Notes from the Beachhead IV.

PCS National conference - Day 2

The second day of the ADC started with motions on Equality on what looked to be a quieter day in prospect for the delegation after yesterday's flurry of activity, how wrong we were! A46, A47, A48 and A49 on equality proofing of pay, equality impact assessments, LGBT issues and judicial reviews in equality impact assessment cases were all passed before the Union's financial report was presented by Chris Baugh, Assistant General Secretary. Some debate did ensue about the Union's owning of shares in firms questioned by a delegate as being unethical. However Chris, asking if any aspect of Capitalism was ethical, was able to assuage the concerns of the conference by confirming the Union's commitment to ethical investments and confirmed all investments were continually re-assessed. In the financial section the first motion A54 on increasing the union overnight allowances for hotel costs stirred a great debate. Delegates from all sides of the Union opposed the motion as, in light of the MPs expenses debacle, they did not wish to be tarred with the same brush as the MPs themselves. One delegate related how his room had been obtained for £19 a night before the motion was remitted (referred to the NEC for those useful parts of the motion to be taken forward, in this case a review of allowances), though general opinion was he must be sleeping under the pier! John McDonnell MP, the chair of the PCS Parliamentary group was due to address the conference after this but was delayed and so we had to wait until the afternoon to hear him and his condemnation of some of his colleagues, more of this later. Instead the Union General Secretary Mark Serwotka presented the Unions Communication awards. Which led to the section on Pensions, where Martin Jones was due to move the Branch's motion, A63. Unfortunately, of the three motions debated in this section, our motion was the only one lost which was a shame as it called for a return to retirement at aged 60. Before the lunch break affiliations were discussed and it was agreed to affiliate the union to the Anti-Academies allowance and UCAPV (a campaign set up following the death of Ian Tomlinson at the G20 demonstrations. Lunch was followed by the presentation of the National Organising strategy for 2009 and then the Campaigns and Organisation section. The Unions work (past, present and future) campaigning against far right parties and there members was debated and passed in motions A71 and A72 with some horrific stories relating to bigotry, abuse and victimisation coming out in the debate. A72 was also the start to consultation with members on the question of supporting trade union candidates in elections as a challenge to all the parties who oppose public services and servants. A15 was debated but defeated as it proposed transferring some members to other relevant unions if that union was felt to cover their work, cleaners, messengers and other areas. The message came back though that these members wished to stay with the PCS. John McDonnell arrived just before the debate on rule changes was to start and he took his place as delegates took a short break to prepare for what can be a dry section but generated the first card vote of the ADC...on one of our motions! Motion A79 was debated relating to Death benefits, Motion A80 on the seconding of motions and A81 and A82 together dealing with transfer of motions between group and national conferences were also debated in this section either being lost or remitted. Our Motion on how branches can spend rebates and the role of the NEC and finance committee on deciding what is or isn't permissible was moved by Chris Wade and opposed by the NEC. The motion required a two thirds majority to change the rule and when the hands went up it appeared clear to the delegation that that had not been achieved, it seemed more 50/50. Bizarrely the President called for a card vote which when completed and counted showed 86,833 in favour and 139, 657 against and 10,878 abstentions. Clearly lost but an exciting interlude in what our guest speaker described as a "fascinating debate" and one which he contrasted with the House of Commons which he reported had voted not to vote on a debate... The speech from John Mc Donnell was as usual a fascinating insight into the actions of MPs with the expenses scandal providing some juicy content as he rounded on those of his colleagues who had abused the public purse Conference then moved onto the final section of the day, Services and Structures, where support for our Commercial Services colleagues was passed in motion A87 and A94. Motion A92 which called for increased access to counselling services (those provided by the Union) for members and representatives was remitted to enable the NEC to take forward those parts that could be. Conference closed for the day and delegates were free to relax after another busy day of debate and decision making. Now then who's for a stroll on the pier and a stick of Brighton Rock? Chris Wade

Notes from the Beachhead III

PCS National Conference - Day 1

Following yesterday's late finish the business today got off to an early start and the Annual Delegate's Conference (ADC) started on time with the Branch almost immediately in action with a "reference back" designed to remove the general debate tag but leave the felling tags on the first motions in the Pay section (A627, 21, and 22).

The Branch delegation believed that the proposing, seconding and then debate on all these motions together would take half of the entire pay section and that by simply leaving the tag that meant A21 and A22 would fall if A627 were carried then time would be saved and more motions would be debated. However despite the branch's efforts and Chris Wade's speech, the reference back was unsuccessful and the Conference moved to the sections to debate.

In the Social & Economic section the recession was debated in Motions A601 and subsequent motions. The section largely centred on the excesses of recent years in the banking and business sector and the negative impact on the public, not surprisingly many of the motions were carried.

Then the debate shifted to Protecting Public Services where Grant McClure was to move motion A17 discussing the closure of sites such as Lytham St Anne's, unfortunately this debate was guillotined before being reached, but not before several motions on opposing privatisation were passed, re-affirming the Union's commitment to protecting Public Services.

After lunch in the Pay section we were surprised by the speed of debate and our motion A29 on pay progression was heard even though it was a long way down the section. Martin Jones, now part of the delegation after Group Conference concluded (he sits on the GEC) moved the motion and it was accepted by conference without dissent and finally becomes policy.

Our motion on Annual Leave (calling for 35 days a year for everyone) was guillotined and will have to be brought back to the conference another year.

In the Health and Safety section Emma and Martin both spoke to motions.

Emma, in her National Conference debut spoke supporting motion A33 on acoustic shock the motion was passed and Emma later received praise from the DWP group president for her efforts.

Martin seconded the motion on lighting A34 and this motion was also passed.

After two guest speakers from Palestinian trade unionists the Conference went on to debate Motion A39 on the situation in Gaza and Israel, but not before the Conference was moved upon hearing the words of one of the speakers who described her joy at seeing the sea in Brighton having been unable to see the see since she was 15.

She told of her sadness that her children had never seen the sea because of the troubles in Israel and her hope that one day they too would be able to. The debate, as expected, was a long and emotional one but was conducted with respect for the contributors on both sides of the arguments.

Motion A39 was carried and followed by a debate on the practice of extraordinary rendition which was condemned in motion A40, also carried.

Conference ended at 5.30 p.m. and the delegates were able to retire to the beach to make sandcastles....Now where's my bucket and spade....hang on...where's the sand, and has anyone got some cement to stick these pebbles together?

Call this a beach?.....

Chris Wade

Notes from the Beachhead II

DWP Group Conference - Day 2
Day two started with the Sun shining as we set off from the hotel to the Conference hall for the last day of the DWP Group Conference. Nervous tension was high as one of the delegation, Emma Haslehurst, was due to make her maiden speech and in the first debate to boot!

Stepping out of the sunshine and into the Hall the delegation could have been forgiven for thinking that that was the last they had seen of the bright light. How wrong we were, intervening on Motion A235 on LEAN Emma's nerves disappeared and she shone! It may be possible that she will blush as much reading this as she did when she stepped down to applause from the Conference, but probably not quite as much as that...the light was shining again, but this time from Emma's face. The motion was carried unanimously.

In this section a motion, A271, on campaigning for the removal of the use of the AAT in Jobcentre Plus (remember the Work Allocation Tool?) was carried following opposition from supporters of A284 which went further and called for boycotts of the AAT. The card vote (votes counted on the basis of branches membership) was close, 40,851 in favour of A271 with 36,735 against and A271 fell.

However, the delegations work this day was not over. In the next section on Health and Safety issues Michelle Kenyon was to second two motions; A393 on Office Environment (heating) and A395 on voice care, both of which were carried. She was raring to go for three in a section when the guillotine fell on the third motion A402 on e-learning training for fire and bomb wardens.

