst things that can happen to anyone, especially when unemployment is so high.' He added: 'Businesses have told the government that above all they need the economy to be growing and the banks to get lending again. The government appears to be reacting to pressure from backbench Conservative MPs rather than actual business concerns.' Job insecurity has been linked to higher rates of injuries at work and of work-related suicides, sickness and ill-health. It has also been shown to drive down productivity.
Increasing the time before workers are protected from unfair dismissal from one year to two years could leave 2.7 million people at increased risk of losing their jobs, the TUC has warned. The TUC says the government-imposed changes, which took effect on 6 April, will increase job insecurity, discriminate against younger workers, part-time women workers and employees from black and ethnic (BME) communities, and encourage more of a 'hire and fire' culture in the UK. TUC says the reforms have been pushed through by the government despite having little support from business. TUC general secretary Brendan Barber said: 'The government's proposals to weaken unfair dismissal rights risk generating a 'hire and fire' culture in the UK and will lead to the creation of insecure employment which is here today and gone tomorrow. Cutting back on protection against unfair dismissal will do nothing to boost the economy. If people are constantly in fear of losing their jobs it will lead to even less consumer spending, and losing your job is one of the worst things that can happen to anyone, especially when unemployment is so high.' He added: 'Businesses have told the government that above all they need the economy to be growing and the banks to get lending again. The government appears to be reacting to pressure from backbench Conservative MPs rather than actual business concerns.' Job insecurity has been linked to higher rates of injuries at work and of work-related suicides, sickness and ill-health. It has also been shown to drive down productivity.
Safety reps do the business
The following has been supplied by the TUC:
Union safety reps have saved 'countless lives', a new TUC briefing has revealed. The message comes in the latest bulletin from TUC ahead of its national 28 April Day of Action to defend health and safety. It spells out how this 'union effect' not only prevents between 8,000 and 13,000 workplace accidents and between 3,000 and 8,000 work-related illnesses each year, it could deliver a cost saving to society of over half a billion pounds annually - and that's take from government figures. According to the TUC briefing, part of a package of resources for reps ahead of international Workers' Memorial Day on 28 April, 'health and safety representatives know the workplace far better than management as they are aware of what really goes on. They also act as a channel for individual workers to raise their concerns.' It is a role the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has acknowledged is 'invaluable.' It's also preventive. From asbestos to vinyl chloride, stress to strain injuries, unions exposed the problem and demanded preventive action long before official agencies caught on. The briefing notes: 'Even today it is unions and groups of safety representatives that are highlighting the potential risks within the semi-conductor industry, or from nanotechnology.' TUC concludes that with safety facing an unprecedented attack from the government, the 28 April Day of Action will 'make it clear that we want clear commitments and action from those who should be protecting us. Join any events in your area on that day and demonstrate that we will not give up our right to a safe workplace.'
Union safety reps have saved 'countless lives', a new TUC briefing has revealed. The message comes in the latest bulletin from TUC ahead of its national 28 April Day of Action to defend health and safety. It spells out how this 'union effect' not only prevents between 8,000 and 13,000 workplace accidents and between 3,000 and 8,000 work-related illnesses each year, it could deliver a cost saving to society of over half a billion pounds annually - and that's take from government figures. According to the TUC briefing, part of a package of resources for reps ahead of international Workers' Memorial Day on 28 April, 'health and safety representatives know the workplace far better than management as they are aware of what really goes on. They also act as a channel for individual workers to raise their concerns.' It is a role the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has acknowledged is 'invaluable.' It's also preventive. From asbestos to vinyl chloride, stress to strain injuries, unions exposed the problem and demanded preventive action long before official agencies caught on. The briefing notes: 'Even today it is unions and groups of safety representatives that are highlighting the potential risks within the semi-conductor industry, or from nanotechnology.' TUC concludes that with safety facing an unprecedented attack from the government, the 28 April Day of Action will 'make it clear that we want clear commitments and action from those who should be protecting us. Join any events in your area on that day and demonstrate that we will not give up our right to a safe workplace.'
3.4.12
Gordon Marsden Mp (Blackpool South) Raises Points About The Future Of The Jobs At Warbreck
The following is the text of a letter that Gordon Marsden MP (Blackpool South) has sent to the employer regarding the future of the jobs at Warbreck.
"Future of Benefit Centres - Blackpool and the Fylde
I am aware that you have been visiting a number of sites across the DWP Estates and have been working up detailed proposals for handling the transition from DLA to PIP over the next four years.
As I am sure you are aware the employment of staff at the various DWP centres in Blackpool and across the Fylde has been a long standing and important element in our local economy for many years. Indeed having been MP for Blackpool South since 1997 I know that there has been a period of strong, reliable performance from staff in those centres, notwithstanding the changes and outsourcing that may have taken place.
