PCS Will Fight Every Threatened Office Closure in Jobcentre Plus

The following details have been supplied by the PCS DWP Group:

Under pressure from government ministers Jobcentre Plus have today announced plans to close 17 Benefit Centres (BC) and 5 Contact Centres (CC).

We have told the Jobcentre Plus Chief Executive that none of the closures are justified. This move is primarily driven by the government’s obsession with making unnecessary cuts in public spending with no regard for the needs of Jobcentre Plus customers. Disgracefully 14 of the offices earmarked for closure today are in areas which Jobcentre Plus accept have higher than average unemployment. PCS believes our offices need to be staffed up, not closed to deal with the sharp rises in unemployment now likely as a result of government spending cuts.

The offices named for closure are: Arbroath BC, Ayr BC, Broadstairs BC, Caerphilly CC, Cannock BC, Carlisle BC, Castleford BC, Chester BC, Clydebank CC, Exeter BC, Grimsby Europarc CC, Halifax BC, Hartlepool BC, Huyton BC, Lincoln BC, Liverpool John Moores CC, Luton BC, Mansfield BC, Preston CC, Sutton in Ashfield BC, Totton BC, Yeovil BC.

This amounts to a massive attack on Jobcentre Plus’ network of BCs and CCs. The closure of these 22 sites means the closure of 20% of all of Jobcentre Plus’ BCs and CCs. The jobs of the 2,400 staff who work in these offices are now clearly at risk. Management say they will try and make an offer of redeployment to another JCP office to all of the staff in the 22 offices. However they admit that these offers of redeployment may not be within the mobility of all of the staff affected.

Management’s intention is to close these offices within the next 12 months though there is no fixed date for any closure. The only exception to this is in respect of Carlisle BC and Hartlepool BC. Under pressure from PCS to halt all the closures management agreed to defer the proposed closure of these offices to 2012-13.

Campaign Plans
By the time you read this the PCS Group Executive Committee will have put a motion condemning this announcement to the Annual Delegate Conference of the DWP Group of the Union and will have held a meeting at Conference of delegates from the union branches containing the 22 sites to discuss campaigning to keep our offices open.

Arrangements have already been made to produce campaign materials including letters to MPs and press releases. A press release condemning this announcement has been issued and can be accessed through the PCS website.

Criteria for closures
Management have used a number of factors for selecting which offices they want to close. The factors used are;

• Cost of the premises (e.g. Rent, etc)
• Performance of the site, using their performance league tables of every BC and CC.
• The number of seats on each site (Generally sites with fewer than 200 seats have been selected to close)
• The ease with which staff at the site can be redeployed into other offices
• The impact on the local economy, including equality impacts and the rate of unemployment in the local economy.

Inconsistent application of the criteria
However the way that these factors have been applied is not consistent. For example in some cases offices with low costs, or with as record of high performance, or with more than 200 seats have still been chosen for closure. This exercise has exposed as a sham management’s propaganda that if staff at an office work hard and perform well then their offices will be safe from closure.

Re-Deployment Plans
Management intend to redeploy as many of the staff as possible into other JCP offices. Re-deployment options to other parts of DWP and other Government Departments will also be explored. However in certain sites the prospects of redeployment are very poor. Their intention is to consider offering voluntary exits in some locations at a later stage to those that they have been unable to re-deploy.

One to One Meetings
Management will be holding a 1 to 1 exercise with everyone on the 22 sites. The main purpose of this will be to understand what possibilities, and also what difficulties, there may be for redeploying staff. It is very important that members use this as an opportunity to put on record any factors that may impact on their mobility such as child care or health issues.

Compulsory redundancies?
Clearly an announcement like this makes the possibility of compulsory redundancies a very real threat to some of our members. It is an absolute priority for PCS that there should be no compulsory redundancies as a result of this announcement and we will do everything possible to ensure this does not happen. Jobcentre Plus has not given a guarantee of no compulsory redundancies. However they have committed themselves to take all possible steps to avoid redundancies and PCS will ensure that we hold them to this commitment. No one can be made redundant without first being offered a voluntary exit scheme.

Non-Jobcentre Plus members
There are a number of members on some of these sites who are not employed by Jobcentre Plus (E.g. Corporate Centre/PDCS/CMEC staff and also Trillium and BBW staff.) They will also be directly affected by this announcement. PCS will be contacting their management to ensure that they receive the same level of support and help as JCP staff.

Job Centres
Some of the sites share a building with a Job Centre. Job Centres that share a building with one of the offices due to close are not affected by this announcement and will not close as a result. Management are currently working separately on their plans for the future Job Centre network and expect to provide details of this within the next few weeks.

Conclusion
PCS is committed to fighting office closures, will campaign to keep all our offices open and will be encouraging members to get involved in their campaign locally. At the same time PCS will defend the interests of all members affected by this announcement and do everything possible to support them.

Benefit tests find sick fit to work

The following details have been supplied by the TUC:

People with serious illnesses are being found 'fit to work' under new sickness benefits tests, disability charities have warned. The MS Society, Parkinson's UK, National Aids Trust, Arthritis Care, the Forward-ME group and Crohn's and Colitis UK are calling for changes to make the test 'fairer' for people with illnesses where symptoms vary over time. The Work Capability Assessment (WCA), currently being used for first-time claimants, is being reviewed. The test is also in the process of being rolled out to the 2.6 million people already claiming disability benefits. Government figures indicate threequarters of new claimants are either found fit for work or abandon their claims. A pilot study which used WCA to reassess existing incapacity benefit claimants found 30 per cent fit for work. But 40 per cent of new claimants challenging their assessments win their appeals, which employment and disability campaigners says demonstrates the tests are unsatisfactory. The charities recommend 12 changes to the current WCA, including amending wording of the test to ask whether claimants can complete 'activities reliably, repeatedly and safely', 'within a reasonable amount of time', and 'without significant discomfort, breathlessness or fatigue'. The report also says the severity and frequency of symptoms should be taken into account by assessors. Simon Gillespie, chief executive of the MS Society, said: 'As charities, we have been inundated by concerns from people living with a long-term health condition who've wrongly been found fit to work. Many of them want to work, but may require extra support to do so. Ensuring that the assessment is fair and consistent is therefore a vital task.' Thousands took to the streets of London on 11 May to protest at disability and sickness benefit changes, including ESA and incapacity benefit-related cuts, which will leave many people with disabilities considerably worse off.

