PCS Broad Left Network

The Labour government is continuing with austerity and cuts which impact our communities as well as pushing through the EHRC code of practice. They bear responsibility for the anger in communities about the sorry state of our public services which results in Reform gaining support. Reform, who recently announced over £50bn in disability cuts. Reform, who have committed to repealing the Equality Act. The party whose councils it controls have banned Prides and LGBT+ education in schools. Reform, whose answer to all of society’s ills is to create even more division by attacking the most vulnerable groups.

The manufacture of a so-called culture war, in which anti-migrant and anti-trans rhetoric mutually reinforce a global rise in bigotry, serves only to fracture the solidarity among people who’d otherwise be fighting a common cause on pay, conditions, and privatisation. This highlights the common battle that we all have in fighting for race, disabilty, women’s and LGBT+ liberation as part of the fight against cuts. We have a key role in the trade union movement to unite our members against the attempts to divide us and to challenge austerity.

The fight for dignity at work is one part of the fight against capitalist austerity and Reform.

A new frontline opened across all civil service departments in July. Following the publishing of the EHRC’s latest guidance, which gained statutory status on August 5th, the Cabinet Office produced a new model policy and guidance for departments on how managers should treat Trans+ members of staff. This guidance and policy includes a bathroom ban, in which the Trans+ community may not use the bathrooms of their lived gender, and a change to departments’ special leave policy, reducing it from the current twelve weeks currently provided.

At least twelve weeks of special leave has been afforded up until now, and is absolutely necessary. To use just one example – trans women who undergo bottom surgery cannot sit for long periods for the first six weeks following surgery. For the first twelve weeks, a trans woman must dilate, which includes lying naked on the floor, inserting rods into their neovagina to ensure it does not close in on itself. This must happen multiple times a day. What government building has the facility to accommodate this?

PCS has clear policy with motion A348 carried at ADC on opposing the EHRC guidance and defending our Trans+ members’ rights. We are also challenging the discriminatory attack on special leave. It is totally unacceptable that Trans+ people would need to consciously choose between having life-saving surgery, or maintaining a positive sickness record as the Cabinet Office guidance suggests departments should instead manage gender affirming surgery under sickness policies. This is all under the guise of legal advice the Cabinet Office has received which supposedly suggests that this change is necessary to avoid claims of indirect discrimination from other protected groups such as disabled people, in so-called “preferential treatment of Trans+ people”. The PCS NEC left coalition will oppose any attacks on equality rights and will place demands on the cabinet office to improve equality conditions to meet the needs of all our members. We will challenge the current coordinated attack on our Trans+ members and the community as a whole.

One negative consequence of employers poorly implementing the toilet ban is that our disabled members will be disproportionately impacted as already scarce disabled facilities will be used by displaced Trans+ members who do not feel comfortable in or feel welcome in either gendered toilets

PCS now has a left coalition for change majority on the NEC who are committed to fighting to implement our union policies in the talks at national level with the Cabinet Office. This includes involving the Proud National Committee as the recognised LGBT+ advisory committee to the NEC in developing the union’s response. We are pressing for full support and guidance to be produced for all the negotiators across the bargaining units in the union to deal with how employers are seeking to implement the Cabinet Office guidance on the EHRC Code of Practice

This work has been frustrated by the refusal of the general secretary to carry out conference and nec decisions. https://bln.org.uk/2026/08/18/nec-agree-major-national-campaign-strategy-but-the-general-secretary-refuses-to-implement-it/

Shortly after Conference concluded and the EHRC’s guidance was published, the General Secretary suspended on union business, which prevented the NEC from carrying out the immediate actions contained in Motion A348, carried at this year’s ADC, which called on the NEC to lobby ministers and call for a full parliamentary review of the guidance. Similarly, actions have been taken by the PCS Legal Department without first consulting with Proud, as instructed in conference policy.

The left coalition NEC majority will explore all avenues to implement our union policies including all those to defend our Trans+ members overwhelmingly carried at successive ADCs. We will challenge the discriminatory attacks on the special leave policy.

As well as challenging the Cabinet Office guidance in talks and exploring all legal avenues it is essential that we mobilise the collective strength of our union to defend our Trans+ members in our workplaces. We need to promote our trans-inclusive polices across our membership and encourage our members to stand by their fellow workers and challenge any discrimination and abuse that is aimed at our Trans+ members.