The future of that employment is one in which all of the MPs across the area have a common interest, with each of us, including myself, having some hundreds of constituents working for DWP, wherever their place of work is situated. You will understand that there is enormous interest and of course concern about the future plans and I have to say that it is unclear from what you have indicated in the note you sent to Benefits Centre staff on March 12 what the implications are for Blackpool and the Fylde. I am therefore seeking some urgent clarification from you on a number of points:
1) Your note indicated that one of the benefits centres would become focused on children’s DLA cases. Will this be at Warbreck or another centre, and if so will this be in the Fylde?
2) You also indicated that ‘Blackpool Benefits Centre’ would undertake the reassessment of all existing DLA claimants aged 16-64 by 2016, beginning in late 2013. Will that centre be Warbreck? Can you confirm that timetable and what the situation will be for people employed on that work beyond 2016?
3) You have indicated that Bootle is likely to be the ‘controlled site location’ for PIP New Claim starts from spring 2013. What will be the role of the Blackpool Benefits Centre(s) be in this process and at what stage? Will they be involved in the whole PIP process end-to-end, and if not what are the implications for work in Blackpool, at Warbreck or elsewhere?
You may be aware that I and my other Fylde MP colleagues met with the Minister Chris Grayling last autumn to express our wish for any new work to have a strong Blackpool element and concern that the loss of posts from the local sites in recent years should not be accelerated by any new developments. We received assurances from him then of that importance of the Fylde offices and an indication that there were no further displacements on the horizon. Given that since then anxieties have been raised locally with the relocation of work outside of Warbreck and issues around the closure of the Helpline – so you will understand why we would appreciate a speedy response to the questions I have raised here.
I have copied this letter to my fellow MPs locally and look forward to your response.
Yours sincerely,
Gordon Marsden MP"
2.4.12
Scrapping unfair dismissal 'will horrify employees'
The following has been supplied by the TUC:
Government plans to scrap protection from unfair dismissal are a charter for nasty bosses, the TUC has indicated. Responding to this week's government call for evidence, which proposes that unfair dismissal laws could be replaced by 'no fault compensated dismissal', TUC general secretary Brendan Barber said: 'Scrapping protection against unfair dismissal, even for people who have given years of loyal service, will do absolutely nothing to boost the economy.' He added: 'Losing your job is one of the worst things that can happen to anyone, especially when unemployment is so high. Employees should only be dismissed for fair reasons, as set out in current laws. The clue is in the name - unfair dismissal.' Job insecurity has been linked to higher rates of accidents at work and of work-related suicides, sickness and ill-health. It has also been shown to drive down productivity. TUC's Brendan Barber said: 'Employers already have powers to make fair dismissals for misconduct or poor performance. Giving bosses the right to act unfairly may go down well on the backbenches, but it will horrify employees. But while this proposal does nothing for growth, it does show the kind of economy those close to the prime minister want to create - one in which nasty bosses are given full license to undermine those trying to maintain decent standards.' The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) also indicated the move to end unfair dismissal would be counterproductive. CIPD's Mike Emmott commented: 'There is no economic case to be made for the watering down of employment rights for businesses of any size. Businesses have far more to lose in lost productivity from a demotivated and disengaged workforce than they stand to gain from the ability to hire and fire at will.' The recent blacklisting scandal has already illustrated that some employers are willing to target employees for dismissal if they raise health and safety concerns.
Government plans to scrap protection from unfair dismissal are a charter for nasty bosses, the TUC has indicated. Responding to this week's government call for evidence, which proposes that unfair dismissal laws could be replaced by 'no fault compensated dismissal', TUC general secretary Brendan Barber said: 'Scrapping protection against unfair dismissal, even for people who have given years of loyal service, will do absolutely nothing to boost the economy.' He added: 'Losing your job is one of the worst things that can happen to anyone, especially when unemployment is so high. Employees should only be dismissed for fair reasons, as set out in current laws. The clue is in the name - unfair dismissal.' Job insecurity has been linked to higher rates of accidents at work and of work-related suicides, sickness and ill-health. It has also been shown to drive down productivity. TUC's Brendan Barber said: 'Employers already have powers to make fair dismissals for misconduct or poor performance. Giving bosses the right to act unfairly may go down well on the backbenches, but it will horrify employees. But while this proposal does nothing for growth, it does show the kind of economy those close to the prime minister want to create - one in which nasty bosses are given full license to undermine those trying to maintain decent standards.' The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) also indicated the move to end unfair dismissal would be counterproductive. CIPD's Mike Emmott commented: 'There is no economic case to be made for the watering down of employment rights for businesses of any size. Businesses have far more to lose in lost productivity from a demotivated and disengaged workforce than they stand to gain from the ability to hire and fire at will.' The recent blacklisting scandal has already illustrated that some employers are willing to target employees for dismissal if they raise health and safety concerns.
