Government publishes 'sunsetting' bill

The following has been supplied by the TUC:

The government has published a Bill that will build 'sunsetting clauses' into new regulations and that includes a presumption the laws will be scrapped unless a government department argues for their survival. The government also says the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill will include measures for 'reducing inspection burdens on businesses of all sizes and increasing SME access to reliable, consistent advice on complying with regulations in areas such as trading standards, health and safety and environmental health.' Business secretary Vince Cable said: 'The measures in the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill will help make Britain one of the most enterprise-friendly countries in the world. It will improve our employment tribunals, reform and strengthen competition enforcement, scrap unnecessary red tape and help ensure that people who work hard and do the right thing are rewarded.' When the Bill was flagged up in the Queen's speech earlier this month, a TUC spokesperson commented: 'Despite all the evidence, the government retains its obsession that businesses are over-inspected. Changes introduced last year mean that most employers will never have the benefit of a health and safety inspection unless they report a death or serious injury. This will mean employers will be both less likely to report injuries, and also will be less likely to take adequate measures to protect their workforce.' He warned: 'We are already seeing evidence that fatalities seem to be rising in many industries as businesses cut back on health and safety. If the government continues to give the message that good health and safety is a burden then this can only increase.' New research has confirmed that official inspection and enforcement has a positive and lasting effect on workplace safety, with no evidence of the burdens on business or job creation and retention claimed by the government.

Safety cuts already causing hurt

The following has been supplied by the TUC:

The government's drive to reduce regulation and enforcement of workplace health and safety is already causing harm at work, the union Unite has said. The union has been asking its union reps how the changes are impacting on standards at work, ahead of the government's own progress report later this year. Unite reps have so far reported a worrying deterioration they link to a government-ordered downgrading of safety protection, which includes slashing enforcement by a third, exempting most firms from preventive inspections and cutting the Health and Safety Executive's budget to the bone. Unite reps say they are feeling the pain at work, with some reporting employers have cut back on personal protective equipment at work and are failing to properly report legally reportable injuries. They also point to work overload as a result of public sector cuts, a lack of action on stress and mental health issues at work, poor management of asbestos at work and a failure to take preventive action to protect women from reproductive risks. Unite intends to collate a dossier to demonstrate the positive effect of unions on health and safety and the problems they are facing as the safety cuts bite.

Civil Service wide overtime ban from 11th May to 31st July

The purpose of this post is to inform members of the continuing overtime ban throughout June and July 2012.

PCS has done everything possible to resolve the disputes over Pensions, the Civil Service Compensation Scheme, the Pay Freeze (and two more years of extreme pay restraint) however to date there has not been an acceptable outcome from the Government.

We have already witnessed over two thousand five hundred job losses from the Fylde economy due to the job cuts in the area and even more are now in jeopardy and many members are facing being made redundant, we have seen our pay frozen and the Government has announced another two years of extreme pay restraint (and unlike other areas of the Public Sector our Pay Progression isn’t separately funded meaning that we are treated even more unfairly than other public servants), our Pensions are under attack (we are being expected to pay more for our pensions, work longer and receive less) and our redundancy terms have been cut so that it is cheaper to get rid of us.

We are being asked to pay for the financial mess created by the bankers and the financial speculators and spivs, with our jobs, our pay, our pensions and our conditions of service.

The financial mess was none of our making. It’s their financial mess make them pay for it. It is time for members to show that they oppose the notion of being forced to pay for the excesses of the spivs.

Our reasonable demands are:

• No detrimental changes to our pensions and our redundancy payments
• Application and strengthening on the protocols to avoid redundancy
• An end to the pay freeze and a fair pay rise for all members

Potential Members

If you have not yet joined your Union, please complete and return the form found here.

Pay Fair: Why Regional Pay Doesn't Add Up

The following has been supplied by the TUC:

We all want to see fair pay for the nurses, teachers and others who work hard to deliver good public services. But on top of pay freezes, the government now wants to change the way pay is set in the public sector.

Instead of a fair, transparent national system, they want local or regional pay that would mean different rates for people doing exactly the same jobs, just because of where they live.