It is essential that negotiators familiarise themselves with the Grainger criteria, the method by which beliefs such as those held by Gender Critical activists are considered “protected”. Not all gender critical beliefs are protected, and the manifestation of their beliefs in the form of intentional deadnaming and misgendering are certainly not protected. In the case of Mackereth vs DWP, David Mackereth’s appeal was not upheld following his sacking as he refused to follow the DWP’s policy on preferred pronouns. The court found that the DWP was correct to fire Mackereth as he breached policy. Similarly, in the case of Souza v Primark, the court found Primark liable as it did not have policies in place to protect its Trans+ staff as they were humiliated and abused.

What cases like Mackereth and Souza demonstrate is that the narrative of litigious gender critical groups being overwhelmingly successful is wrong. Having strong policy that protects Trans+ members of staff reinforces the employer’s ability to combat employment tribunal claims. Instead, the Cabinet Office may have opened the civil service to a fresh wave of claims from its Trans+ employees.

The EHRC’s guidance does not create new legal obligations, and it is not an authoritative statement of the law. Guidance for workplaces has not yet been published, so the Cabinet Office is not compelled to force through this new policy. The law matters, but only as ammunition in an argument that must be fundamentally about solidarity.

Resist the cabinet office model policy and guidance

• Fight for a workplace built on mutual respect, not tolerance.
• Stop changes to special leave policy.
• Oppose the introduction of a bathroom ban for the Trans+ community.
• Improve equality policies and terms and conditions for all our members.

Join the Broad Left Network to help us in the fight to defend our Trans+ members, improve equality rights and conditions and unite everyone in the battle again

Download leaflet here

PCS Conference in May voted in favour of a motion instructing the National Executive Committee to build a serious campaign, capable of winning on jobs. pay, pensions and the huge number of other issues facing PCS members day in day out. That campaign needs to be built, if there is no satisfactory movement from the employer in meeting our demands.

There has been no movement. A new Prime Minister has not meant a new direction – for any worker, let alone PCS members. A 3.5% pay remit, potentially condemning our lowest paid grades to the minimum wage forever, goes nowhere near meeting our claim for 10%. Jobs and livelihoods at risk, with members taking matters into their own hands in disputes across the union – striking to protect jobs and conditions. Thousands of pensions still not being paid to members or their families, condemning many to severe hardship, sees little sign of remedy as the Cabinet Office continues to refuse to bring this service back in house. In fact, to the contrary, private profiteer Capita, awarded more work!

This is just the tip of the iceberg as prices continue to rise and workers pay the price for a cost-of-living crisis which is set to become worse. The employer needs to demonstrate concrete “respect” for civil service workers and others, including private sector workers, who work on the contracts dished out by government without a second thought about the jobs, pay and conditions of those who work on them. Burnham, since July, has created lots of “sound-bites” but little else.

If we are to make progress, then it is vital that we build a campaign across PCS as set out and agreed in motion A375. The NEC Left Coalition majority remain determined to build this campaign.

The saga to do so has been going on since 29 May. This was when the first meeting of the new NEC took place, immediately following conference. And with the specific intention of moving quickly to put the plans in place to launch a cost-of-living campaign on pay, jobs, pensions and other crucial issues and as set out and agreed only the week before at our Annual Delegate Conference.

Unfortunately, at this stage, equally clear, has been the determination of the PCS General Secretary Fran Heathcote and her “Democracy Alliance” allies to frustrate and block any national campaign. This determination was on show immediately after the close of Conference, when the General Secretary published her article lauding the 3.5% civil service pay remit as “above inflation”.

Setting aside that the General Secretary was using the government’s measure of inflation, not that used by trade unions, this publication bypassed the NEC in a way that up until now has been exceedingly rare. It is now common. This is despite clear NEC instructions to the contrary – for example on Pensions, where Heathcote’s name appears alone at the bottom of branch bulletins, these mainly just reflect updates from management and whilst there are references to insourcing there is no clear strategy on how we need to implement our policy to make this a reality.