Campaigners protest at rights erosion

The following details have been supplied by the TUC:

Unions and campaigners joined forces this week to highlight the government's assault on health and safety legislation and enforcement. A 10 May lobby of parliament, organised by the GMB, heard union leaders warn about the impact of plans to cut life-saving legislation. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has already had its funding slashed and has announced most firms will no longer face any chance of unannounced safety inspections. Changes to the sickness benefit system will exacerbate the problem, unions and campaigns have warned, as will moves to make access to compensation harder after workers suffer an occupational injury or disease. The lobby came a day ahead of a government announcement that it intends to push through further measures to dilute or remove existing employment rights. Announcing the employment law review in a speech to the Institute of Directors annual convention, chancellor of the exchequer George Osborne said: 'My message today is straightforward - this coalition government is unequivocally pro-business.' He said the business lobby should not be 'passive observers' as 'for every regulation on business' there is 'a pressure group to defend it.' He said the government intended to boost 'enterprise' by addressing 'the costly impact of our employment laws and regulations.' However, independent studies in the UK and other developed economies have shown regulations do not damage the economy and in many instances can spur economic growth. Health and safety laws have been a top target of the business lobby, and are already the subject of a government-commissioned review, due to report in the autumn. Employment minister Chris Grayling, launching the review last month, said: 'By rooting out needless bureaucracy we can encourage businesses to prosper and boost our economy.'

Official review aims to help business

The following details have been supplied by the TUC:

A health and safety review to be completed by the autumn will look at 'easing unnecessary burdens on business.' The terms of reference of the government commission review, to be led by industry-favourite Professor Ragnar Löfstedt of the King's Centre for Risk Management at King's College, London, were published on 20 April. The government says the initiative 'is part of package of changes to Britain's health and safety system to support the government's growth agenda and cut red tape.' These changes include slashing HSE's budget, dramatically decreasing the number of HSE inspections and exempting most businesses from any safety inspections at all. Commenting on the review, employment minister Chris Grayling said: 'By rooting out needless bureaucracy we can encourage businesses to prosper and boost our economy.' Professor Löfstedt's advisory panel includes three MPs, one from each from the main parties, two representatives of industry bodies and just one union voice, Sarah Veale from the TUC. The review will 'explore the scope for consolidating, simplifying or abolishing regulations', but will also 'examine whether a clear link exists between regulation and positive health and safety performance' and will consider if 'lessons can be learned from comparison with health and safety regimes in other countries.' However, none of the 16 Acts 'owned and enforced' by HSE fall under the review team's remit, including the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 - the big daddy of all workplace safety law - and the Health and Safety (Offences) Act 2008. One of the two employer reps on the panel is Dr Adam Marshall of the British Chambers of Commerce (BCC). BCC is an avowed opponent of health and safety regulation that has been accused of using 'rigged statistics' together with 'deadly omissions and gobsmacking lies' in its arguments against safety laws. The Löfstedt review is expected to report in the autumn.

Informal meetings for attendance management changes and PCS support for Members

The following details have been supplied by the PCS DWP Group:

Managing change informally
DWP expects managers to have informal meetings with employees who are not disabled but have an underlying health condition.

Any separate or raised consideration point which has been awarded to take account of absences related to the underlying health condition will not apply from 11th April 2011.

Line managers are expected to discuss with employees what this change means for them, bearing in mind that employees cannot retrospectively change their attendance records, and how employees can be supported to help them meet the new attendance standard. The Complex Cases Advisory Service (CCAS) will give instruction on managing the transition.

PCS support for members
There is a long established approach for informal meetings related to sickness absence and attendance management which is that, as such meetings are supposed to be supportive, where a member wants a trade union representative or colleague present such requests should not be refused.

The DWP Desk Aide for informal Welcome Back Discussions, for example, states that:

The employee may be accompanied by a colleague or Trade Union Representative if they wish.

The Employee Policy Liaison Team has recently contacted the Head of CCAS "to emphasise that while such meetings are informal, they should be handled much the same way as the Welcome Back Discussion. If the employee wants to bring a TU rep, this should not be prevented.”

Informal and supportive
DWP expects managers to come to a view about disability, based on readily available information and a simple “balance of probability” consideration which takes into account:

• Whether the employee thinks they are disabled;
• The criteria summarized in Attendance Management Advice Q&A 7 and what the employee says about these;
• Any readily available information, including medical evidence, the employee is able easily to provide.

DWP advises that it is permissible to err on the side of leniency and, having tested the grounds of the employee’s self-declaration of disability in conversation, to accept that they probably are disabled. Where a relatively small amount of additional sickness is involved, this might be preferable to instigating a formal occupational health investigation and provoking conflict.