In the Equality section motions on Equality reps, A126, and LGBT issues were carried and, after lunch in the Working Hours section, motions EM15 and A350 on flexible working were also carried. We then listened to the guest speaker from Sawt el-Amel a Palestinian Workers Union about their efforts to assist workers and unemployed people in Nazareth.

Gloria Hodkinson and Grant McClure's efforts to second motion in the section regarding Attendance Management came to nought as both motions were guillotined with only motion A305 being heard but being carried. However, the branch will have a chance to raise these issues on Friday at the National Conference (starting tomorrow).

The guillotine fell again in the next section on Union Organisation and the branch delegation were unable to get its intervention on closer working with the commercial sector (working with the membership and potential membership). In the Guillotine Section three motions that the branch had an interested in were re-introduced but only Grant McClure managed to be involved, seconding motion A97 (terms and conditions in CMEC) which was passed with Grant reminding conference and CMEC members "that their fight is our fight!"

The DWP conference ended at 5:30 but the work of the Delegation continued with an approach to the Standing Order's Committee for the National Conference for reference back on motions affecting tomorrow's debates....more of that tomorrow.

By the time the day's work ended at 8:00p.m. the delegation finally got to put their feet up.

Now where's the bar stool?

Chris Wade

Notes from the Beachhead.

DWP Group Conference - Day 1
The first day of the conference started with a sodden dash to the Conference Centre and ended with fringe meetings in gloomy corners whilst the sun had finally begun to shine here in Brighton. During the day your delegates to Conference were involved in several of the debates and sections on day one, and here is a summary of the motions and results.

The business of the day was preceded by the President's address to the delegates, appointment of tellers (Chris Wade amongst them and hoping for a quiet day), adoption of Standing Orders (including the inclusion of several Emergency Motions) and Group Secretary's report. The adoption of the Standing Orders led to the debate of several "reference backs" (requests to conference to change or amend to the classification, position or status of motions) and delayed the discussion of motions by a few minutes but nonetheless demonstrated the control over the business of the conference that the delegates have.

The following motions of interest to the branch were carried; A1 on the recession and EM1 on PDCS job cuts (Chris Wade intervened on behalf of the branch and spoke of the recent member's meeting which rejected "more work, less jobs"). Our branch's motion of payment of an honorarium to First Aiders was guillotined and not heard.

Awards of Life memberships, including some made posthumously were then given to several stalwarts of the union before a quick lunch break, which was shortened by the press of the morning's business.

Back to the motions, EM10 and A49 on pay (our branch's motions A60 and A61 were included in this composite motion), EM5 and A79 on recruitment and A80 on the grievance policy and EM14 on the results of strike action were also carried before the guillotine fell again and motion A97 (which we were to second) on CMEC and conditions of service was also not heard though we are to ask for this to be brought back to the Conference in the Guillotine section tomorrow. Motion A14 on the Canteen committee was also not heard and this will need to be brought back (again) next year (better luck next time Martin).

Before the afternoon break we had the chance to listen to the Union's General Secretary, Mark Serwotka, who spoke about the challenges for the next year, on jobs pay and protecting public services and the possibility of the Union standing candidates to oppose those politicians of all parties who seem hell bent on taking our jobs.

Returning to the debates, several rule changes were discussed with the tellers called into action to count votes for the necessary 2/3rd majority. Then, A246 a motion regarding BNP members working in the Civil Service, was passed unanimously following a speech by our Branch Equal Opportunities Officer (Gloria Hodgkinson) and before the conference ended for the day at 5.30 p.m. motions on PDS and people performance, A143 and on benchmarks and H&S KWO, A156 and A157 were all carried along with the important motions on Victimisation of Union representatives, employee relations in CMEC and Equality Officers.

By now the Sun was shining...where's that sun block?

Chris Wade.

European Elections – Use Your Vote

Stop the Fascist BNP!
Four years ago the British National Party came within a whisker of winning a seat in the European Parliament for the North West. Because the vote is on the basis of proportional representation they only need 8% of the vote across the region to achieve this. With the turnout predicted to be as low as 20% they could be elected with a tiny proportion of the potential vote.

Don’t be fooled by their respectable image. The BNP is a Nazi party: it is not just another right wing party with a particular ideology.

Their leader, and candidate in the North West, Nick Griffin was convicted of inciting racial hatred after a BNP magazine denied the Holocaust in which six million Jews and a total of over 15 million trade unionists, socialists, gypsies, Slavs, gay and disabled people were murdered by the Nazis’. During his trial he said “I am aware that the orthodox opinion is that six million Jews were gassed and cremated and turned into lamp shades. I have reached the conclusion that the extermination tale is a mixture of Allied wartime propaganda, extremely profitable lie and latter day witch-hysteria”.

If elected to the European Parliament he will sit in a Parliamentary group that includes the grand daughter of former Italian dictator Benito Mussolini and with members of Jean Marie Le Pen’s Front National. Le Pen who has been the guest of honour at BNP events is on record as describing the holocaust as a “mere detail of history”.

They don’t believe in democracy. Griffin argued in 1993 “the electors of Millwall backed what they perceived to be a strong, disciplined organisation with the ability to back their slogan of Rights for Whites with well directed boots and fists. When the crunch comes, power is the product of force and not rational debate”.

Although in recent years they have tried to pose as a legitimate political party this has not always been the case. Their founder John Tindall who Griffin replaced was quoted as saying “Many who feel that Hitler was right do not believe it is yet safe to state such views openly – but times will change”.

In an interview with BBC Radio 4, Griffin dismissed the notion that Black or Asian people could be British as a "politically correct fiction". He was defending the BNP's "Language and Concepts Discipline Manual" which tells the party's activists that Black and Asian Britons "do not exist" and should be referred to as "racial foreigners". The BNP manual also states that the organisation's "ultimate aim" is the "repatriation of the resident foreigners of the UK".

Do any of us really want such people to represent the North West in Europe?

The BNP build support by whipping up hatred against every minority just as Hitler targeted Jewish people in the 1930’s.But, like the Nazis’, if the BNP ever came to power they would strip every person of their rights and freedoms.

As the recession bites, as in the 1930’s, easy solutions and scapegoats will become more attractive to some people. Don’t let this happen!

A low turn out in the European elections could allow the fascist BNP to win a seat. PCS is not affiliated to any political party. We do however urge members to use their votes in the forthcoming European elections and vote for democratic candidates.

The PCS NW Regional Website can be viewed here.

