Part 1
Part 2
28.2.15
24.2.15
DWP Sick Leave Procedure revised for new Return to Work Plans
The following
details have been supplied by the PCS DWP Group:
New independent assessment service
DWP Sick Leave Procedure
and Fit Note Advice have been revised for the introduction of Return to Work
Plans from a new government funded advice service called ‘Fit for Work’.
The GOV.UK website explains that:
·
Fit for Work...provides
an occupational health assessment and general health and work advice to
employees, employers and GPs
·
Fit for Work will
complement, and not replace, existing occupational health services provided by
employers.
·
Fit for Work is a Great
Britain wide service. In England and Wales it will be provided by Health
Management Limited. In Scotland it will be provided by the Scottish Government
on behalf of DWP and will be known as Fit for Work Scotland.
Key things you need to know revised
DWP Sick Leave ‘Key things’ for Medical Evidence
have been revised: If your GP refers you
to an external Occupational Health provider, you will be issued with a Return
to Work Plan. This is treated as medical evidence and you should forward this
in the same way as you would do with a Fit Note. You should inform your GP that
there is an Occupational Health service in place at work.
Sick Leave Procedure revised
DWP
Sick Leave Procedure has been revised to take account of Return to Work Plans issued by Fit for Work:
·
Medical Evidence – Procedure 5.3
confirms: If the GP has
referred the employee to an external OH provider, the employee may be given a
Return to Work Plan. This should also be accepted as medical evidence.
·
Referring to Occupational Health Service -Procedure 6.7 confirms: It is not necessary for
the manager to make a referral to the external Occupational Health service as
the internal OH service is the primary source of occupational health support.
Advice
There
will be a phased roll out of the new service over a period of months during
2015.
The British Medical Association (BMA) has warned
that it will boycott the new service if doctors felt it was forcing people back
to work. The BMA warns if GPs feel the new service is punitive, or is seen as
part of a system to drive people off benefits, they will very quickly
disengage.
Members should
inform their GP that there is an OHS in place at work and only use the new
service if their GP identifies an advantage to do so in their personal case.
23.2.15
Fair Pay Fortnight Campaign
It’s Fair Pay Fortnight from 16 Feb to 1 March – two weeks of campaigns and activities from Britain’s unions aimed at tackling our growing pay crisis.
We’re coming out of a recession caused by greed and recklessness at the top of the banking industry. But whilst executive pay is booming again, for most Britons we’re still stuck in the longest living standards squeeze since Victorian times.
When wages are low consumers spend less; businesses can’t grow, the Exchequer gets less tax income and the deficit only grows further. We need a new plan for the economy that gets wages growing and keeps them growing.
Find out more about Fair Pay Fortnight and how you can get involved visit the TUC page FairPayFortnight.org
19.2.15
Study explodes EU over-legislation myth
The following details have been supplied by the TUC:
Government claims that the European Union has fuelled an increase in legislation have been proven to be a myth, the TUC has said.
The union body was commenting after an an academic study concluded that far from producing too much legislation, the EU is only producing a small minority of the new laws coming into effect in Britain.
It showed the number of new directives has halved in the past five years and this trend seems set to continue, as the European Commission’s Work Programme for 2015 has abandoned 80 proposals and introduced just 23.
TUC head of safety Hugh Robertson, writing in the Stronger Unions blog, noted: “For many of us, the fact that the EU is regulating less is not a matter for celebration, but anger. We have recently seen proposals for new regulations on carcinogens and musculoskeletal disorders ditched by the Commission after pressure from the UK and, in the current climate, many ordinary workers would welcome new laws on employment protection, fairness at work or decent hours, wherever they come from.” He added that other studies of the impact of EU laws only examined effects on business. “The Commission has just conducted a study on the effect of EU health and safety legislation, but the main question is what have been the costs and benefits to business. In fact EU regulations in areas like health and safety, consumer rights and employment, have been of huge benefit to hundreds of millions of people throughout Europe, so why is the Commission not evaluating the benefits to its workers and citizens that its regulation brings, rather than just perpetuating the myth that regulation is about burdens and ‘red tape’?”
Government claims that the European Union has fuelled an increase in legislation have been proven to be a myth, the TUC has said.
The union body was commenting after an an academic study concluded that far from producing too much legislation, the EU is only producing a small minority of the new laws coming into effect in Britain.
It showed the number of new directives has halved in the past five years and this trend seems set to continue, as the European Commission’s Work Programme for 2015 has abandoned 80 proposals and introduced just 23.
TUC head of safety Hugh Robertson, writing in the Stronger Unions blog, noted: “For many of us, the fact that the EU is regulating less is not a matter for celebration, but anger. We have recently seen proposals for new regulations on carcinogens and musculoskeletal disorders ditched by the Commission after pressure from the UK and, in the current climate, many ordinary workers would welcome new laws on employment protection, fairness at work or decent hours, wherever they come from.” He added that other studies of the impact of EU laws only examined effects on business. “The Commission has just conducted a study on the effect of EU health and safety legislation, but the main question is what have been the costs and benefits to business. In fact EU regulations in areas like health and safety, consumer rights and employment, have been of huge benefit to hundreds of millions of people throughout Europe, so why is the Commission not evaluating the benefits to its workers and citizens that its regulation brings, rather than just perpetuating the myth that regulation is about burdens and ‘red tape’?”