Official review aims to help business

The following details have been supplied by the TUC: 

A health and safety review to be completed by the autumn will look at 'easing unnecessary burdens on business.' The terms of reference of the government commission review, to be led by industry-favourite Professor Ragnar Löfstedt of the King's Centre for Risk Management at King's College, London, were published on 20 April. The government says the initiative 'is part of package of changes to Britain's health and safety system to support the government's growth agenda and cut red tape.' These changes include slashing HSE's budget, dramatically decreasing the number of HSE inspections and exempting most businesses from any safety inspections at all. Commenting on the review, employment minister Chris Grayling said: 'By rooting out needless bureaucracy we can encourage businesses to prosper and boost our economy.' Professor Löfstedt's advisory panel includes three MPs, one from each from the main parties, two representatives of industry bodies and just one union voice, Sarah Veale from the TUC. The review will 'explore the scope for consolidating, simplifying or abolishing regulations', but will also 'examine whether a clear link exists between regulation and positive health and safety performance' and will consider if 'lessons can be learned from comparison with health and safety regimes in other countries.' However, none of the 16 Acts 'owned and enforced' by HSE fall under the review team's remit, including the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 - the big daddy of all workplace safety law - and the Health and Safety (Offences) Act 2008. One of the two employer reps on the panel is Dr Adam Marshall of the British Chambers of Commerce (BCC). BCC is an avowed opponent of health and safety regulation that has been accused of using 'rigged statistics' together with 'deadly omissions and gobsmacking lies' in its arguments against safety laws. The Löfstedt review is expected to report in the autumn.

From Gross Misconduct to Minor Misconduct

The following details have been supplied by the PCS DWP Group:

Information Security – from gross misconduct to minor misconduct - DWP disciplinary changes 11th May 2011

Disciplinary policy changes
DWP has accepted concerns raised by PCS about unfair disciplinary action. Changes to DWP Disciplinary Policy, Procedures and Advice will be introduced from May 11th 2011.

These changes meet the objective agreed in 2010 Conference Policy A120 to clarify the distinction between simple human error and deliberate misconduct.

Minor misconduct policy introduced
DWP Discipline Policy paragraph 13.1, on Minor Misconduct, has been revised to include some breaches of information security that are accidental, genuine errors where reasonable care was taken and where there is no criminal act; no known harm or distress caused; and no reputational damage or significant financial cost to the Department

Disciplinary procedure revised
DWP Disciplinary Procedure paragraph 17, on breaches of information security, has been revised. The revised procedure confirms that:

The manager must consider the circumstances of the case, whether there was any intent or known harm caused, the extent to which the individual’s actions caused or exacerbated the incident and take disciplinary action in line with policy.[17.1]

Failure to comply with the policies on information security is serious. The level of misconduct depends on the full circumstances of the case, such as the nature of the offence, intent and the potential or known harm from disclosure. [17.2]

Disciplinary Procedure 17.3 confirms that minor misconduct action may be appropriate for information security breaches in cases where:

• The incident does not constitute a criminal act;
• The act was the result of a genuine error and there is no deliberate, malicious or suspicious intent;
• There is no known harm or distress caused to any party;
• There is no reputational damage; and
• This is not a linking offence – the employee does not already have another live warning in place at the time the breach was identified.

Action on current cases and warnings
DWP will not agree retrospective action but does accept that the changes will have immediate effect on current decision making including appeals. Also, members under a live two year Final Written Warning, for an offence which would be treated as minor misconduct from 11th May 2011, will have the warning ended when it has reached 12 months.

Workers stand up for safety rights

The following details have been supplied by the TUC:

More than one hundred events involving thousands of workers took place around Britain to commemorate Workers' Memorial Day. The 28 April event also saw record numbers around the world participate, with over 60 countries having already filed reports. Commemorations were also held throughout England, Scotland and Wales, with well attended events in towns and cities including Bradford, Bristol, Coventry, Wolverhampton, Keighley, Goole, Immingham, Sheffield, Telford, Manchester, Liverpool, Sunderland, Durham, Hartlepool, London, Edinburgh, Glasgow and Cardiff. Unions and campaigners held protests, rallies, marches, wreath-laying ceremonies and observed a minute's silence to mark the event. Unite general secretary Len McCluskey commented: 'As the coalition's cuts to people's living standards become a grim reality and the wave of public sector job losses ebb into homes throughout Britain, never has it been more important to celebrate International Workers' Memorial Day and the achievements hard won over the last century for working people.' UNISON's general secretary, Dave Prentis, who participated in a minute's silence at midday, said: 'The government's cuts will cost lives. Too many workers are still suffering because of workplace injuries, yet the government is adding to the risks by piling pressure on staff and enforcement agencies.' Grahame Smith, STUC general secretary, said 'we face a huge challenge as budgetary cuts imposed on the HSE by the coalition government will mean less proactive enforcement will, we believe lead to more accidents, greater risk of exposure to dangerous substances such as asbestos and more incidences of occupational ill health.' GMB general secretary Paul Kenny said: 'The road to recognition of Workers' Memorial Day is paved with the broken bones, the blood, shattered lives and premature deaths of thousands of working people.'

NEC elections results 2011

The independent scrutineers' report on voting in the above elections, which closed at 12 noon on Thursday 5th May 2011, is as follows:

President

Number of eligible voters: 271,215
Votes cast by post: 29,399
Total number of votes cast: 29,399
Turnout: 10.8%
Number of votes found to be invalid: 583
Total number of valid votes to be counted: 28,816

Result (1 to elect)
GODRICH, Janice (Department for Work & Pensions) 16,246 Elected
BREEN, Diane (Department for Work & Pensions) 8,346
MOLONEY, John (Department for Transport) 4,224



Deputy President & Vice-Presidents

Number of eligible voters: 271,215
Votes cast by post: 29,399
Total number of votes cast: 29,399
Turnout: 10.8%
Number of votes found to be invalid: 696
Total number of valid votes to be counted: 28,703

Result (4 to elect)
The count was conducted in accordance with the constraints set out in Principal Rule 10A of the Union.