Here are just five reasons why it doesn't add up:

It's unfair

Regional pay could mean two nurses or teachers with the same skills and experience being paid differently in two different places - even though they're doing the same job. People should be paid based on their skills and the work they do, not where they live. Low pay could make it harder for poorer regions to attract and keep the skilled public sector workers they need.

Regional pay could also work against equal pay. Great progress has been made in the public sector in narrowing the pay gap between women and men. For instance, the Agenda for Change system in the NHS was designed to deliver equal pay. Bringing in local or regional pay could unravel this progress.

It's bad for the economy

Public sector workers are already feeling the pinch from pay freezes, the VAT rise and inflation. Regional pay would mean holding back pay for even longer in the parts of the country that are struggling the most.

Holding back public sector pay will take money out of public sector workers' pockets that they would otherwise spend in local shops and businesses. Taking demand out of the economy like this will hurt the private sector and widen the north-south divide.

It isn't backed up by evidence

The government has argued that public sector pay stops the private sector growing. In fact, there's no evidence to support this. There is an average of five people chasing every job vacancy, and up to 30 unemployed people per vacancy in some areas. It's the lack of demand in the economy, not the wages of nurses and teachers that is causing the problem.

It isn't what the private sector does

Most big private sector employers recognise that a national system is the fairest and most efficient way to set pay. In fact, companies like Waterstones, Greggs, Marks and Spencer, BT and Halfords all take the same sort of approach as the public sector: a national pay system with limited additions for London and the south east of England.

It's unpopular

According to a recent opinion poll only 28% of voters believe the idea of extending pay freezes for public sector workers outside of the south east and London would be fair. As few as 17% believe that real term pay cuts for public sector workers would help low pay regional economies. It's time that coalition MPs listened to their constituents, heard their concerns and put a stop to these damaging and divisive plans.

PCS condemns threats of compulsory redundancy for AA’s in DWP

Management have today announced the start of meaningful consultation for compulsory redundancy for up to 94 AA’s in DWP. Meaningful consultation is the start of the formal process that leads to compulsory redundancies.

The AA’s involved are those that management have deemed to be ‘surplus’. They are spread over all parts of DWP including:

Job Centres

Benefit offices due to be closed

Contact Centres (not TPIP sites)

Pension Centres

Shared Services
Corporate Centre

The staff involved will be notified on May 14th that they have been placed into meaningful consultation. The exact number of staff being placed into meaningful consultation may be reduced as some of the AA’s may still be offered promotion opportunities following the recent AA to AO promotion exercise.

No Business Reason

PCS condemns this decision to start meaningful consultation. There is no real business reason for doing so as there is plenty of work for all of these AA staff to do. DWP faces rising workloads and increasing unemployment. At such a time it is madness to threaten staff with compulsory redundancy. Every AA employed can take routine work off other staff allowing them to focus on duties appropriate to their grade. The removal of AA’s only means that higher graded staff have to do their own AA work instead.

Second time in meaningful consultation

Some of the AA’s being placed into meaningful consultation today are the same staff that were placed into meaningful consultation back in 2007. They were  only finally taken out of meaningful consultation two years later, following the agreement that PCS reached with DWP to resolve the 2007 DWP Pay dispute.

Plenty of AA work

Management have always claimed that there is no permanent role for these staff in DWP. PCS asserted back in 2007 that there was plenty of meaningful work for these AA’s to do then. The fact that they have continued to be employed on important and worthwhile work since then has proved PCS to be right. There is no reason why they should not continue to be employed to do this work.

Breach of 2009 agreement

PCS is very concerned that  moving some of these AA’s, who were taken out of meaningful consultation in 2009, back into meaningful consultation again now is a breach of the agreement that PCS reached with DWP in 2009 to resolve the 2007 pay dispute. PCS is also concerned that AA’s who were offered redundancy in 2007 will now be offered it again but on the greatly reduced terms of the new Civil Service Compensation Scheme.

PCS will defend AA members

PCS is determined to defend our AA members and to fight for their job security. We have successfully done so in the past and will do so again. We will make it clear to DWP management that we believe that none of our AA members should be made redundant when they wish to continue in employment with DWP. The union will do everything possible to protect their jobs, including, if necessary, balloting members across DWP to defend these members’ jobs.