GEC Election Results

DWP Group Executive Committee Elections 2009 - Results:

Election of President
Result (1 to elect)
AITCHISON, Jane 3,293 Elected
BREEN, Diane 2,240
WRIGHT, Annette 1,593

Election of Vice Presidents
Result (5 to elect)
BROWN, Alan 3,113 Elected
CAVANAGH, Martin 2,948 Elected
McINALLY, John 2,912 Elected
WILLIAMS, Katrine 2,785 Elected
MARTIN, Laura 2,685 Elected
BARROWCLOUGH, Rachel 2,454
GALLIGAN, Christine 2,327
COX, Joe 2,215
CAMPBELL, Moira 2,198
FEGAN, Gary 2,156
ROCK, Lee 1,856
BROWNE, Marjorie 1,669
HULME, Christine 1,614
HOWS, Lynne 1,540

Election of Group Executive Committee
Result (21 to elect)
POPE, Ian (SS) 3,417 Elected
ROBINSON, Sarah (DCS) 3,330
ElectedKHALIF, Adam (DD) 3,243
ElectedGODRICH, Janice (JCP) 2,937 Elected
GREEN, Sharon (TPS) 2,888 Elected
JONES, Martin (DCS) 2,883 Elected
HARTLEY, Gavin (DCS) 2,820 Elected
FLANAGAN, Helen (JCP) 2,802 Elected
ALSTON, Dave (JCP) 2,791 Elected
REVELL, Carol (CMEC) 2,790 Elected
CARASS, Alison (JCP) 2,712 Elected
OWENS, Dave (JCP) 2,677 Elected
WEST, Steve (CMEC) 2,659 Elected
THOMSON, Derek (JCP) 2,598 Elected
SAMUEL, Willie (SS) 2,595 Elected
SANDHU, Jagdeep (JCP) 2,568 Elected
RUDDICK, Siân (JCP) 2,521 Elected
WASHBOURNE, Yvonne (JCP) 2,518 Elected
SALT, Lesley (JCP) 2,487 Elected
FERRABY, Jason (JCP) 2,455 Elected
BROWN, Andrew (DD) 2,279 Elected
SHEAHAN, Nigel (JCP) 2,250
CAMPBELL, Moira (CMEC) 2,235
ANDERSON, Elaine (CMEC) 2,231
BARROWCLOUGH, Rachel (TPS) 2,190
COX, Joe (CMEC) 2,153
ANDERSON, Lee (TPS) 2,060
WITHERS, Angela (CMEC) 2,035
KANG, Gurmit (JCP) 2,033
WRIGHT, Annette (TPS) 2,000
BRYSON, Rob (JCP) 1,997
BUCHANAN, Tony (JCP) 1,950
GALLIGAN Peter (JCP) 1,949
HAWTING, Elaine (CMEC) 1,855
CAMPBELL-NIMMO, Alan (CMEC) 1,841
JACKSON, Steven (CMEC) 1,828
WELCH, David (JCP) 1,761
McBRIDE, David (JCP) 1,734
FULLER, Howard (JCP) 1,702
BROWNE, Marjorie (JCP) 1,657
ROCK, Lee (JCP) 1,620
ANDREWS, Trevor (JCP) 1,607
PUTTOCK, John (JCP) 1,604
McGINLEY, Con (JCP) 1,601
LAIDLAW, Bev (JCP) 1,569
HULME, Christine (JCP) 1,495
BIRD, Nick (JCP) 1,478
TUFT, Ann (JCP) 1,443
BISHELL, Tom (JCP) 1,384
CATTEN, Sue (JCP) 1,376
McDONALD, Charlie (JCP) 1,343
ELLIS, Mervyn (JCP) 1,271
LEDERER, Jackie (JCP) 1,258
RAFTERY, Theresa (JCP) 1,243
MAHONEY, John (JCP) 1,231
THOMPSON, George (JCP) 1,225
DIAMANTIS, Nick (JCP) 1,204
GILL, Jimmy (JCP) 1,198
POWER, Declan (JCP) 1,172
COCKROFT, Simon (JCP) 1,155
HOAR, Steve (DCS) 1,143
PRINCE, David (TPS) 811
CUTTS, Ian (JCP) 659
ZAVARE, Muneyi (JCP) 499

Election of Group Assistant Secretaries
Result (7 to elect)
WILLIAMS, Rob 3,332 Elected
PENN, Tom 3,326 Elected
HALL, Sam 3,269 Elected
BARTON, Paul 3,165 Elected
CUTHBERT, Christine 3,058 Elected
BURKE, David 2,978 Elected
RICHARDS, David 2,782 Elected
BRYSON, Rob 2,347
KANG, Gurmit 2,230
LAIDLAW, Beverley 2,162
McGOWAN, John 2,111
FULLER, Howard 1,811
BIRD, Nick 1,782
REAY, Tony 1,640
POWER, Declan 1,585

Election of Treasurer
Result (1 to elect)
CHILWAN, Bashir 2,720 Elected
WITHERS, Angela 2,364
PRENDERGAST, Nigel 1,658

Election of Group Organiser
Result (1 to elect)
HEATHCOTE, Fran 4,140 Elected
THOMPSON, George 2,034

Hope Not Hate

The Branch has recieved the following message from the Hope Not Hate campaign:

"The BNP's campaign launch on Monday showed just how desperate they are to deliver a seat for Nick Griffin - they are willing to freely and openly tell out and out lies.But we can fight back with the truth - and I know that our supporters are more than able to match them leaflet by leaflet, phone call by phone call and pound for pound. We will beat their politics of hate and division. This weekend thousands of anti-racist campaigners will be doing just this - and I need you to stand alongside them. You can help do your bit at a local event near you:

http://action.hopenothate.org.uk/eventsnearme

The BNP have shown how they plan on running their campaign. At their campaign launch Nick Griffin said that Unison members have been telling residents at old people's homes that they'll be thrown out on the streets if they vote BNP. It's clearly a lie - but it just shows how far they are willing to go to snatch victory in this campaign. We can beat them - we just need to make a concerted effort. Just imagine how you'll feel waking up on June 5th to a BNP victory - in the knowledge that you could have stopped them. I'm giving you the opportunity to do this - you just have to take it.We've got 1.1 million leaflets to deliver this weekend - will you give me two hours of your time to deliver a few hundred? By working together I know that we'll make this ambitious target - sign up now:

http://action.hopenothate.org.uk/eventsnearme

Our campaign's success over the past months has been built by people accross the length and breadth of Britain who believe in a tolerant society. It's all been about people willing to invest whatever time and effort they can afford to stop the BNP and that's how we will close this campaign out. Our supporters, giving their time, to secure a victory for a just and fair society.

Remember the deadline to register to vote or apply for a postal vote is 19 May.

If you're not registered or want a postal vote visit http://www.aboutmyvote.co.uk/

Please forward this information to your friends reminding them to register to vote.

Thank you for all you are doing."

Branch Mandating Meeting 2009

For PCS National and DWP Group Conference

Wednesday 13th May 2009
Warbreck House Canteen
2.00pm - 3.30pm

The purpose of this post is to remind members of a General Meeting to mandate (i.e. instruct) delegates to the forthcoming PCS National and DWP Group Conferences.

Obviously as the manner in which delegates vote can influence PCS policy on a range of issues from Pay Bargaining to the way the union is run, this is an important meeting. The motions booklets will be available at the Mandating Meeting, however, if you require an advance copy please contact the Branch Secretary, Duncan Griffiths by email or by phone on Ext: 63484.

The agenda for the meeting is:

1) Apologies
2) Announcements
3) Emergency Motions
4) Mandating of delegates to the PCS National and DWP Group Conferences.

1½ hours facility time, plus reasonable travelling time, has been applied for you to attend the meeting. Please make every effort to do so.

If you require any further details please do not hesitate to contact the Branch Secretary, please also contact him if you require a hard copy of the DWP Group or PCS National Conference Motions booklets.

The National Motions book can be found here in .pdf format, the Group Motions booklet is not yet available electronically due to the slightly different nominations and motions timescale of National Conference. We will publish it once it is.

Petition to Ban Members of Racist Organisations from being employed in the Department

Members of PCS Union in the Home Office and UKBA are campaigning for a ban on members of racist organisations from being employed in the Department.

Staff in the Home Office are employed amongst other things as Border Officers, Asylum caseworkers, and enforcement officers. It is incompatible for members of racist organisations to be employed in these sensitive roles.

Whilst there is a ban in the Prison and Police Services there are currently no restrictions on members of the BNP, Combat 18 or the National Front from being employed in the Home Office or UKBA.