BEAN, Dave (HM Revenue & Customs) 15,485 Elected
McINALLY, John (Department for Work & Pensions) 14,596 Elected
BROWN, Paula (Health & Safety Executive) 13,361 Elected
BOND, Sue (Equality & Human Rights Commission) 13,328 Elected
BRYSON, Rob (Department for Work & Pensions) 11,802
FRANKLAND-BARBER, Lynda (HM Revenue & Customs) 10,552
WEST, Rod (D.B.I.S.) 8,217
CAMPBELL, Moira (Child Maintenance Enforcement Comm) 8,077
BROWNE, Marjorie (Department for Work & Pensions) 7,338


Ordinary Members

Number of eligible voters: 271,215
Votes cast by post: 29,399
Total number of votes cast: 29,399
Turnout: 10.8%
Number of votes found to be invalid: 576
Total number of valid votes to be counted: 28,823

Result (30 to elect)
The count was conducted in accordance with the constraints set out in Principal Rule 10A of the Union.

MERRY, Lorna (HM Revenue & Customs) 13,311 Elected
McHUGH, Kevin (HM Revenue & Customs) 12,515 Elected
McFADDEN, Dominic (HM Revenue & Customs) 12,483 Elected
WESLEY, Hector (HM Revenue & Customs) 12,439 Elected
HALL, Sam (Department for Work & Pensions) 12,268 Elected
FERGUSON, Mary (Department for Work & Pensions) 12,182 Elected
KELLY, Emily (Land Registry) 12,170 Elected
REID, Andy (HM Revenue & Customs) 12,139 Elected
ALBERT, Ian (Department for Work & Pensions) 12,008 Elected
GEDLING, Cheryl (Scottish Government) 11,954 Elected
LICENSE, Neil (HM Revenue & Customs) 11,724 Elected
WILLIAMS, Rob (Department for Work & Pensions) 11,704 Elected
GREEN, Jackie (Ministry of Justice) 11,629 Elected
BROWN, Alan (Department for Work & Pensions) 11,597 Elected
COMER, Steve (UK Border Agency) 11,452 Elected
MORRISON, Chris (Cap Gemini UK plc) 11,401 Elected
DENNIS, Alan (Ministry of Defence) 11,284 Elected
CHILDS, Eddie (Ministry of Justice) 11,264 Elected
THOMSON, Derek (Department for Work & Pensions) 11,234 Elected
HEYES, Joel (UK Border Agency) 11,218 Elected
KHALIF, Adam (Department for Work & Pensions) 11,016 Elected
HOLBOURNE, Zita (ACAS) 10,943 Elected
GREENWAY, Kevin (Ministry of Justice) 10,905 Elected
LLOYD, Marion (D.B.I.S.) 10,845 Elected
BREEN, Diane (Department for Work & Pensions) 10,546 Elected
BAKER, Mark (Planning Inspectorate) 10,484 Elected
WILDE, Jake (HM Revenue & Customs) 10,377 Elected
BRYSON, Rob (Department for Work & Pensions) 10,318*
JAMIESON, John (Registers of Scotland) 10,313 Elected
DERBYSHIRE, Michael (Ministry of Justice) 10,310 Elected
WILLIAMS, Paul (Driving Standards Agency) 10,269 Elected
FRANKLAND-BARBER, Lynda (HM Revenue & Customs) 10,154
RICHARDS, David (Child Maintenance Enforcement Comm.) 10,022
COLLIS, Simon (HM Revenue & Customs) 10,009
SIDDALL-BUTCHERS, Glenn Richard (Ministry of Justice) 9,545
KIRKPATRICK, Robert (HM Revenue & Customs) 9,479
MAGEE, Andy (HM Revenue & Customs) 9,311
BARROWCLOUGH, Rachel (Department for Work & Pensions) 8,987
GALLIGAN, Christine (Department for Work & Pensions) 8,968
DODD, Owen (UK Border Agency) 8,751
KURUP, Ravi (HM Revenue & Customs) 8,719
McGOWAN, John (Department for Work & Pensions) 8,482
KANG, Gurmit (Department for Work & Pensions) 8,250
COVINGTON, Mary (D.B.I.S.) 8,193
SAMUEL, Willie (Department for Work & Pensions) 8,159
HASKINGS, James (Cabinet Office) 7,764
FULLER, Howard (Department for Work & Pensions) 7,716
LORD, Christopher (D.B.I.S.) 7,514
COX, Joe (Child Maintenance Enforcement Commission) 7,445
WRIGHT, Annette (Department for Work & Pensions) 7,404
HUNTER, David (Scottish Government) 7,323
REYNOLDS, James (D.B.I.S.) 7,070
GIESCHEN, Hubert (Environment, Food & Rural Affairs) 6,968
WEST, Rod (D.B.I.S) 6,809HUNTER, Peter (HM Revenue & Customs) 6,748
LAIDLAW, Bev (Department for Work & Pensions) 6,595
RAFTERY, Theresa (Department for Work & Pensions) 6,160
CATTEN, Sue (Department for Work & Pensions) 5,937
MOLONEY, John (Department for Transport) 5,913
MORRISON, Geraldine (D.F.I.D.) 5,879
HULME, Christine (Department for Work & Pensions) 5,806
BIRD, Nick (Department for Work & Pensions) 5,409
SHARPLES, John (HM Revenue & Customs) 5,247
LYONS, Gerry (HM Revenue & Customs) 4,982
PALMER, Carol (Metropolitan Police Service) 4,596
CHAPMAN, Mike (Metropolitan Police Service) 4,502
JOHNSON, Karen (D.C.L.G.) 4,397
REAY, Tony (Department for Work & Pensions) 4,192
OKONKWO, Damian (Metropolitan Police Service) 4,171
RAINE, Jamie (Department for Work & Pensions) 4,085
HICKEY, Christopher (D.C.L.G.) 3,856
MEGONE, Tim (Treasury Solicitors Department) 3,426
WELLS, Matt (Environment, Food & Rural Affairs) 3,381
PEARSON, John (HP Enterprise Services) 3,367
VINCENT, Dave (Ministry of Justice) 3,328
GALSTAUN, Kevin (Metropolitan Police Service) 3,082
RIGBY, Mike (Metropolitan Police Service) 2,768
SHEIKH, Imran (Metropolitan Police Service) 2,645