Movement of work from Warbreck
The following is an extract from the employer's brief of what to say to the staff about the situation of the jobs at Warbreck and the doubt and uncertainty about the job prospects in the area:
"You may get asked what will happen after 2016 but at this stage it’s impossible to tell. You can remind your audience that the Department’s policy is always to redeploy staff. By 2016 we maybe in a different world."
Talking about being in a different world isn’t exactly reassuring.
Some may ask what planet are these people on?
"You may get asked what will happen after 2016 but at this stage it’s impossible to tell. You can remind your audience that the Department’s policy is always to redeploy staff. By 2016 we maybe in a different world."
Talking about being in a different world isn’t exactly reassuring.
Some may ask what planet are these people on?
BNP to lose EU funding?
The following has been received from Hope Not Hate:
"I am writing to you to share some good news. A few weeks ago BNP leader Nick Griffin boasted that he and two other fascist MEPs were going to share €289,266 with the prospects of much more to come. This morning Griffin woke up to the realisation that this funding is in jeopardy and future funding is incredibly unlikely.
"I am writing to you to share some good news. A few weeks ago BNP leader Nick Griffin boasted that he and two other fascist MEPs were going to share €289,266 with the prospects of much more to come. This morning Griffin woke up to the realisation that this funding is in jeopardy and future funding is incredibly unlikely.Griffin, and two MEPs from the Front National (France) and Jobbik (Hungary), formed a political grouping within the Parliament called the European Parliament for Alliance of European Nationalist Movements (EAMN). They applied for money from the European Parliament from a pot put aside to help political parties carry out their work. Shockingly, their bid was accepted.
As soon as we learnt about this HOPE not hate began contacting MEPs and journalists to try to reverse the decision. This helped set in train a series of events which culminated in the case being heard by the Council of Presidents yesterday and a decision being taken to review the rules for funding parties and to investigate the possibility of getting back the money it has offered EAMN.
This is great news. Our money should not fund fascist parties.
This is great news. Our money should not fund fascist parties.
At issue was that the BNP, the FN and Jobbik – all fascist parties – do not comply with the funding rules which clearly state that political parties have to abide by “the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law.” We all know that the BNP, with its racist agenda, does not.
Politicians from across the political spectrum spoke out against the EAMN funding, especially several Labour MEPs from Britain who were at the forefront of calling for the decision to be reversed.
HOPE not hate is proud of its role in working with MEPs and journalists to ensure taxpayer’s money does not fund fascist parties. Griffin was relying on this funding to prop up his sinking party. This money is now in question and he is certainly unlikely to get any more."
Rich make a killing, others will be killed
The following has been supplied by the TUC:
The TUC has condemned this week's Budget as a series of measures 'for the rich by the rich' incorporating a 'regurgitated mish-mash' of pro-business moves that tell employers safety is unimportant and can be ignored. Deregulation of health and safety got top billing in chancellor George Osborne's 21 March announcement of measures for 'supply-side reform of the economy.' The budget statement said: 'The government will scrap or improve 84 per cent of health and safety regulation' and added other measures would include the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) urging the European Commission to introduce 'micro-exemptions or lighter touch EU health and safety regulation' for small and medium-sized firms, 'based on ideas raised during the Red Tape Challenge.' The statement also referred to action with the insurance industry 'in order to tackle the compensation culture'), a phenomenon the government itself has determined does not exist. A statement from TUC noted: 'While this is a regurgitated mish-mash of previously announced moves, presented as a package in this way it highlights the pro-business, anti-worker agenda of this government. Not one of these proposals will do anything to protect the workforce from the epidemic of occupational disease that we have. Instead it will simply give the message to employers that health and safety is a burden and there is little need for them to give it any priority as there is no chance of them ever being investigated or prosecuted unless they report an injury.' It added the Budget focus on safety deregulation 'shows very clearly exactly why the TUC is organising a Day of Action on 28 April to defend health and safety.' Business lobby group CBI said the deregulatory proposals did not go far enough. 'There needs to be much greater urgency to the government's deregulatory agenda,' said CBI director-general John Cridland. TUC general secretary Brendan Barber described the chancellor's announcement as 'a Budget for the rich by the rich'.