Universal Credit

First Universal Credit Sites Announced

Management have today (17th May) announced the first tranche of offices that are to become Universal Credit (UC) service centres. 16 DWP sites and 2 HMRC sites have been named. The sites have capacity to house around 8,500 staff. The sites are:

DWP Benefit Centres

Bolton, Glasgow, Wolverhampton, Wrexham, Canterbury, Birkenhead, Cosham, Sunderland

DWP Contact Centres

Grimsby, Bootle, Dundee, Bangor, Paisley, Derby, Makerfield, Middlesbrough

HMRC

Blackpool Ryscar House, Merry Hill

These sites will be used to deliver the first phase of Universal Credit. This begins in April 2013 with the start of the UC Pathfinder and then expands as the first New Claims to UC start in October 2013.

Management are very keen to stress that these sites are for the first Phase 1 of UC and that further sites will be named to become additional UC sites in 2013 and then again in 2014 in order to deliver the subsequent phases of UC. From April 2014 new tax credit claims will become UC cases and from 2014 to 2017 all existing claims to working age benefits and tax credits will be gradually converted to UC. It is therefore important to understand that today’s announcement does not exclude any DWP Benefit Centre or Contact Centre from becoming a UC site in the future.

What if my office has not been named?

PCS is concerned that members in DWP sites that are not named as UC sites will fear that their site may close as a result. Management have assured us that this is not the case. Sites not chosen to be UC sites will be required to maintain existing claims to legacy benefits during the conversion process which runs until 2017 and further announcements of more UC sites will be made over the next 2 years. Staff will also be required to continue to process those benefits that are not being subsumed into UC.

Management’s letter to all staff clearly says that “staff in all our sites still have a key role in delivering essential changes”. While this does not constitute an indefinite guarantee of a job for everyone it is nevertheless less an important assurance for the foreseeable future.

UC in the longer term

At this stage management are not able to say exactly how many staff will be required to process UC in the longer term. This will be ongoing work that is likely to be heavily influenced by the experience of UC in practice. Factors such as the take up of online claiming and the robustness of the new IT are likely to be important factors in determining this. Management have also made clear that they intend to consider alternative methods for delivering UC from 2017 onwards, but are unlikely to make any firm decisions on this before 2015.

HMRC Staff

As well as announcing 16 DWP UC sites, management have also announced 2 HMRC sites for phase one of UC. This will mean the HMRC staff on these sites will be transferred to DWP and become DWP staff. This is obviously a major issue for our PCS colleagues in HMRC, but it also has implications for DWP staff.

The staff transfer will take place under the principles of the Cabinet Office Statement of Practice (COSOP) that governs the transfer of staff within the public sector. This means that HMRC staff will transfer into DWP on their existing terms and conditions. There are differences in the staff terms and conditions that apply in DWP and HMRC, most notably rates of pay, which are generally higher in HMRC. PCS will be pressing for these terms and conditions to be harmonised for all staff on the best terms. Further discussions will be taking place with management on this. There is also further work ongoing to confirm what other HMRC sites may become UC service centres.

How will UC be organised?

Detail on this is still being developed but management have given some broad indicators. Online claiming with automated processing will be used as much as possible, though the extent of this is very dependent on the quality of the new IT systems that are being developed.

UC sites will be known as Service Centres. These centres will deliver both telephony and processing functions under a single management chain. PCS welcomes this as we believe that the separation of telephony from processing has not delivered good customer service and has been extremely unpopular among our members.

Job Centres and ex-PDCS offices

Job Centres and ex-PDCS Offices as well as HQ and shared services sites are not in scope for selection to become UC service centres. Job Centres will deliver the labour market services of UC from 2013. The exact detail of what this will mean is still being worked on. Pension centres will be largely unaffected by UC while Regional Disability Centres will be changing to become Personal Independent Payment (PIP) offices when PIP is introduced in 2013 to replace Disability Living Allowance. The future of Warbreck is uncertain in terms of what will happen after 2016, when the re-assessment of the DLA cases is concluded.