* not elected due to limit of eight elected candidates from any one employer.

National Conference Motions

The PCS National Conference Motion Booklet has been issued. It can be found here.

A Message from the DWP Group President - in a personal capacity.

The DWP Group President (Jane Aitchison) has taken the time to write to the Fylde branch in a personal capacity to ask our members for their support for the GEC elections currently running.

The letter she sent can be found here.

The Branch has AGM agreement to support her candidacy.

DWP Attendance Management and disabled employees from April 11th 2011

The following details have been supplied by PCS DWP Group:

Disabled Employee’s Consideration Point
Managers in DWP are expected to award an increased Consideration Point for disability related absences under the Attendance Management changes introduced on April 11th.

DWP has introduced a new Reasonable Adjustment Policy under Attendance Management Policy paragraph 10, a new procedural requirement under Attendance Management Procedure 2.3 and a new Attendance Management Advice Q&A 7.

The policy intent is for a broad, inclusive approach to be adopted by managers when deciding to award a Disabled Employee’s Consideration Point (DECP). Managers are expected to:

• Increase the consideration point to take account of absences related to disability (Policy 10)
• Promote the continued employment of disabled employees (Procedure 2.3)
• Safeguard the future employment of disabled employees ( Advice Q&A 7)

Managers are advised under Advice Q&A 7 to form a view (informally and reasonably quickly, on the balance of probability, using available information) on whether the employee is or is likely to be disabled.

Managers are not expected to initiate formal assessments to form that view and should normally accept a diagnosis by the employee’s GP if it is available, previous OHS advice or any other readily available record or source.

PCS Guidance for Managers 01/11 PCS Guidance for Managers 01/11 has been issued as Branch Briefing DWP/BB/052/11 and should be copied to all managers with attendance management responsibilities.

DWP wants managers to form a view informally, using available information, such as OHS Reports, Doctors diagnosis or the criteria listed in Q&A 7, that the employee is, or is likely to be disabled for the purpose of awarding the Disabled Employee’s Consideration Point. Only where it is impossible to do so using the information to hand should Employee Services or the OHS be contacted for help. Some medical conditions (HIV, cancer and multiple sclerosis) are automatically considered to be disabilities from the point of diagnosis PCS has also provided a list of examples of disabilities in Guidance for Managers 01/11 which are taken from the LRD Booklet on the Equality Act 2010.

Policy, Equality and Law
Managers are expected to form a view informally and should take a broad, inclusive approach so that there is no question of a case arising under the Equality Act for redress at an Employment Tribunal.

Managers are also expected to discuss the level of the DECP with the employee (Advice Q&A 8) who may have a PCS Representative, or colleague, at such a meeting as a formal decision is being considered at this discussion.

Don't Scrap Environment Laws - 38 Degrees

The following has been received from the 38 degrees team:

Nearly 40,000 people have now signed the petition against government plans to scrap key protections for wildlife, the environment and the countryside. Pressure is building fast!

It's only two weeks since the Guardian newspaper first revealed this new threat to wildlife and the environment. [1] As well as our big people-powered petition, more and more organisations are speaking out– including the RSPB, Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace. [2]

Keep the pressure building.

Can you help get the petition to 50,000 this weekend by asking your friends to sign?

http://www.38degrees.org.uk/dont-scrap-environment-laws

The government has branded protection for the conservation, wildlife and countryside as "red tape". [3] That means, without public outcry, we could see laws scrapped that:

• protect wild birds, their nests and eggs
• protect national parks and footpaths
• prevent smog and air pollution
• protect footpaths and access to the countryside
• keep the government on track with tackling climate change

The government consultation makes it clear: "the default presumption is that burdensome regulations will go". [4] So we need to speak up!

Let's get more names on this petition, and prove that the British public don't think it's "red tape" to be looking after our countryside, wildlife and environment.

We know that when we work together we can stop plans which could hurt wildlife. When the government decided to try to sell off England's forests, over half a million of us got together and convinced them to drop their plans. [5] Now let's do the same to save crucial protection for wildlife, the countryside and the environment.

Thanks for being involved,

David, Hannah, Johnny and the 38 Degrees team



PS: The laws under threat in the government's "red tape challenge" include the Climate Change Act, National Parks Act, Clean Air Act and the Wildlife and Countryside Act. Do these sound like "red tape" to you? Please add your name and tell the government that protecting our countryside and our planet should be a priority.