If you support the campaign to instigate a ban then please sign the petition which can be found here. It is unacceptable for asylum and immigration policy to be implemented by members of racist organisations.

DCPU - More Work, Less Staff

Members’ Meeting
You may have seen details from the employer recently about the additional work coming to the DCPU from Manchester DBC.

You may have also seen the Branch and DWP Group circulars on the closures and the job cuts in the (P)DCS now (about LEAN) and in the near future and the impact of the job cuts on the staff left to do the work.

Staffing in the DCPU has been reducing due to the Civil Service and DWP job cuts, enabled by LEAN and other reviews. This is despite the DCPU taking on extra work. More work, less staff in other words.We have therefore arranged a members’ meeting to discuss the work situation and gauge members’ views as follows:

Wednesday 13th May 2009
The Canteen
Warbreck House
10:00 am

We will feedback the results to Senior Management to help us to tackle the erosion of jobs at Warbreck House.

Please note that if you have not yet joined PCS there is a membership form available to print and fill in on the right hand side of this website.

We look forward to seeing you on the 13th May 2009

Resolving DCPU Helpline Issues

Scheduled Breaks - Results of the ballot
You may have seen the earlier circular regarding the employer imposing fixed scheduled breaks from 26th May 2009. We indicated that we intended to continue to oppose this imposition and were considering what steps we need to take to try to persuade Senior Management to remove this imposition and would be asking for your views.

On Thursday 30th April 2009 the Branch undertook a ballot which was a snapshot of the members’ views that were in work at that point. The results of the ballot are as follows:

Q1: Do you believe that imposed scheduled breaks are a good idea? Yes = 77 No = 185
Q2: Are scheduled breaks compatible with your Health, Safety and Welfare at work? Yes = 79 No = 174

The employer has stated it intends to impose scheduled breaks on 26 May 2009. Members will receive details of their proposed scheduled breaks before that date. The employer has not withdrawn from the temporary arrangements we agreed with them whilst discussing this issue. PCS believes they still apply namely Management can suggest when they would prefer you to take a break but you were not obliged to comply with this. PCS are aware that some managers are threatening members with disciplinary action if they do not comply immediately. This is not acceptable. Please bring any instances where you are being forced to comply with scheduled breaks before 26 May to our attention.

We will now present the results to the employer and attempt to work with them to find an acceptable solution for all parties. PCS has reminded the employer that our recent experience suggests that we can work together to find acceptable ways forward given willingness on both sides. PCS has indicated we are willing to discuss further.

We hope that the above is useful. If you require any further details about these or any other points then please do not hesitate to contact the Branch Office on Ext: 61186.

Resolving DCPU Helpline Issues

Scheduled Breaks

PCS and the employer have been discussing a number of issues recently to try to improve working conditions in Helpline and to maximise use of the DWP’s resources. Part of this was around scheduled breaks and Senior Management’s proposals to enforce scheduled breaks.

At the Helpline Members Meetings on 26th March 2009 members told us they were opposed to having their 20 minute breaks scheduled at fixed times 4 weeks in advance. PCS raised this, and other issues at a meeting with Senior Management on 15th April 2009 and argued strongly that fixing scheduled breaks was not compatible with individual needs around comfort and welfare, would reduce flexibility and would engender a more controlling and rigid environment and could affect customer service. Members felt strongly that it was important that individual members should be able to determine their own breaks in accordance with their individual needs.

Senior Management understood this and proposed that staff would be able to state when they wanted to take their breaks but would have to do so in advance. They also proposed that if members wanted to split their break into two 10 minute breaks they would be able to do so. PCS welcomed these proposals.

It is therefore extremely disappointing that Senior Management have now withdrawn these proposals and have told us they will be imposing fixed scheduled breaks from 26th May 2009. Senior Management claim “the WFM Geneysis system cannot input 10 minute breaks instead of 20 minute breaks nor do their Performance Team have the resources to input preferred breaks”. They also stated that this means that if we were to go ahead with their proposals Team Leaders would have to manually input all preferred breaks (as a worse case scenario, for up to 14 staff) every week. According to the employer this was not a viable option.

PCS rejects this view. We do not believe allowing staff the flexibility to request when they want a break is particularly onerous given that it is for 14 staff at most once a week. This does not appear to be a particularly huge resource issue particularly when we are doing all we can to resolve the issues that staff are telling us are making their working lives intolerable.

Senior Management also state that the option they propose to use is to schedule 20 minute breaks for all staff (except DDA breaks) via the Geneysis system, which requires no manual intervention. However DDA breaks will still be offered and manually input by Team Leaders. This is the key to the issue. The DWP tells us that Geneysis is a tool and is not the be all and end all when it comes to scheduling cover. Geneysis is a computer software package that takes no account of individuals and their working lives and the pressures, stresses and strains that members face on an increasing basis day by day. Members as individuals know what affects them when they come to work and when the best time is for them to take their break. This continues to be the case.

All the evidence provided by Senior Management suggests that breaks taken throughout the day on the present basis are broadly in line with expected and actual call traffic therefore we do not see any problem. PCS has already agreed that Senior Management can suggest to staff when they would like them to take their break but this was not mandatory until now.

Senior Management even claim they are committed to using any available time that occurs, as a result of this more efficient use of resources, to provide all Helpline staff with more time allocated to them, in order to read their e-mails, discuss procedural changes, read information on the Intranet etc which is a bit rich given it was the same Management Team that slashed the amount of reading time have for staff to do just that.

We must remember that the PDCS has willingly relinquished the use of 1,100 staff on the basis that PDCS claims they will be able to cope with the same amount of work. The reality is they expect more work with less staff which is why Senior Management are introducing this much more rigid, inflexible and controlling environment.

PCS will continue to oppose this imposition. We will be considering what steps we need to take to try to persuade Senior Management to remove this imposition and will be asking for your views shortly. If members have any views or ideas they would like to contribute please let us know.

We hope that the above is useful. If you require any further details about these or any other points then please do not hesitate to contact the Branch Office.

Resolving DCPU Helpline Issues

Working on Flexible Working Hours

PCS and the employer have been discussing a number of issues recently to try to improve working conditions in Helpline and to maximise use of DWP’s resources. Part of this was around work done by full time FWH staff between 7.00 am and 7.30 am (7:30 am being when the phone lines open).

Senior Management were concerned that there could be difficulties finding work within Helpline to enable those staff who regularly work from 7.00 am without impacting on the work of staff who may not be able to go on the phones for whatever reason ie temporary adjustments etc. As part of these discussions Senior Management are proposing to offer to these staff work from an Operational area and will be writing to them directly to ascertain their personal view. Senior Management are proposing that for those full time FWH staff who want to continue to exercise their FWH hours from 7.00 am they will provide work, which is likely to be in an Ops Room

This proposal complies with the principle of the DCS FWH Agreement as Senior Management are finding work that allows members to continue to work their FWH from 7.00 am

PCS are generally supportive of the proposal. We would naturally expect that H&S considerations are taken into account when working in other areas.

We hope that the above is useful. If you require any further details about these or any other points then please do not hesitate to contact the Branch Office on Ext: 61186.

Hope Not Hate Report

BNP leader defends policy on race

Hope Not Hate, an organisation backed by PCS nationally has produced an article on the BNP defending defended a party leaflet which states that black Britons and Asian Britons "do not exist".

The article, which is sourced from the BBC, can be viewed here.

BNP says some members are oddballs and liars

Matthew Taylor from the The Guardian published an article on the BNP last month. It makes interesting reading and can be viewed here.

Asbestos Petition

The Greater Manchester Asbestos Victims Support Group have launched an on-line petition here.