PCS Position

UC is a very large change programme for DWP and HMRC staff and will undoubtedly be unsettling to many of our members as they fear for their job security and their future during a period of change. PCS’ priorities for Universal Credit is to ensure that our members’ interests are fully protected. Specifically we will be seeking agreements with the employer that UC is delivered in a way that ensures there are no job losses or office closures, terms and conditions are protected and that UC work continues to be delivered in-house.

Grayling turns again to job killer 'claptrap'

The following has been supplied by the TUC:

Employment minister Chris Grayling has told employers he believes 'unneeded' workplace safety regulations 'stifle' economic growth. Speaking at an Enterprise Forum meeting in London last week, he said: 'That's why we are cutting health and safety bureaucracy. We're making good progress and I am determined to cut the number of health and safety regulations in half.' The minister responsible for workplace safety added: 'Of course we have to protect people against death and serious injury in the workplace and we won't do anything to risk this but if we stifle their employers with unneeded rules and regulations those people won't have a job in the first place.' Critics again refuted government claims about safety regulation being a job killer, pointing out that good safety enforcement makes business sense. Each 'accident' death at work costs over £1 million. Each occupational cancer death - and TUC estimates there are over 15,000 each year - comes at a cost to society of over £2.5m. Families Against Corporate Killers co-ordinator Hilda Palmer rubbished Mr Grayling's comments as 'ideological claptrap' based 'on no evidence whatsoever.' She said: 'Too many regulations don't kill people, too little regulations do and the government is failing to protect workers from serious safety risks.' The minister also trailed the publication of a new Health and Safety Executive guide intended to help businesses avoid unnecessary safety tests on portable electrical appliances.

Regulators to face 'sunsetting' threat

The following has been supplied by the TUC:

A law intended to push forward the government's plans to strip employment regulation and further limit or even abolish regulators will form part a key part of the government's plans for the next session of parliament. The Department for Business (BIS) said the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill, trailed in the 9 May Queen's Speech, would include measures to 'reduce inspection burdens on business and strengthen the legal framework for sunset clauses on regulation' and 'repeal unnecessary legislation, cutting the burden on business and citizens.' John Cridland, director-general of the business lobby group CBI said 'the jury's out' on the government's regulatory reform plans, and called for the new law to be used to cut regulations and regulators. 'We hear a lot about regulatory reform, but the big prize for businesses would be to major on the new power for 'sunset clauses' on regulation and regulators. Every new bit of regulation should be time-limited and then reviewed.' He added: 'It is employment regulation where the shoe pinches for growing firms. We await the government's bold reforms in this area.' TUC however indicated dangerous firms were already overlooked by regulators. A TUC spokesperson said: 'Despite all the evidence, the government retains its obsession that businesses are over-inspected. Changes introduced last year mean that most employers will never have the benefit of a health and safety inspection unless they report a death or serious injury. This will mean employers will be both less likely to report injuries, and also will be less likely to take adequate measures to protect their workforce.' He warned: 'We are already seeing evidence that fatalities seem to be rising in many industries as businesses cut back on health and safety. If the government continues to give the message that good health and safety is a burden then this can only increase.' Commenting on the wider attack on employment rights included in the legislation, TUC general secretary Brendan Barber said: 'What is worst is that ministers are wrapping up a real attack on rights at work as good for growth and employment.

Thank You

Thanks to all the members who took strike action on the 10th May. Those who did should be proud of themselves, their action and their support ensured that our pay, pensions and jobs got back to the top of the news/ national prominence.

All Out on 10th May 2012

Then a Civil Service wide overtime ban

from 11th May to 30th June

The purpose of this post is to inform members of the strike action on the 10th May 2012 to be followed by a Civil Service wide overtime ban from 10th May to 30th June 2012.

PCS has done everything possible to resolve the disputes over Pensions, the Civil Service Compensation Scheme, the Pay Freeze (and two more years of extreme pay restraint) however to date there has not been an acceptable outcome from the Government.

We have already witnessed over two thousand five hundred job losses from the Fylde economy due to the job cuts in the area and even more are now in jeopardy and many members are facing being made redundant, we have seen our pay frozen and the Government has announced another two years of extreme pay restraint (and unlike other areas of the Public Sector our Pay Progression isn’t separately funded meaning that we are treated even more unfairly than other public servants), our Pensions are under attack (we are being expected to pay more for our pensions, work longer and receive less) and our redundancy terms have been cut so that it is cheaper to get rid of us.