References:

[1] Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/apr/17/environment-green-laws-red-tape

[2] See: http://www.foe.co.uk/green_blog/lifes_let_downs_30429.html
 http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/blog/climate/tell-cameron-and-clegg-save-uks-green-laws-20110427

http://campaigning.rspb.org.uk/ea-campaign/clientcampaign.do?ea.client.id=13&ea.campaign.id=10410

[3] http://www.redtapechallenge.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/environment/

See also: http://blog.38degrees.org.uk/2011/04/20/sign-the-petition-dont-scrap-green-laws/

[4] http://www.redtapechallenge.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/about/

[5] 38 Degrees - “Victory! Government to scrap plans to sell our forests” http://blog.38degrees.org.uk/2011/02/17/victory-government-to-scrap-plans-to-sell-our-forests/

Blackpool Against the Cuts

The following message has been recieved from the Blackpool Against the Cuts campaign:

Thank you to those who came to the Blackpool Against Cuts open meeting on 15th April – it was a great success.

Upcoming meetings are as follows:

26th April 2011 at 7pm – Blackpool Against Cuts Committee.

Trades Club, 7 Chadwick Street, Blackpool, Lancashire FY1 5EJ

(meeting moves into full trades council executive and aims to finish by 7.30pm).

2nd May 2011 – Town Centre Demo (details to be confirmed).

Can members note that the Blackpool Against Cuts committee also covers the wider Fylde – any member with ideas for events outside of Blackpool please bring them to one of the upcoming meetings meeting or give them to your local Branch to pass on to us.

Please note that Blackpool Against Cuts has a Facebook page which can be found here.

Impending tax changes on redundancy payments

The following details have been supplied by PCS:

Colleagues have been contacted by members who have heard of the impending tax changes on redundancy payments via the BBC and other media. PCS have been lobbying the civil service and others to oppose this technical adjustment that will mean in practice members who are basic rate tax payers paying higher rates of tax on their redundancy payments and having to claim back the difference. PCS officials cannot give individual financial advice but can encourage members to check their redundancy payments and contact the HMRC on advice about claiming back overpayments where appropriate.

The following paragraphs and attached advice has been received from HMRC in relation to redundancy payments in the civil service:

• Instead of tax code Basic Rate (BR) being operated on all CSCS severance/redundancy payments (20% flat rate tax deduction in excess of the first £30,000), from 6 April Capita are required by the new PAYE regulations to operate tax code 0T (Zero T) Month 1 (on a non-cumulative basis).
• Code 0T Month 1 has the effect of applying not only BR tax of 20%, but for severance/redundancy payments in excess of £32,917 the Higher Rate (HR) of 40% will be applied. In addition, depending on the amount, the Additional Rate (AR) of 50% may also be applied.
• The changes are a result of amendments to the PAYE Regulations and are designed to ensure more taxpayers pay the right amount of tax at the right time.
• Any individuals who initially pay too much tax (for example a Basic Rate taxpayer) will be able to submit a repayment claim immediately by providing details of the payments and the tax paid to HMRC.
• Examples of how this new tax code will work in practice for CSCS severance/redundancy payments, are contained within the attached Executive Summary for illustration purposes.

Injury victims face 'ever tightening screw'

The following details have been supplied by the TUC:

Injured people face an 'ever tightening screw', the head of a top legal body has warned. David Bott, the new president of the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL), told the organisation's annual conference this week that it is 'plain wrong' for injury victims to take a cut of up to 25 per cent of their compensation to meet some legal costs. Commenting on legal reforms introduced by justice secretary Ken Clarke, he told delegates: 'Claimants have not chosen to litigate. They did not arrive at the decision after a cost-benefit analysis. They were injured and rightly expect redress. All that they want, and all that the law can give them, is to get back to where they were before the injury.' He added the government reforms are 'literally adding insult to injury. APIL will work with as many claimant bodies as possible to try to get the voice of injured people, the voice of ordinary people, the voice of the voting public, heard.' When the reforms were announced earlier this month, TUC general secretary Brendan Barber said: 'This review has nothing to do with justice, it is simply lining the pockets of insurers at the expense of claimants seeking compensation for injuries caused by the negligence of others. This is yet another attempt to reduce the rights of those at work to secure justice when employers break the law.'

Duncan Smith should apologise for sick 'spin'

The following details have been supplied by the TUC:

Work and pensions secretary Iain Duncan Smith should apologise for his 'outrageous spin' after it was revealed some jobcentre staff had been being forced to stop people's benefits to meet targets, civil service union PCS has said. The union's general secretary, Mark Serwotka, said: 'When this story broke Mr Duncan Smith described it as 'claptrap' and a 'conspiracy', but faced with the overwhelming evidence that these targets are still in place, his department has been forced to backtrack.' Commenting on the cabinet minister's claims to Sky News on Sunday 3 April, the union leader said: 'The secretary of state should issue a full and public apology for what was a piece of outrageous spin when he must have known what was happening. When MPs return from their Easter break, he should also be asked to explain to parliament why he tried to mislead the public in his TV interview. We fundamentally oppose the use of targets for welfare sanctions and we call on the Department for Work and Pensions to put an immediate stop to this abuse of the system.' Following an investigation by the Guardian newspaper, DWP last week backtracked and released a statement confirming the practice had been going on in some offices. It said this was due to a misunderstanding between the department and some jobcentre managers and insisted the practice had now stopped. 'A few weeks ago ministers discovered that their message to be clearer about conditionality had been misinterpreted by a small number of Jobcentre Plus offices who had imposed targets for the number of sanction referrals. These targets were immediately removed,' the statement said. 'We are clear that there is no wrong or right level of how many sanctions an office should make and they should only be made where people have not adhered to their jobseeker obligations. We have already taken rapid steps to reinforce this message to our staff. Ministers would not countenance any target for sanctioning customers.'