The TUC has condemned this week's Budget as a series of measures 'for the rich by the rich' incorporating a 'regurgitated mish-mash' of pro-business moves that tell employers safety is unimportant and can be ignored. Deregulation of health and safety got top billing in chancellor George Osborne's 21 March announcement of measures for 'supply-side reform of the economy.' The budget statement said: 'The government will scrap or improve 84 per cent of health and safety regulation' and added other measures would include the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) urging the European Commission to introduce 'micro-exemptions or lighter touch EU health and safety regulation' for small and medium-sized firms, 'based on ideas raised during the Red Tape Challenge.' The statement also referred to action with the insurance industry 'in order to tackle the compensation culture'), a phenomenon the government itself has determined does not exist. A statement from TUC noted: 'While this is a regurgitated mish-mash of previously announced moves, presented as a package in this way it highlights the pro-business, anti-worker agenda of this government. Not one of these proposals will do anything to protect the workforce from the epidemic of occupational disease that we have. Instead it will simply give the message to employers that health and safety is a burden and there is little need for them to give it any priority as there is no chance of them ever being investigated or prosecuted unless they report an injury.' It added the Budget focus on safety deregulation 'shows very clearly exactly why the TUC is organising a Day of Action on 28 April to defend health and safety.' Business lobby group CBI said the deregulatory proposals did not go far enough. 'There needs to be much greater urgency to the government's deregulatory agenda,' said CBI director-general John Cridland. TUC general secretary Brendan Barber described the chancellor's announcement as 'a Budget for the rich by the rich'.
Parliamentary Questions
Ben Wallace MP (Wyre and Preston North) has tabled the following questions regarding the potential loss of jobs from the Warbreck site and in the Fylde as a result of the announcement of the Personal Independence Payment location strategy from 2016 onwards.
The exact wording is detailed below:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions whether Personal Independence Payment claims relating to children will be processed on the Fylde Coast?
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what role Warbreck House will play in processing Personal Independence Payment?
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what role Warbreck House will play in processing of Disability Living Allowance a) between 2012 and 2016 and b) after 2016?
We will keep you informed of any response.
The exact wording is detailed below:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions whether Personal Independence Payment claims relating to children will be processed on the Fylde Coast?
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what role Warbreck House will play in processing Personal Independence Payment?
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what role Warbreck House will play in processing of Disability Living Allowance a) between 2012 and 2016 and b) after 2016?
We will keep you informed of any response.
Lobby George Osborne - Wednesday 11th April
Colleagues
Please find below information provided by North West Regional Office.
"You may be aware that had the M28 national action gone ahead, we had intended to hold a protest in Knutsford, Cheshire - the Tatton Constituency of Chancellor George Osborne. PCS was seeking to hold similar events in the constituencies of Cameron, Clegg, Maude and others in conjunction with the NUT, UCU and Unite.
Now that the action is postponed and in order to maintain momentum, the NEC have asked regions to arrange similar protests in the week following Easter and during the Parliamentary recess when MPs might be in their constituencies.
Accordingly, we have made tentative arrangements for such a protest on the afternoon of Wednesday 11th April.
We are conscious that this is a working day for many. However, teachers and lecturers will be available owing to Easter holidays and many members will be available on a similar basis. Families are welcome to attend. Activists may be required to use a half-day annual leave or flexi where such arrangements exist to leave workplaces at lunchtime in order to attend.
Subject to confirmed numbers we will provide transport as follows:
This will be an important event which represents a new tactic in that it takes the campaign directly to the door (almost literally) of the individuals directly responsible for creating the many challenges we face. We therefore hope you can provide a strong level of support."
If anyone would like to support this event, please contact the Branch Secretary by email who is collating numbers for NWRO.
Please find below information provided by North West Regional Office.
"You may be aware that had the M28 national action gone ahead, we had intended to hold a protest in Knutsford, Cheshire - the Tatton Constituency of Chancellor George Osborne. PCS was seeking to hold similar events in the constituencies of Cameron, Clegg, Maude and others in conjunction with the NUT, UCU and Unite.
Now that the action is postponed and in order to maintain momentum, the NEC have asked regions to arrange similar protests in the week following Easter and during the Parliamentary recess when MPs might be in their constituencies.
Accordingly, we have made tentative arrangements for such a protest on the afternoon of Wednesday 11th April.
We are conscious that this is a working day for many. However, teachers and lecturers will be available owing to Easter holidays and many members will be available on a similar basis. Families are welcome to attend. Activists may be required to use a half-day annual leave or flexi where such arrangements exist to leave workplaces at lunchtime in order to attend.
Subject to confirmed numbers we will provide transport as follows:
- Blackpool > Preston > Wigan > Knutsford
- Liverpool > Warrington > Knutsford
- Manchester > Stockport > Knutsford
This will be an important event which represents a new tactic in that it takes the campaign directly to the door (almost literally) of the individuals directly responsible for creating the many challenges we face. We therefore hope you can provide a strong level of support."
If anyone would like to support this event, please contact the Branch Secretary by email who is collating numbers for NWRO.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)