On 2 June, when the National Disputes Committee met, to implement the decisions of the 29^th May, material prepared by members of that Committee was condemned by the General Secretary as “disrespectful”. There is still nothing published telling members that the priority of PCS, as overwhelmingly supported at conference, is to build a campaign win on the issues that matter to them most – jobs, pay, pensions and conditions.

On 11 June, there was the General Secretary’s infamous walkout – which was nothing to do with the Standing Orders and everything to do with the determination to shrug off lay control of the union by its elected leadership

Following pressure from ordinary members and reps, the General Secretary was forced to back down.

At the NEC on 15/16 July, further recommendations were agreed to put the necessary steps in place to build the campaign. But the delaying tactics continued with information not forthcoming and still no sign of any publicity to the activist layer or members.

Pay negotiator forums were called for, but the agreed date was simply missed and was neither published or built for. To date no clear plan has been communicated to branches, groups or regions and the delaying tactics continue.

NEC of 19 August

At an emergency NEC which took place on the 19 August, the NEC instructed the General Secretary to get on with it.

A motion put to the NEC by BLN member, Fiona Brittle, laid out some clear and high-profile methods of raising the visibility of the campaign, and some urgent communications for members and activists, including on the crucial question of finance and paying for the cost of a serious campaign of industrial action. This motion passed, despite Democracy Alliance/Left Unity members voting against it. Crucially it also instructed the General Secretary to prepare for a statutory ballot to be launched on the 30^th September with the final decision to be made at the NEC taking place at the beginning of September.

It is clear that the DA/LU alliance minority, including the General Secretary (who has been elected to implement conference policy, not blatantly obstruct it) are hoping that because DWP, MOD, MOJ and other areas have not started delegated pay talks they will be excluded from any national response. Likewise for those areas in a multi-year deal. This is a nonsense, not least because the campaign includes jobs, pensions and conditions, but also because we already know that the pay remit of 3.5% will not meet our demand of 10%, will not remove thousands from the horror of low pay and doesn’t protect pensions or jobs.

The argument that because delegated pay talks in these areas have not begun, a ballot cannot commence, is spurious. DWP balloted last year because the employer simply ignored the views of the union in delegated pay talks about how last year’s pay award would be spent. A ballot during pay talks, agitated by reports from the front line of negotiations, would easily achieve membership buy-in.

When the pay and jobs ballot was launched back in September 2022, the mandate was designed to last through to Spring 2023, so as to overlap the period when the government would make decisions about the Civil Service Pay Remit. At that time, multiple groups had not concluded delegated pay talks – but went for it anyway, recognising that the cost cap of the pay remit would not allow for a good award.

That is exactly the current situation. The cost-cap is 3.5%, set by the pay remit, and any flexibilities appear to be accessible only by screwing over AA grades and confining them permanently to the national minimum wage, which should not be acceptable to any serious union rep – though the General Secretary lauded this flexibility too, in her outrageous message on the website back in May.

There is clear industrial logic for the launch of a campaign this autumn, and Conference policy is clear: launch by the end of September.

Broad Left Network members are absolutely committed to the launch of a campaign, to the faithful discharge of Conference policy and to pushing against what is an unstable government predisposed to do us no favours unless it really has to. Anyone not willing to participate – especially those in DA/LU thinking they can block the campaign at Group level – should get out of the way. The General Secretary should respect conference policy and work tirelessly to implement it and stop blocking progress and we hope that all members and reps, no matter what their personal view, will campaign vigorously to build support and win the vote. To not do so, will give strength to the employer at a time when they remain weak and vulnerable.

PCS has a history of being a fighting, democratic union, whose proud traditions defended pensions, established and defended the civil service compensation scheme and who can now play a crucial role in fighting the cost-of-living crisis. Let’s rewin those traditions and build the campaign to win.  If you agree, and you want this to continue, we urge you to join the Broad Left Network.

Burnham Bounce does not mean better pay, jobs protected and pension crisis solved.

PCS Annual Delegate Conference in May, voted for to build a serious campaign to tackle pay, protect jobs, sort out the pension crisis and improve members terms and conditions. Almost simultaneously, members voted for a NEC Left Coalition majority – not least because it stood on a platform to build a serious campaign capable of winning as set out in Motion A375.However, reps and members would be forgiven for not knowing about any campaign, nor the decisions taken by the NEC to build the campaign as determined by members through conference. This is because the General Secretary, Fran Heathcote, is not implementing them. Decisions of the NEC are being delayed, or simply ignored.