DWP Group Elections – Ballot Starts on 20th April 2011

The Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS) Fylde Central Benefits and Services Branch recommends that you vote for the following candidates for officers in the PCS DWP Group Executive Elections 2011:

Group President:
Jane Aitchison


Vice President (5):
Alan Brown, Martin Cavanagh, John McInally, Laura Martin, Katrine Williams


Asst Secretaries (7):
Paul Barton, David Burke, Christine Cuthbert, Sam Hall, Tom Penn, Dave Richards, Rob Williams


Organiser:
Fran Heathcote


Treasurer:
Bashir Chilwan


Journal Editor:
Alan Smith


Committee (21):
Dave Alston, Marie McDonough, Ian Bartholomew, Dave Owens, Alison Carass, Ian Page, Jason Ferraby, Ian Pope, Helen Flanagan, Carol Revell, Jimmy Gill, Sarah Robinson, Janice Godrich, Annette Rochester, Sharon Green, Sian Ruddick, Gavin Hartley, Derek Thomson, Martin Jones, Steve West, Adam Khalif.

Treasurer:
Bashir Chilwan


Journal Editor:
Alan Smith


Committee (21):
Dave Alston, Marie McDonough, Ian Bartholomew, Dave Owens, Alison Carass, Ian Page, Jason Ferraby, Ian Pope, Helen Flanagan, Carol Revell, Jimmy Gill, Sarah Robinson, Janice Godrich, Annette Rochester, Sharon Green, Sian Ruddick, Gavin Hartley, Derek Thomson, Martin Jones, Steve West, Adam Khalif.

Blackpool Against Cuts - Public Meeting

The Blackpool Against Cuts Committee are holding their first Public Meeting, where key speakers will address attendees on the devastating cuts being inflicted upon the Blackpool and Fylde Community by the Con’Dem Government.

Date: 15th April 2011

Time: 7.30pm

Location: St. Kentigern’s Parish Centre, Newton Drive, Blackpool.

 

Confirmed Speakers:

• Gordon Marsden MP
• Councillor Simon Blackburn (Leader of Blackpool Labour Group)
• Matthew Brown (Preston City Council)
• Tyrone Wassell (President of Blackpool & Fylde Student Union for Further Education)
• Steve Holmes (Unison Branch Secretary)
• Others TBC

The venue is licensed and the bar will be available.

Incapacity benefit crackdown begins

The following details have been supplied by the TUC:

Unions and disability groups have warned a nationwide crackdown on incapacity benefit claimants will leave vulnerable people in danger. The one-and-a-half million people who claim incapacity benefit started to receive letters this week requiring them to be tested on their ability to work. The new assessments, which we take place at a rate of 10,000 every week, are part of government plans to reduce the number of long-term claimants in a rolling programme through to 2014. Those deemed unable to work because of sickness or disability will be entitled to the highest rate of employment and support allowance (ESA), and will not be expected to look for work. A middle section - those who have been long-term unemployed but judged capable of doing some form of work - will receive benefits, but be placed in a 'work-related activity group'. The remainder would lose disability-related benefits. Unions and campaigners have warned repeatedly the work capability assessments (WCA) on which decisions are made are rushed and flawed. STUC general secretary Grahame Smith said: 'The government is pushing ahead with plans to subject tens of thousands of people to work capability assessments, a process that is deeply flawed, is operated in draconian fashion and places many thousands of vulnerable people in danger.' These concerns were echoed by disability groups. Richard Hawkes, chief executive of Scope, commented: 'The government's fitness for work test provides no information on the barriers that prevent individuals' moving into work, making it highly likely that they end up on the wrong benefit and unable to access to help they need. The high number of successful appeals against WCA decisions further underlines its inadequacy.'

HSE's no longer all about safety

The following details have been supplied by the TUC:

The Health and Safety Executive is moving away from a dedicated mission seeking 'the prevention of death, injury and ill health to those at work and those affected by work activities' and adopting a new plan that also aims to 'enable innovation that brings economic growth'. In a preamble to its new work plan, HSE chair Judith Hackitt says the changes have been driven by the government's new safety strategy. This has slashed HSE's budget, down from £227.7m in 2009/10 to £198.7m by 2011/12, and demanded a dramatic cutback in inspection activity. The HSE chair notes: 'Change is never easy, but standing still is not an option.' In response to the new government safety strategy, Hackitt says HSE's Delivery Plan for 1 April 2011 to 31 March 2012 outlines the steps the safety watchdog will take to 'enable innovation that brings economic growth while ensuring that risks are managed properly and proportionately'. The plans are grouped under four main headings: Transforming our approach; Avoiding catastrophe; Clarifying ownership of risk and improving compliance; and Securing justice. Critics say there's plenty of government departments and agencies promoting business innovation and growth, but only one intended to have protecting the life and limb of the workforce as its sole concern.

Hope Not Hate - Big Day of Action

The local Hope Not Hate (HNH) organiser in Burnley has contacted the Branch with news that the BNP is standing seven candidates in their area.

The BNP has announced it will contest wards right across Burnley, including one where the party is defending a seat.

HNH have been working hard over the past few months on the ground in Burnley building a campaign against the BNP in the community. But they need help to make sure they see off the BNP.

Can you help on Saturday 16 April?

They were stopped from winning in the by-election in February, and they can be stopped from winning in the local elections in less than a month’s time.

Join Hope Not Hate at:

St Mark’s Church Hall
Rossendale Road
Burnley BB11 5DQ

People don’t want the BNP dividing their community, bringing its hatred, violence and cruelty to the town. So if you agree, go and help them send the BNP packing once and for all.

You can sign up to show your support here.

PCS opposes unfair, unethical and unacceptable change:

The following details have been supplied by PCS HQ:

Attendance Management Cutback
DWP has decided to impose an Attendance Management policy change, from 11 April 2011, so that managers will have a duty to increase Consideration Points only for disabled employees. This means that increased consideration points for any employees who are not disabled will be withdrawn.