The petition reads as follows:

We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to Support the aims of the Daily Mirror's Asbestos Timebomb campaign.

"We urge the Prime Minister to work towards implementing the five campaign demands.

These are:

• A £10 million National Centre for Asbestos Related Disease to find better treatment, alleviate suffering and find a cure for mesothelioma.
• Compensation reinstated for victims of “pleural plaques” (scars on lungs caused by asbestos) after it was scrapped two years ago.
• Fair and equal compensation for asbestos disease sufferers who can’t trace the insurers of the boses who exposed them, through a new Employers’ Liability Insurance Bureau paid for by the insurance industry.
• A public register of all asbestos surveys carried out on public buildings.
• The Health and Safety Executive must be given the resources to meet its own targets for inspecting asbestos removal work."

Unite Against Facism - Regional Conference

Saturday 25th April
2pm-5pm (Doors open 1.30 pm)
Mechanics Institute,
103 Princess Street Manchester, M1 6DD
(Go to the Major Street entrance)

It is time for all of us to unite to stop the BNP. This Conference aims to bring together all those who wish to be part of the Campaign to stop the BNP in the European Elections on June the 4th.

“The world is a dangerous place to live in: not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don’t do anything about it.” - Albert Einstein, Refugee to Britain from the Holocaust in Nazi Germany.

The Mechanics Institute is located here.

If you wish to attend, please complete email a registration form which can be found here.

Please email the form to Manchester UAF or contact them for more information and a list of speakers at the event.

PDCS Job Losses – Update

Following the recent announcement of 1100 jobs to go in PDCS (Pensions, Disability & Carers Service) senior PCS officials have now met with PDCS management. The main purpose of this meeting was to establish the future for our members transferring to Jobcentre Plus. However, we also wanted to seek assurances around workloads for those members remaining within the PDCS organisation.

PDCS Change Programme
Management appeared surprised at the reaction from PCS members and officials around their decision to axe 1100 jobs in PDCS. They stated that, under the PDCS Change Programme, it was always their intention to make a minimum of 1100 staff efficiency savings in this financial year. The offer from Jobcentre Plus, they said, to absorb the planned staff savings merely prevented them from going down the mass redundancy, wastage and early retirement route. Management made it clear that this would have been a possibility should Jobcentre Plus not have stepped in.

Sites Directly Impacted by Decision

Stockport & Wembley

Both Stockport Pension Centre and Wembley DBC will migrate to Jobcentre Plus. The migration of work will not commence until early summer. Staff will then be trained in Jobcentre Plus work, prior to any JC+ work coming in. Numbers released at any one time will be dependent on the ability of JC+ to deliver the relevant training.

Manchester DBC

The decision has been taken to close Manchester DBC by March 2010. The reason given by management was that the current estate is not fit for purpose and all staff can be redeployed to the Jobcentre Plus network, whilst still meeting the restrictions placed around mobility. PCS expressed concerns around the future for the AA members based there (36), however management have given an assurance that all AA’s will be relocated into the Benefit Delivery Centre network within the Manchester area. All AO’s and above will be expected to move to the Customer Services Directorate within the Jobcentre Plus network

Other Sites

There was good news for staff at National Pension Centre (NPC) who have now been given “Transformation” status and would appear to have their future secured. Similarly, whilst Winter Fuel Payments are moving to NPC, staff at Southgate House will transfer to Cardiff Disability Centre and be re-trained to carry out Disability Benefits work. Staff based at Glasgow DBC will be re-housed at the recently modernised Atlantic Quay, two minutes walk from their current location, and will expand in size to accommodate additional work.

Walsall

Management have confirmed that Walsall will remain open until Autumn 2010, at least, and retain its “Migration” status. PCS have made clear to management that it is totally unacceptable to continue treating members on the Walsall site in this cavalier fashion. With the current exodus off staff to Jobcentre Plus, PCS would have expected Walsall to be given “Transformation” status and allow the members there some certainty over their future.

Terms & Conditions

All members transferring across to Jobcentre Plus do so with their existing terms and conditions. This includes preferred working patterns, reasonable adjustments etc. Furthermore, PCS has been given an assurance from DWP management that those staff who do transfer will not be “locked-in” for any given period should they apply, and be successful, with any lateral transfer request to another Government department.

Conclusion

Whilst PCS accepts that there are huge pressures on our members within Jobcentre Plus which require immediate action, we cannot support the majority of the above decisions taken by PDCS management. In order to provide a lifeline to Jobcentre Plus, they have merely asset-stripped the PDCS network. We are already missing targets, shelving work and turning our back on the promise of improved accuracy. This helps neither our hard working members or the client groups which our members serve so well.

Representatives Meeting

PCS has called a meeting of representatives across the PDCS organisation, along with both TPS and DCS trade union sides. We would expect reps attending to come armed with statistical information which makes a mockery of managements’ claim that the current state of work across PDCS has never been lower and also how the announcement affects their sites.

Group Executive Elections 2009

The purpose of this post is to inform members that from Thursday 23rd April 2009 onwards you should receive your 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 Meeting support the following list of candidates:

Group President: Jane Aitchison
Vice Presidents (5): Alan Brown, Martin Cavanagh, John McInally, Laura Martin, Katrine Williams
Assistant Secretaries (7): Paul Barton, David Burke, Christine Cuthbert, Sam Hall, Tom Penn, Dave Richards, Rob Williams
Organiser: Fran Heathcote
Treasurer: Bashir Chilwan
Group Journal Editor: Alan Smith

Committee (21): Dave Alston, Ian Pope, Alison Carass, Carol Revell, Jason Ferraby, Sarah Robinson, Helen Flanagan, Sian Ruddick, Jimmy Gill, Lesley Salt, Janice Godrich, Jagdeep Sandhu, Sharon Green, Nigel Sheahan, Gavin Hartley, Derek Thomson, Martin Jones, Yvonne Washbourne, Adam Khalif, Steve West, Dave Owens

The above candidates, if elected, will campaign for:

Pay
A return to national pay bargaining, a minimum wage in line with the European Decency Threshold and all staff to reach their maximum within 5 years. Opposition to Performance Pay. All pay awards must be equality proofed to ensure that they are not discriminatory.

Health & Safety
Full support for members’ Health and Safety rights of work. The above candidates support the Branches in ensuring safety is a key issue- issues such as windows falling out at Preston, ensuring the employer conducts proper Risk Assessments across a range of working environment issues and procedures, lighting (the ability of members to have some control over their environment) and for proper local consultation our Health and Safety issues.

Conditions of Service
The harmonisation of pay, grading and all conditions of service for all DWP members on the basis of the best terms from each Agency. For improved policies on Equal Opportunities and Domestic Violence, improved procedures on promotion vacancy filling and transfers and improvements to sick absence procedures.

Although there is a long way still to go these candidates have already succeeded in preventing the Department’s sick absence procedures from becoming even worse and are seeking to curtail the procedure of semi automatic warnings after only 8 days absence. A degree of common sense is now expected. Successfully achieved the abolition of the despised PDS Appraisal system.

Staffing
Against casualisation and for more permanent staff.

Industrial Relations
For improved industrial relations, adequate time off for PCS representatives and an insistence that PCS must remain an independent Trade Union with the explicit right to actively campaign against and fully oppose any of the employer’s proposals. In favour of fully open negotiations.

Privatisation
A high profile campaign to oppose any further privatisation of work and for the return of work already privatised back into the public sector.

Wider Issues
For a better and fairer benefits system which alleviates rather than perpetuating poverty.

We would encourage members to vote in the forthcoming elections and we hope that you will consider voting for the above candidates.