Members have instructed the union leadership to build a serious fight on pay, jobs, pensions and other crucial issues at three consecutive conferences. The Democracy Alliance led NEC at the time, “paused” action 40 months ago and are still intent on sabotaging our attempts to build the necessary campaign.

Members recognise that this is the only way to fight and win our demands against a government still rooted in cuts and passing on austerity to the public and its own workers. This is as true of a Burnham led government as it is of a Starmer led government and no amount of waiting around to see if Burnham delivers, will change that. The 3.5% remit is still 3.5%, job cuts are still taking place and our members in FCDO and elsewhere are still bravely fighting on to defeat these in their areas, the crisis in Capita shows little sign of resolving itself with thousands still suffering hardship, delayed pensions and delayed retirements, low pay is still prevalent amongst thousands of our members and our offices are still threatened with closure and the cost-of-living crisis rages on.

The Broad Left Network members, as part of the Left Coalition were elected on a platform to build a serious strategy to win. And we remain determined to do so. To do otherwise is a serious betrayal of an approach that has been overwhelming endorsed by members through conference and is the only way to tackle the serious issues facing PCS members day in day out.

Use industrial leverage

PCS members have huge industrial power and not to recognise this and not use it is a serious betrayal of members interests. With Andy Burnham taking over as Prime Minister, we must apply pressure to ensure Labour delivers for workers rather than continuing to govern in the interest of big business. And the early signs are not good. Many trade union leaders may wish to give Burnham “a chance to make changes”, but all we have seen so far is yet more machinery of government changes for the civil service, vague announcements about devolution without any guarantee of job protection for our members, and blaming climate change on BBQs whilst authorising further oil drilling in the North Sea. He has made no commitment to increase the public sector pay remit which restricts our members’ pay to around 3.5% (only partially funded), or to bring pensions administration back in house to resolve the appalling Capita pensions crisis. Our members can’t afford to “wait and see”.

NEC make decisions to build campaign but General Secretary refusing to implement

From the point where the decision was made to support A375, it is clear that General Secretary, Fran Heathcote and her supporters continue to do everything possible to undermine this decision and not carry out the instructions she is responsible for implementing. Far from “holding the employers feet to the fire”, her election pledge when she won the GS election with less than an 800 vote majority, she has done the opposite, not even publishing the result of the conference vote to members, the absence of any social media or website announcement, which if done, would have put not only the whole of PCS on a war-footing, but would have sent a very clear message to the employer, just in advance of the publication of their paltry 3.5% pay remit..

From the very first meeting on 29^th May, the NEC have repeatedly instructed the General Secretary to urgently publish materials on the PCS website and social media, and comprehensive branch briefings to announce the new Conference policy to fight, and to equip reps with advice and information to build support and momentum for the campaign amongst members. We have instructed her to provide proposals for giving lay representatives access to members’ contact details and the ability to communicate with them directly. We have agreed members meetings right throughout the union and a plan to work with all of our lay structures to build the campaign necessary.

None of this has been done, and the General Secretary refuses to explain why. In fact, Deputy National President Dave Semple produced specific website articles to rally members following the 29^th May NEC and was told this was “disrespectful” to the General Secretary.

There have been multiple social media posts, emails and articles on other issues, but a deafening silence on the national campaign. To most reps and members this NEC looks no different than what they’ve had for years. Members and reps have not even been told officially that PCS laid campaign demands on the Cabinet Office within weeks of Conference ending, indicating that we consider PCS in dispute if no progress were made.

This is not an accident. Rather it is the latest way that the General Secretary aims to stop PCS members having a national campaign, having lost the ability to do so via the National President and NEC following the elections. She and her Left Unity allies have vocally opposed a national campaign on pay, jobs and conditions. They voted to oppose A375 in the NEC last year (as well as similar motions A353 and A315 in 2025 and 2024). The General Secretary does not want this campaign, and rather than sticking up for those she has been elected and paid to represent, she is acting as an apologist for a Labour Government who have no intention of delivering the “respect” in the form of jobs, pay, pensions promised when Labour was elected two years ago.