We are being asked to pay for the financial mess created by the bankers and the financial speculators and spivs, with our jobs, our pay, our pensions and our conditions of service.

The financial mess was none of our making. It’s their financial mess make them pay for it. It is time for members to show that they oppose the notion of being forced to pay for the excesses of the spivs.

Our reasonable demands are:

• No detrimental changes to our pensions and our redundancy payments
• Application and strengthening on the protocols to avoid redundancy
• An end to the pay freeze and a fair pay rise for all members

Potential Members

If you have not yet joined your Union, please complete and return the form found here.

Welfare cuts: We all stand to suffer

Once we were 'poor dears', now we are 'benefit cheats', said a demonstrator at last year's rally of disabled people against the welfare bill neatly summing up the government-instigated hate campaign against the most vulnerable in society.

Cameron and Osborne aim to make welfare itself a dirty word implying taxpayers’ money is being wasted on undeserving “shirkers” who receive over-generous payments from a system riddled with fraud and delivered by an inefficient and expensive public sector. All lies and myths. Unemployment is in reality about five million, including one million young people. Benefits are the lowest in Europe, except Estonia, and the contentious figure of £1 billion lost to fraud is dwarfed by the £16bn in unclaimed benefits.

A quarter of all cuts are from welfare with another £10bn announced in the recent budget. These cuts will mean the impoverishment and marginalisation of millions and drive those least able to defend themselves into appalling poverty. But it is also a fundamental assault on democracy and accountability as the government never sought nor was given a mandate to destroy the safety net that was, however inadequate, in place to prevent people from literally starving or going without shelter. Behind it all is privatisation in an attempt to slash the social wage and bash the victims of the economic crisis to extract every last drop of profit.

Welfare top priority

The government attempts to divide employed from unemployed workers but we all suffer from the welfare proposals which end universal benefits and cap tax credits, affecting millions of low-paid people, the very members we represent. Welfare must be a top priority for the trade union movement, as it clearly is for the government.

PCS’s welfare alternative pamphlet is a vital contribution to this debate and a guide to action. Welfare is a fundamental right, not a privilege. The labour and trade union movement demanded adequate welfare provision to afford working people some basic protection against the vagaries of a ruthless system that placed profit above people. State provision was demanded because the private sector and the charities were incapable of delivering such services in an effective way.

It is important we engage in and define the terms of the debate while fighting these attacks. Welfare, or more precisely social security, concerns issues like unemployment and disability rights but also low income, housing, child poverty and childcare and pensions. It is at the very core of the debate about what type of society we want to live in and the quality of life itself.

Demanding a fair system

For our union particularly welfare is an industrial issue - our members administer the system. That means our demands rightly include the need for the system to be delivered by the public sector and that public sector workers must be well trained, adequately resourced and well paid.

But it is a social and political issue too and we must be at the forefront of raising and popularising demands for a fair and equitable welfare system. That means arguing for job creation, a dignified standard of living for those unable to work for whatever reasons, much increased benefit levels and a substantially increased minimum wage or living wage.

We demand an end to privatised assessment for disabled people, that child poverty is tackled and for adequate childcare. The principal cause of child poverty - low benefit and pay levels - needs to be removed as well as an end to the exploitation of housing benefit by unscrupulous landlords and sufficient council should be provided. There are sound economic arguments too: all serious research shows strong welfare systems produce stronger economies, support not punishment is the way to get people into work. 

We have held excellent public meetings on welfare recently. Let’s now step up this work which is a vital part of our opposition to the cuts and attacks on our members

68 is too late

Preparations for a public campaign – 68 is too late – linking changes to pension age with changes to public sector pension age are well advanced. The aim is for the campaign, being developed with Unite and the NUT, to be running when the government announces any legislative changes to pensions in the Queen’s Speech on 9 May.