National Elections 2009

Election of the National Executive Committee

From 16th April 2009 members should begin to receive their ballot papers for the forthcoming PCS National Elections, for the National Executive Committee.

The last few years have made a big difference at the top of the union, and we have no hesitation in calling on members to re-elect the current National Executive Committee majority.

A few years ago members from disparate points of view from the Left Unity Group and the PCS Democrats Group came together to form a broad ‘Democracy’ coalition in order to undo years of damage done by the Right Wing and misnamed ‘National Moderate Group’ whose control of the former CPSA, and for one year in PCS resulted in the unlawful attempt at a “coup” and the attempt to sack the Elected General Secretary Mark Serwotka. They also tried to frustrate both Conference decisions and Membership ballot decisions. To hide their shameful past they have changed their name to “4 the members”. Do not be fooled, they haven’t changed much and still have not put forward a single proposal to improve your pay and conditions.

The antics of Barry Reamsbottom’s acolytes should never be forgotten, but the Union must now look forward.

This is why the Branch Annual General Meeting and Branch Executive Committee recommend that you vote for the list of candidates for the following reasons:

Working Together For Members
The National Executive Committee has worked together for PCS Members. Thanks to this work, change has begun at all levels of the union:

Pay is being taken forward as a National issue by Mark Serwotka and Janice Godrich. We need to negotiate and campaign on pay with one National voice rather than 200 separate voices, to prevent decimation of our pay and pay progression – particularly in DWP. The NEC is leading this campaign. Negotiations were stalled as the Government dragged talks out. Due to this the leadership asked members to back up the negotiations with action, and this has secured fresh substantive negotiations for the first time in over 10 years.

The Pensions Campaign across the entire Public Sector was led by our President, General Secretary and NEC. The Victory on protecting members Pensions would not have been achieved without the leadership of these candidates. Millions of Public Sector workers have reason to be thankful.

Campaigns against privatisation and the Civil Service job cuts, have been launched, and despite setbacks, will continue.

The National Executive Committee in five years, has done far more than was done in predecessor Unions in the previous two decades.

Senior Officials Elections
Over the past period the President Janice Godrich, the Deputy General Secretary Hugh Lanning and Assistant General Secretary Chris Baugh, along with the General Secretary Mark Serwotka have worked together to re-establish PCS as a campaigning union and have:

• put a return to national civil service pay, and an end to low and unequal pay, at the top of the union’s work and forced the employer to concede talks Nationally


• led a real fight to defend jobs, pensions, pay, conditions and public services, protected the final salary pension scheme and the right to retire at 60 for existing staff. Negotiated a new Pensions scheme for new entrants with faster accrual rates


• united 14 major unions in a National campaign against privatisation


• stopped the cuts in civil service paid sick leave


• secured a commitment from the Government to end the Two Tier workforce (an outcome of privatisation)


• raised the profile of the union with Ministers, employers, the TUC, other unions, opinion formers, and within the membership and used television, radio and press to advance members’ interests

Let’s show our support and re-elect Janice and her team!

Building On The Progress Made
There is a need to continue to unite all those in the union who are committed to implementing the policies of the union and defend the union's democracy.

The Branches ask for support based on the record of the candidates on the list during the last year and on the following important basic principles:

• Implementation of PCS Policies as agreed by Conference and Membership ballots and concentration on delivering on members’ priority issues, particularly on Pay, Pensions and Privatisation.


• Implementing improvements to the way PCS is organised and run.

The recommended list is as follows:

Deputy General Secretary: Hugh Lanning
Asst Gen Secretary: Chris Baugh
President: Janice Godrich
Deputy/Vice Presidents (4): Dave Bean, John McInally, Sue Bond, Glenys Morris

National Executive Committee (30): Ian Albert, Cheryl Gedling, Dominic McFadden, Mark Baker, Kevin Greenway, Kevin McHugh, Alan Brown, Sam Hall, Chris Morrison, Paula Brown, Zita Holbourne, Andy Reid, Steve Comer, Jon Jamieson, Dave Richards, Tony Conway, Emily Kelly, Victoria Steeples, Alan Dennis, Adam Khalif, Hector Wesley, Mike Derbyshire, Neil License, Paul Williams, Joy Dunn, Marion Lloyd, Rob Williams, Mary Ferguson, Lorna Merry, Gary Winder.

The newly re-named ‘4 members’ i.e. the old National Moderate Group (Barry Reamsbottom's ex-followers) only want to look after one set of members, themselves! The former ultra left “Socialist Caucus” (who have newly re-named themselves the “Independent Left”) talk as if the revolution is tomorrow and what’s more all their policies are based upon this premise!

Vote Wisely.

Several leaflets have been distributed to branches by the Democracy Alliance, most of the information is contained in this post. However the originals can be viewed here:

Recommendation for Branches

National Poster

National Elections

Transfer of Work To Warbreck

More Work Less Staff

Members will by now have heard the announcement that Manchester and Wembley DBC’s are to be closed and that the Manchester DLA work is to be moved to Warbreck.

Members will be rightly annoyed about the worrying times ahead for their colleagues in Manchester and Wembley DBCs. This bad news has been dressed up as good news by the employer who have indicated that this measure somehow secures jobs. We did not create the current economic downturn and banking crisis however 1,100 PDCS staff are to be moved lock stock and barrel to Job Centre Plus to help out with the impact of the economic crisis.

More work and more uncertainty
Not only does this announcement mean more uncertainty in terms of the members directly affected, it also means that there will be more work and less staff for the members remaining in the PDCS. This is not about job security, its all about measures to try and cope with ever increasing problems following the job cuts. The employer claims that Lean and other “enablers” will mean the staff remaining can do the same (or actually increasing!) amount of work. We are hugely sceptical of this. The reality of the cuts is already here with the unpopular LEAN job cuts already beginning to bite and plans to cut further staff from the DCPU staffing budget by next year.

This announcement simply means that there will be more work and less staff. Whilst staff may seemingly have more “secure” jobs at the moment, and who really can trust our employer on that point, those who are left in PDCS will see their workloads soar with all the consequent pressures on their individual working life, restrictions on access to flexi and leave, being forced to work to targets.

Meetings with MPs
The Branch has a meeting arranged with two of the local MPs for Friday 17th April 2009, and has meetings in the pipeline with the other local MPs. The issue of the pressures on the members will be raised at those meetings and you may wish to contact your MP if you are concerned about them.

Hopefully the above is useful. If you require any further details about these or any other points then please do not hesitate to contact the Branch Office.

1,100 jobs to go in PDCS - PCS demands urgent talks

Sam Hall (Group Assistant Secretary) and Dave Wilklinson (Negotiations Officer) have provided the following information:

PCS has written to Pensions, Disability & Carers Service (PDCS) management demanding urgent talks following today’s announcement that 1100 staff are to be transferred, permanently, to Jobcentre Plus.

Background
PCS has learned that the PDCS staff at Wembley and Manchester Disability Benefit Centres, along with all staff at Stockport Pension Centre, are to be moved to Jobcentre Plus because of the economic downturn and their urgent need to recruit more staff. There are also changes planned for staff at the Winter Fuel Payments Centre in Cardiff, Glasgow Disability Benefit Centre and both Walsall and National Pension Centres. However, staff on those sites will remain within the PDCS organisation. These moves will be phased over a 12 month period.

Current Situation
PCS recognises the pressures facing our members in Jobcentre Plus due to the current recession, however PCS firmly believes that the decision by management, nationally, to remove 1100 PDCS staff from their current work to be an act of folly. Experienced PCS representatives across the PDCS network report a picture of failing accuracy, arrears of work, incorrect issues of award and easements, which allow overpayments and underpayments to go on indefinitely. Moving 1100 staff out of the PDCS organisation will only make the situation worse.