Beyond this, she hopes that by frustrating the efforts of the NEC and making us look ineffective, members will continue to be disillusioned with the leadership. She hopes this will keep voter turnout low in the next round of NEC elections, to increase the odds of returning her allies to power and with them a lacklustre approach to trade unionism.

The General Secretary would clearly prefer to continue endless talks, which have produced nothing of substantial benefit, with the Cabinet Office, with no industrial action campaign, and hope that Burnham sorts everything out. Her supporters in Left Unity have made it clear that they want to see the outcome of pay talks before even building for a campaign. This is a nonsense when we know that offers will be around 3.5%, far too low to combat the years of pay erosion due to austerity, and anything above that will only be offered in exchange for selling off members’ terms and conditions. Even the 3.5% isn’t fully funded, with only 2% of that coming from the Treasury as new money, and Departments will have to find the rest from within existing budgets. We know that means staffing cuts, recruitment freezes, and mounting workloads for remaining staff.

We have no faith the General Secretary will implement conference and NEC decisions, so we will need to organise in our Branches, Groups and Regions/Nations to apply pressure.

If you agree with the need for a fighting campaign, join the Broad Left Network and raise the issue in your branches.

Our previous articles have laid out the position of the Left Coalition which now forms a majority on PCS’ National Executive Committee. They have also detailed the blocking tactics deployed by the Left Unity General Secretary, up to and including shutting down the 11th of June NEC and refusing to allow the National Disputes Committee to meet.

On the back of this, members and branches, mobilised by the Coalition for Change, wrote to the General Secretary to demand she stops her obstruction and meets with the President and the Deputy President to resolve this. As a result, the NEC finally met on the 7^{th of} July. At that meeting Coalition for Change NEC members allowed the adoption of the General Secretary’s undemocratic standing orders under protest, to enable notice to be served following the historic ballot result in the FCDO and further strike dates to be set to support strikers in Sodexo. The coalition, in which the BLN plays a leading role, put our reps’ and members’ issues first. And on the first morning of the full NEC which met on the 15^th/16^th July, members of the NEC attended the picket at the FCDO to stand shoulder to shoulder with our striking members. Dave Semple, Deputy president and BLN chair spoke at that picket with other unions reps and MPs.

The NEC majority have been consistent in our approach in that to win on pay, jobs, pensions and other issues that are set out in Motion A375 carried overwhelmingly at our May Conference, we need to build a huge campaign across PCS. And members need to see it – the total lack of Comms coming from PCS and the General Secretary on the NEC decisions to push forward is unacceptable.

In contrast the Democracy Alliance, including the General Secretary, argue that we should accept the pay remit and “welcome” it as a victory of their two years of backroom chats with the Cabinet Office. This is a remit which contains serious detriment to members including: accepting AA staff will be permanently on minimum wage; accepting that a 3.5% pay rise is “good enough” despite rocketing living costs; and accepting that pay in all areas currently calculated on a 41/42 hour working week will instead be calculated on 36/37 hours, meaning a £3300 a year reduction for new AAs in those areas. And accepting it also means no campaign, without achieving any of members’ most important demands on pay, terms and conditions, and job protection.

Democracy Alliance U-Turn

In a remarkable and stunning U-turn, the General Secretary’s office wrote to the Coalition’s Senior Officers in advance of the NEC, to try to align the General Secretary’s paper with the position set out in conference policy in A375 (and previous years), supported by the BLN and the Coalition majority.

Under normal circumstances this would be welcomed, but it begs the question as to why, given she and the rest of the Democracy Alliance shut down the national campaign in 2023. They have then spent the three years since doing all they can to avoid building a national campaign in line with conference policy, including using the undemocratic Standing Orders to block any discussion when the Coalition last had a majority, and cancelling it without even trying in October 2025 when they once again had control. However, the discussion took place, which resulted in an approach both presented and agreed by the NEC. A motion submitted by Deputy President Dave Semple prior to the General Secretary’s paper being drafted was also carried –here This was an important motion as, whilst it was reproduced almost exactly in the eventual General Secretary paper, it additionally set out opposition to the proposed reduction of contractual hours from gross to net, not least because it would leave future AAs £3300 worse off a year.

Astonishingly, Democracy Alliance members stated that the standardisation of contractual hours to 37 per week would be a step towards the long-held PCS demand for national pay bargaining! Whilst we want national pay bargaining, it is not at any cost and certainly not to the detriment of any member, let alone our lowest paid.