18.2.15
Win for disabled staff denied pay
Land Registry staff are in line for a withheld performance award after a judge ruled they were discriminated against for their disabilities.
Five claimants had not been included in the award scheme because they had received formal warnings for sick absence.
A tribunal found the time off was all attributed to disability and they had been discriminated against under equality legislation.
At an employment appeals tribunal, judge Peter Clark rejected the Land Registry’s argument that their disabilities were not a factor in the decision.
He ruled the only relevant fact was they were denied the award because of their disability related absence.
The scheme allowed for discretion where a warning related to an employee’s conduct, meaning payments could still be made, but there was no discretion for sickness.
We supported the claimants at the tribunal and appeal and have now written to the Land Registry to say all payments should be made.
The case confirms once again of how unfair and discriminatory bonus systems can be.
Read the full judgement.
Five claimants had not been included in the award scheme because they had received formal warnings for sick absence.
A tribunal found the time off was all attributed to disability and they had been discriminated against under equality legislation.
At an employment appeals tribunal, judge Peter Clark rejected the Land Registry’s argument that their disabilities were not a factor in the decision.
He ruled the only relevant fact was they were denied the award because of their disability related absence.
The scheme allowed for discretion where a warning related to an employee’s conduct, meaning payments could still be made, but there was no discretion for sickness.
We supported the claimants at the tribunal and appeal and have now written to the Land Registry to say all payments should be made.
The case confirms once again of how unfair and discriminatory bonus systems can be.
Read the full judgement.
9.2.15
Tax justice now!
Tax should play a vital role in society in every country, redistributing wealth from corporations and rich individuals, funding vital public services and tackling poverty. Instead multinational companies dodge billions of pounds of tax every year, acting as giant corporate parasites on the countries they operate in, sucking profits out and leaving the rest of society paying the price.
War on Want are running a campaign they are demanding that the UK's tax laws are changed and the UK's tax havens are abolished, so the UK can no longer feed the corporate tax dodgers sucking profits of countries around the world.
Tax justice is not just about ending tax avoidance and evasion, it is about a building a democratic tax system, based on ability to pay and spent according to need.
Take action now and demand the Uk stops fuelling tax dodging by emailing the home office here.
War on Want are running a campaign they are demanding that the UK's tax laws are changed and the UK's tax havens are abolished, so the UK can no longer feed the corporate tax dodgers sucking profits of countries around the world.
Tax justice is not just about ending tax avoidance and evasion, it is about a building a democratic tax system, based on ability to pay and spent according to need.
Take action now and demand the Uk stops fuelling tax dodging by emailing the home office here.
6.2.15
Resort wages lowest in the North West
The Blackpool Gazette has published an article about the particularly low wages in the area. The full article can be found here.
4.2.15
Lawyers condemn ‘outrageous’ court fee hike
The following details have been supplied by the TUC: Government plans for dramatic increases in the cost of going to court could have a ‘profound impact on access to justice’, according to personal injury lawyers.
The Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) warns that a claim valued at £12,000 would come with a court fee increase of almost a third under the new regime. It adds the fee for a claim of £200,000 for a serious injury would be over five times (560 per cent) higher than it is today.
“The government’s claim that fees are not a major factor in a person’s decision about whether or not to go to court is completely disingenuous,” said APIL president John Spencer. “This move is bound to discourage people from making valid claims – people who have every right to make them. And the idea that seriously injured people making higher value claims are more likely to be able to afford the new fees is outrageous. The severity of an injury has nothing to do with the injured person’s capacity to pay. This new regime will dictate that some seriously injured people will be expected to pay £10,000 up front to bring their cases to court, and many simply won’t be able to afford it.” He said the planned increases have sparked criticism from both the judiciary and Civil Justice Council. “These people do not ask to be injured,” the APIL president said. “They are injured because someone else is negligent. To expect them, on top of all that, to pay a court fee which represents more than the actual cost of the service is simply unacceptable.”
Unions provide free legal support for members suffering injuries or diseases related to their work.
Stop the compulsory moves of the Birchwood Higher Apprentices
These staff were told they would be based from Birchwood, Warrington for the duration of their apprentiships and consequently made plans to live in the vicinity, many of them locals.
DWP management then proceeded to tell them that because they have changed their minds as to where the work will be based, all 25 would now be compulsorily moved to Leeds and if they did not accept they would be at risk of losing their jobs.
Many of these staff are local 18/19 year olds for which many this is their first job. They haven’t received an apology and have been met with a lot of unfair treatment by DWP management.
This is a flagship scheme that comes from the Cabinet Office itself. It’s aim is to recruit young people for a career in the civil service. The appalling treatment of these staff by DWP management is not congruent with a scheme that professes to encourage young people into a worthwhile career in public-service.
This reckless decision has caused these staff untold stress. Many of them have dependants, caring respinsibilities and families locally that they are being forced to leave. Equally, almost all will undergo financial hardship as a consequence of any move and have been offered no financial assistance.
We ask that DWP management withdraw all 25 compulsory moves and permits these staff to continue their apprentiships in Birchwood as agreed.
Please sign the petition here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)