PCS and other trade unions are campaigning for fair pensions for everyone – whether they are part of private or public sector schemes, or rely on the state pension. In the budget the government announced plans to introduce measures which will formally link the state pension age to increases in longevity. Current projections are that life expectancy will rise by 2.5 years every decade, meaning a child born today would only receive their state pension aged 74. The campaign will highlight that we could keep public sector pensions, make private sector employers provide proper schemes, and return the state pension to its value of 30 years ago – 25% of average male earnings. It will include a website which will host a video explaining the issues, an e-action and links to social media. The website also enables us to email our own members directly, involving them in the activity and collecting the emails of supporters to continue to involve them in the campaign

Bad stats and policies add up to deadly workplaces

The following has been supplied by the TUC:

A government safety strategy 'built on myth and dogma' is making the UK's workplaces more deadly, unions have warned. Unite accused the government of hiding behind poor statistics, with workplace deaths 'underestimated by more than 800 per cent' in the official toll. Unite's general secretary Len McCluskey, speaking ahead of Workers' Memorial Day on 28 April, said: 'The government is hell bent on reducing health and safety regulations, and standards. It will lead to fewer inspections, less enforcement and more deaths, injuries and ill-health at work. The government's strategy, built on myth and dogma, puts workers at greater risk.' The union estimates up to 50,000 people could die each year as a result of work-related injuries and diseases. UNISON general secretary Dave Prentis, calling on the government 'to think again about its damaging cuts,' said: 'The government is wrong in believing that health and safety rules are a burden on business. Cut the funding to develop and enforce these rules and business and the taxpayer will face the bigger burden of an injured and unwell workforce.' A statement from PCS, one of the main unions representing Health and Safety Executive (HSE) staff, noted: 'We believe that health and safety hurts nobody. In fact, businesses responded to the government's Red Tape Challenge by saying that they wanted more advice, not less. However, the government ignored the results and the HSE remains under threat.' Chris Keates, general secretary of the teaching union NASUWT, said 'the Coalition wheels out apocryphal stories about health and safety for the amusement and entertainment of the public.' She said the government's 'underlying, sinister intention' was to use the stories as 'decoys' to excuse a 'disgraceful stripping away' of critically important workplace safety rules. CWU general secretary Billy Hayes, speaking at a 28 April event in Liverpool questioned 'how many in the Cabinet of millionaires know a relative, friend, workmate, or pensioner, who worked with asbestos?' Asbestos cancers kill several thousand people each year in the UK.

68 is too late

Today, Tuesday 8th May, PCS is launching a big public campaign against increases to the pension age - with sister organisations Unite and the National Union of Teachers.

The government plans to push back everyone's retirement age to at least 68. The formula they are using will mean babies born this year have to work until they are 80 to receive a state pension.

Sign up to the campaign at http://www.68istoolate.org.uk/ - and please send the link on to colleagues, friends and family.

Rally – in defence of public sector pensions

The following has been supplied by Blackpool against the Cuts:

Rally in Defence of Public Sector Pensions

Thursday 10th May - 2pm

St. John’s Square, Blackpool

Speakers arranged.

Bring along your placards, banners etc.

Top Tories were behind safety bashing headlines

The following has been supplied by the TUC:
A series of headlines ridiculing workplace safety rules, some taken up by ministers to justify the government's deregulatory plans, were part of a strategy cooked up by Tory high command to try and to spin the government out of trouble, a newspaper has claimed. The Independent reported on 20 April that Conservative ministers 'have been ordered by Downing Street to come up with eye-catching right-wing initiatives to deflect media attention from the government's Budget woes.' Among the stories highlighted by the paper was the case of employment minister Chris Grayling, who on 10 April 'thundered' his disapproval in the Daily Mail about 'an EU 'nanny state' health and safety directive that would enforce regular breaks for hairdressers and ban them from wearing high-heeled shoes at work'. The minister had intended to use a related jibe in a speech last week to the Policy Exchange, but pulled the reference at the last minute after the TUC pointed out there were no plans for either a Euro hairdressing directive or a ban on high heels. Another headline linked by The Independent to a Conservative strategy to court true blue supporters with populist right wing policies, was the Daily Mail's 11 April headline 'Panel set up to bust health and safety myths'. A Whitehall source quoted by The Independent said: 'Downing Street has been desperate to move the news agenda on from the Budget and has been scouring Whitehall for things to announce. They want to show we're on the front foot and are looking for issues that are consumer friendly. The trouble is finding them.'