Undue Pressure
Staff across the PDCS network will feel cheated by this latest management move. Volumes of work will, inevitably, increase, putting hard-working members under even more pressure in their efforts to deliver a service to the most vulnerable client groups that DWP provides for.

Consultation
Members will not be surprised to learn that there was no proper consultation around these proposed moves. Management have chosen to announce this without discussing with PCS the implications for our PDCS members. Following our request, management have now informed PCS that they are willing to meet with us for one hour on 9th. April 2009 to discuss our concerns. Their view appears to be one of complacency, and have even stated that this is good news for PDCS staff.

Alliance Groups
PCS shall be making The National Pensioners Convention aware of the latest attack on the service provision for the disabled and retired community. We are also seeking to meet with The National Disability Network Group. PCS is committed to working with the above groups to ensure that the needs of their client groups are not ignored because of pressures elsewhere across the DWP organisation. We also need to ensure that The Minister for Pensions, Rosie Winterton, is fully aware of the consequences the enforced changes bring to the client group she is expected to look after and have requested an urgent meeting with her.

Conclusion
As stated, PCS will be meeting with management later this week. We have many questions around these changes which have already been communicated to the employer. Hopefully our next publication will clearly reflect the outcomes of those talks.

DWP People Performance Starts April 2009

Objectives, Competencies and Discussions

Start of the Year
People Performance replaces the Performance and Development System (PDS) for members in DWP from 1 April 2009.

People Performance Policy, Procedure and Advice are published on the DWP Intranet Human Resources site.

At the initial performance discussion, the manager and the employee should:

• Agree objectives and competencies
• Agree the personal development needs of the employee and update the development plan
• Agree the number and timing of performance discussions that will take place throughout the year, these must be quarterly as a minimum
• Record what has been agreed on appropriate forms.

Managers should also explain what the “Wholly Exceptional” criteria (Procedure 7.3) will mean in the employee’s own work context.

SSMART Objectives
The employee and their manager will agree who will be responsible for preparing the first draft of objectives. If employees choose not to, then managers should set appropriate objectives for the employee. The manager will be responsible for ensuring that the objectives are relevant to the job role, SSMART (Stretching, Specific, Measurable, Achievable & Agreed, Relevant, Timebound), and written using simple language about what is expected. A “SSMART Checklist” is provided for further help on this area. ( Procedure 2.1)

No more than six SSMART objectives (and a minimum of two) will be recorded at any one time, as these are to be reviewed at each performance discussion and updated whenever significant changes occur (Procedure 2.3).

Competencies
There are six competency areas in the DWP competency framework. One of these is Delivering a Professional Service which is broken down into different professional areas. The manager and employee will agree which competencies are most relevant to the employee’s job role. (Procedure 2.4 – 2.7)

Performance Discussions
Performance discussions are vital to ensure that employees are aware of how they are performing against their objectives and competencies. There is no laid down structure for the performance discussion, they can be as long or short as necessary. They may take the form of a conversation about work matters where new plans are made, objectives reviewed and feedback given on past work. (Procedure 3.3)

Generic Objectives
DWP targets or generic objectives should not be automatically set as work objectives. Individual factors such as experience, knowledge, any reasonable adjustments needed and working pattern must be taken into account ( Procedure 2.8 & 2.9).

Stretching but Achievable
Stretching objectives are qualified by the SSMART criteria expectation for all objectives to be achievable and agreed.

Numerical Targets
Numerical targets which are not within the employee’s personal control should be opposed. Objectives must be within the employee’s capability.

Attendance Objectives
DWP has accepted that numeric targets for attendance are not within the active control of the individual and are therefore not necessarily achievable. An attendance objective should, if used, only expect compliance with processes, application of policy and an understanding and commitment to overall business targets.

Team Work
Numerical targets should be qualified by the need for team work and recognise the individual is expected to make a contribution towards the achievement of a target. An example of an acceptable work objective would be: to accurately determine entitlement to new claims to benefit and to make an effective contribution towards the new claims clearance times of X days, as in the unit business plan.

Disability and Objectives
Disabled people must have objectives set which provide the same opportunity to meet or exceed objectives as any other employee. Reasonable adjustments must be made for their disability if that affects their performance (Procedure 2.11 & Advice 5).

Part Time Workers
Part time staff must have the time taken for learning, reading and keeping up to date etc. taken into account, for example, a member of staff working half the hours of a full time member of staff should expect to have objectives set at less than half that of the full timer to allow for these activitities (Procedure 2.12 & Advice 5).

Use Grievance Rights
Use the DWP Grievance Procedures to oppose unacceptable Objectives / People Performance problems or decisions which give cause for concern (Procedure 8.28).

Employees have a right to a grievance hearing and the right to be accompanied by a Trade Union Representative.

Further PCS guidance for People Performance will be issued first on the PCS HQ website.

PDS-CMEC Performance Plans 2009 - Oppose Unacceptable Work Objectives

Achievable and Agreed Requirements
The CMEC PDS procedures require at least three and no more than six work objectives to be set which conform to the “SSMART” model. Objectives should be achievable and agreed and relevant. They need to be reviewed when they have become unachievable or irrelevant.

Joint agreement between line managers and employees should be the aim. Where agreement cannot be reached line managers will set objectives. However, line managers decisions are subject to the decision making standards required under the HR Decision Makers Guide (para 2).

Fair And Reasonable Requirements
PDS decisions need to meet the principles of natural justice (PDS policy para 7). All PDS decisions need to be reasonable, fair, unbiased and properly explained. Employees have the right to use the Grievance Procedures for redress when unreasonable objectives are set.

Grievance Rights Apply
Unagreed work objectives which do not conform to the SSMART criteria and/or are unfair, unreasonable, biased or not properly explained should be resisted by using the grievance procedures. Line managers and employees should avoid disputes wherever
possible. The PDS policy for setting objectives puts an emphasis on agreement:

Work objectives should conform to the SSMART criteria: Stretching, Specific, Measurable, Achievable and Agreed, Relevant, Timely (PDS Procedure para 2.2)

Agreement of objectives between line manager and employee is emphasised under the PDS procedures. A = Achievable and Agreed.

Individual factors such as time in the job, experience, knowledge and part time hours must be taken into account (para 2.2).

Oppose Unacceptable Objectives
All PCS members should oppose unacceptable work objectives. CMEC targets or generic objectives should not be automatically set as work objectives. Adjustments must be made to ensure equality of opportunity to achieve all performance levels.

New or more stretching objectives should not be backdated when objective setting takes place later in the year. Line managers and employees should agree objectives which support team work, are consistent with the SSMART criteria, and are fair and reasonable, unbiased and properly explained.

Stretching But Achievable
Stretching objectives are also qualified by the need to be achievable and agreed.

Numerical Targets
Numerical targets which are not within the employee’s personal control should be opposed. Objectives must be within the employee’s capability.

Attendance Objectives
PCS has argued against Attendance Management objectives being used, especially the use of numeric attendance targets. PDS Advice recognises that numeric targets are not within the active control of the individual and are therefore not necessarily achievable.

The recommended approach is to set objectives which require compliance with processes, application of policy and an understanding and commitment to meeting the overall targets (PDS Advice paras 7 and 8).

Team Work
Numerical targets should be qualified by the need for team work and recognise the individual is expected to make a contribution towards the achievement of a target. An example of an acceptable work objective would be: to accurately determine entitlement to new claims to benefit and to make an effective contribution towards the new claims clearance times of X days, as in the unit business plan.