This change is supported by an Equality Impact Assessment, Transitional Arrangements and Complex Case Advisory Service Advice but has been opposed by PCS which has not agreed the change.

PCS will continue to oppose this change in principle and in practice. This change is unfair, unethical and unacceptable and will inevitably bring DWP into disrepute.

It is fundamentally wrong that employees with a health condition will be expected to meet the same 8 day attendance standard as other employees.

Disabled people are exempt from this change.

Post-go live, outcomes will be monitored by DWP to ensure this and to detect any unintended, disproportionate impacts on other diversity groups.

Transitional Arrangements Apply
Non-disabled employees – including those who formerly had access to increased consideration points – will be informed by a general communication that they will be required to meet the 8-days standard from the point of change. A line will be drawn under illnesses formerly accrued against their previous separate consideration point and that consideration point will no longer apply.

Where an employee takes further sick leave, having already accrued sickness absence against the normal 8-days consideration point in the current rolling year, the manager will be required to contact the Complex Case Advisory Service (CCAS) for Advice before deciding an appropriate course of action. As regards warnings, CCAS will advise managers to be tolerant to a level not exceeding the number of days already accrued against the 8-days consideration point.

Openness and Transparency
DWP will publish the Equality Impact Assessment but not the CCAS Advice or Transitional Arrangements. In the interest of transparency PCS will publish all 3 documents.

NEC Elections Ballot - Thursday 14th April

The Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS) Fylde Central Benefits and Services Branch recommends that you vote for the following candidates in the PCS National Executive Committee Elections 2011 (which start on the 14th of April):

President
Janice Godrich

Deputy/Vice Presidents (4 of)
Dave Bean, Sue Bond, Paula Brown, John McInally

NEC General
Ian Albert, Mark Baker, Alan Brown, Eddie Childs, Steve Comer, Alan Dennis, Mike Derbyshire, Mary Ferguson, Cheryl Gedling, Jackie Green, Kevin Greenway, Sam Hall, Joel Heyes, Zita Holbourne, John Jamieson, Emily Kelly, Adam Khalif, Neil License, Marion Lloyd, Dominic McFadden, Kevin McHugh, Lorna Merry, Chris Morrison, Andy Reid, Dave Richards, Glenn Siddall-Butcher, Derek Thomson, Hector Wesley, Paul Williams, Rob Williams.

All Together for the NHS

The Government is imposing huge changes on the NHS. These plans – set out in the Health and Social Care Bill currently going through Parliament – will change our National Health Service beyond recognition.

The speed and scale of these changes is massive. Patients and staff will be the losers. They will mean big cuts in health spending.

Before the election David Cameron said: "I will cut the deficit, not the NHS" yet the cost of this reorganisation could be up to £3 billion. At the same time the government is demanding £20 billion in "efficiency savings" which only ministers believe can be achieved without affecting patients. This is being taken from patient care and leading to job losses (including clinical staff) across the NHS. Waiting times are already on the increase.

• Opening up the NHS to private profit. The Health Bill opens up the prospect of far more NHS services being organised and delivered by private companies. Taxpayers’ money destined for NHS patients will be diverted into shareholder profits.
• NHS patients will be pushed to the back of the queue. The Bill takes the cap off the amount hospitals can earn from private patients – so NHS patients risk being pushed to the back of the queue for care.
• It means competition, not co-operation. The Government wants to run the NHS through competition between different health providers and market forces. Bureaucracy, lawyers and contracts will replace co-operation and joint planning.
• It will create a huge postcode lottery. Under the proposals, the care patients can expect will vary from place to place, increasing costs and health inequalities and hurting vulnerable people the most.
• No-one voted for this: before the election we were told there would be no more top-down reorganisations of the NHS. Now the health service faces the biggest upheaval since its creation – so big that NHS Chief Executive David Nicholson said they could be “seen from space”.
• The NHS is working: Public satisfaction with the NHS is at an all-time high. Doctors, nurses, midwives, support staff, patients groups and more have all spoken out about the dangers of these changes.

All Together for the NHS is a joint campaign co-ordinated by the TUC, bringing together unions and campaigners from across the health sector.

Government to rob injury victims of justice

Government changes to the compensation system will deny thousands of sick and injured workers access to justice, unions and legal experts have warned. Justice Secretary Ken Clarke told the Commons this week that lawyers would no longer be able to claim 'success fees' from the losing side, and should instead receive a share of the damages. 'We are trying to deliver a civil justice system which is more equitable, accessible and just,' Mr Clarke told MPs. The government says it hopes the changes will act as a disincentive to anyone bringing 'spurious cases'. The proposals follow a review carried out by Lord Justice Jackson in 2010 at the request of the previous government. But TUC general secretary Brendan Barber said: 'This review has nothing to do with justice, it is simply lining the pockets of insurers at the expense of claimants seeking compensation for injuries caused by the negligence of others. This is yet another attempt to reduce the rights of those at work to secure justice when employers break the law.' Tom Jones of leading claimant law firm Thompsons said lawyers would turn down more cases as a result of the changes. He added: 'This is the dawn of access to limited justice for the lucky few. Insurers will save tens of millions of pounds whilst injured people who have a valid claim but one that isn't absolutely open and shut, will be unable to find a lawyer able to help them. The lucky ones who can find a lawyer will be hit by deductions from their damages.' And Andrew Tucker, head of personal injury for Irwin Mitchell, said it was 'bleak day for access to justice', adding: 'Our own research shows that just under half of people (47 per cent) would not bring a valid claim for compensation if they thought that they would have to pay some of the legal costs. The proposals favour the defendant over the consumer and are a serious backward step.'