Disability And Objectives
Disabled people must have objectives set which provide the same opportunity to meet or exceed objectives as any other employee. Reasonable adjustments must be made for their disability if that affects their performance (PDS Advice para 6).

Part Time Workers
Part time staff must have the time taken for learning, reading and keeping up to date etc. taken into account, for example, a member of staff working half the hours of a full time member of staff should expect to have objectives set at less than half that of the full timer to allow for these activities (PDS Advice para 4).

Individual Circumstances
Objectives must take into account levels of experience and knowledge, the possible effect of a recent job change or return from a lengthy absence from work (PDS Advice para 5).

Use Grievance Rights
Use the CMEC Grievance Procedures to oppose unacceptable work objectives (PDS Procedure 7.28).

Employees have a right to a grievance hearing and the right to be accompanied by a Trade Union Representative.

Grievances may include problems with objectives which are unachievable, not relevant, unfair or unreasonable

Changes to DWP Reasonable Adjustments Procedures

Pilots
Following the evaluation of pilots in the Yorkshire and the Humber Region and the London Head Office Estate the procedures for managing the assessment and provision of reasonable adjustments for staff with disabilities have changed from 1 April 2009. This bulletin summarises the changes and detailed guidance can be found on the DWP intranet under HR, Diversity and Equality, Reasonable Adjustments.

Problems with RA provision
Disabled staff and PCS reps will be aware of the difficulties experienced over the years where the procedures and contracts have been an obstacle to providing staff with acceptable, appropriate assessment and adjustments in a timely manner. PCS has often resorted to using employment tribunals in order to enable the provision of reasonable adjustments and the tribunals have been critical of DWP policies as an employer. This has put pressure on DWP in particular as it is the public body changed with enabling employers to help keep and get disabled staff into work. Managers have also expressed concern at the amount of special leave with pay they have had to fund during these unacceptable delays.

Reasonable Adjustments Specialist Team (RAST) service
All reasonable adjustment requests will now be managed by a central DWP team based in Sheffield. Line managers will be responsible for identifying those staff with disabilities that require adjustments but will now pass these (except where simple adjustments can be made by the manager) onto the RAST service to manage the process. This is a significant and welcome change as it removes all the restrictive criteria used in the pilots where for example only “severe, chronic and progressive cases” were passed onto the RAST service.

No changes to contracts
PCS have been consulted on these changes and hope to see an improvement in the provision of reasonable adjustments. However there are no changes to the contracting out of assessments (ATOS) and provision of furniture/equipment (Trillium) and IT equipment following the pilot. PCS are concerned about reports that the changes made to the ATOS/Trillium contracts last year, on how and who conducts workplace assessments have increased assessment and delivery times leading to yet further delays in provision. We are firmly committed to pursuing a policy of provision either by, or as good as our own (in house) staff from the Access to Work Teams in line with conference 2007 motion A227.

The changes to the management of RA provision outlined above will allow the RAST teams to progress and monitor provision in order to give them a clear picture on a national scale and feed this back into contract management in order to achieve any contractual changes required.

Advice for reps
These changes will impact on how PCS represent members going through this process, at present local mangers know who representatives are and can easily verify they have the authority to access documents on the members’ behalf. As the process will be managed remotely reps may have to get written authority from members in order to obtain this information, in particular internal notes not automatically given to members.

Reps should feed back any problems and requests for advice through their PCS branch equality rep or branch H&S officer who will in turn pass this to regional or group officers as appropriate.

National Pay – Treasury Pay Guidance Finally Issued.

The PCS DWP Group Executive Committee (GEC) has supplied the following information:

National Pay – Treasury Pay Guidance Finally Issued.

There have been serious delays by the Government in issuing new guidance on pay for this year, and PCS exerted maximum pressure about this over several weeks. The guidance was issued on 31st March 2009, but is unacceptable in not taking account of cuts in living standards that our members experienced in recent years. However, the guidance does conform to the agreement reached with the Government last December, by including the use of efficiency savings to improve pay awards. We can now test whether this results in more money reaching our members pay packets.

MP’s Get 2.3% Rise

Members will also have noticed that MP’s have voted themselves a 2.3% pay rise this year. We believe that if a 2.3% pay rise, on top of their generous allowances, is good enough for highly paid MP’s then it is the very least that hard working low paid civil servants deserve.

Fair Pay for All
More evidence continues to emerge to show how badly members in DWP fare compared to pay rises in other organisations. Even staff in Lloyds bank are being awarded an inflation busting pay increase, despite being one of the banks bailed out by the taxpayer.

PCS don’t begrudge anyone an inflation proof rise – it’s what we are fighting for. We just believe this is further evidence of how justified we are in continuing to argue for decent pay rises for all DWP members.

GEC Secures Early Pay Talks
Immediately after the pay remit was published, The GEC met with DWP management and secured agreement from them to hold meetings at the earliest possible time to discuss how we apply the pay remit guidance in DWP.

We have pressed for full access to the information on potential and actual efficiency savings in DWP that can be used to improve members’ pay. We have made it clear to management that we expect them to move ahead rapidly with this work.

PCS are currently working on the detail of the guidance to ensure that we are best placed to secure every single additional penny we can to improve members pay. While in those talks yesterday the BBC revealed another 3,000 job losses in the economy – emphasising how crucial DWP staff are at present.

As we approach the third year of the imposed three year pay offer, DWP management will have to work hard with us to secure the maximum amount of extra money from efficiency savings in order to get members the pay we all deserve.

Together we will win.

CMEC/CSA – Contract Breakers

The following has been supplied by PCS DWP Group:

Members working in CMEC/CSA will by now have been informed of the plans to break up contracts and impose new working patterns on individuals. This, as always, is being dressed up as ‘improving client service’.

Working Day Project
We have kept members up to date on this issue with management claiming the benchmarking exercise confirmed they had insufficient staff to cover after 5pm weekdays and on Saturdays. Recruitment exercises have not been successful in filling the gaps, particularly in the evening.

Proposal
Under the title ‘Proposed Business Change’ management want to impose changes on those members who have contracts outwith the management’s definition of the working day. This equates to roughly 1400 staff. They state they will “review” the contracts of people who are currently contracted to work outwith 8am – 8pm (Monday – Friday) and 8.36am to 5pm (Saturday) and then following this ‘review’ they propose to change contracts by 14 December 2009.

The Process
If your contract falls outside the ‘working day’ you are being offered continuous employment but on new terms. When PCS asked what if members failed to comply would they be sacked? We were informed CMEC didn’t want to get into that space.

That statement is an absolute outrage and must be treated with the contempt it deserves.

You will be invited to a 1:1 consultation where potentially pressure will be applied to members to change their contracts. Under no circumstances agree to consultation without a trade union representative and under no circumstances agree to any changes until further advice is given.

To our members who are managers involved in this process the same advice applies and that is that you should not be pressured to force members to agree to changes.

PCS Response
PCS has urged management not to follow this path. There are implications for members who receive Extended Working Hours Allowance which could result in a loss of pay. There are potential pension implications if members lose some hours and this also extends to EWHA which is pensionable. Many members work their current hours due to management request and/or round their domestic circumstances and this could lead to extra care costs and again potential loss of hours/salary.

Our initial legal advice is that contract changes must be agreed, either by the employee and employer or through collective bargaining. PCS has not reached a collective agreement. Further legal advice is being sought.

Once again CMEC/CSA management are trying to change terms and conditions with little thought for the impact this has on our members.

It will also raise a concern for many other members that CMEC may look to change contracts whenever they dream up a new business requirement.

As stated earlier members are advised to agree nothing until further advice is produced. This affects members in Corporate Services and CSA.