Most of the Democracy Alliance NEC minority voted for both the General Secretary’s paper and Dave Semple’s motion, despite both being entirely incompatible with the same old arguments they made in the debate, opposing the position of building for a national campaign on pay, job protection, terms and conditions, pensions, and more. Clearly despite the General Secretary starting to recognise she will at least need to try to recognize deliver what members have demanded, the Democracy Alliance views and intentions have not changed.

Build the Cost-of-Living Campaign

So, having agreed these, the stage is now set for a major Cost-of-Living campaign. Pay claims will be submitted in all groups and bargaining units on the basis of the national pay claim, including a 10% pay rise, for a pay compression framework flex cases which produce an £18 per hour Living Wage, measures to ensure that the Administrative Assistant (AA) grade are on more than the minimum wage, and reflect London Weighting arrangements in addition to the National Living Wage of £5,000 per annum. Motion A375 – here -sets out a set of demands around which the whole union can unite, campaign one and build the support necessary to win.

The General Secretary has agreed, at last, to end the silence surrounding the national campaign and to take the first practical steps towards building that campaign. We must make sure that happens. She has agreed to ensure that branch and members’ bulletins are produced, website articles are published and social media communications will be prepared. She has also agreed to urgently produce an NEC statement, for all members, without delay. She stood for election promising to hold the employers “feet to the fire.” There has been little evidence of that – so the NEC majority must hold her to the agreements she has made. The NEC has also agreed that a full programme of members meetings will be organised, right across our union. Further measures are being developed to give the campaign a wider political profile. These include a speakers’ brief for workplace meetings following the Pay Negotiators’ Forum; a letter to the PCS Parliamentary Group requesting support and the tabling of Early Day Motions; the preparation of Parliamentary Questions; and an examination of whether a parliamentary petition capable of securing a debate can be successfully launched. We are also seeking a meeting with Andy Burnham to advance the union’s case and apply pressure right from the start of his tenure, with the outcome to be reported back to the NEC.

These decisions mark an important advance. After months in which the national campaign existed on paper and little else, the NEC has met and agreed a full programme of activity to build our campaign. We must now ensure the General Secretary implements these agreements and stops blocking the NEC majority from doing what we were elected to do. It would be a serious mistake to confuse an agreement to do something with it actually being done.

Defending Trans+ Members Through Collective Action The NEC also agreed a motion, moved by Fiona Brittle, which set out PCS’ response to attacks on the rights and dignity of Trans+ members following the publication of harmful guidance published by Government People Group. This is here and commits the union to urgently bringing together the National Disputes Committee, PCS Proud and PCS legal to agree urgent advice for reps and to explore the potential of a judicial review, further legal interventions, and a campaign to overturn the Supreme Court ruling. It also commits the union to restoring the PCS Trans Awareness course under the direction of PCS Proud and encouraging widespread PCS participation in Pride events. Earlier versions of this motion had been submitted at every NEC since conference, including instructions to intervene while the Code of Practice underwent Parliamentary scrutiny – but due to the General Secretary’s blocking of the NEC, this instruction was not carried out. Shockingly, PCS therefore did nothing to halt the Code being brought into force.

The motion agreed commits PCS to making clear to negotiators that guidance at delegated level, following the publication of the EHRC guidance, should not be implemented as proposed. It instructs the National Disputes Committee to produce urgent bargaining guidance for branches and groups to resist exclusionary changes to workplace policies and to defend any members affected by attempts to impose them.

This represented a clear political dividing line within the NEC. Democracy Alliance argued instead for an approach centred primarily on legal test cases and surveys, as if members hadn’t been very clear at conference! This approach would in practice mean waiting until our members suffer discrimination rather than acting to prevent it. Democracy Alliance members voted against the motion.

The passing of this motion means that PCS now has a clear strategy which combines legal intervention, industrial bargaining and workplace organisation. The task now is to ensure that these commitments are translated into practical support for branches and reps, and into a determined defence of every Trans+ member facing discrimination at work.

Pensions

The General Secretary’s provided an update on the Capita takeover of MyCSP. This has clearly been a disaster, especially for the thousands of members waiting for payments and for those delaying retirement. The government has now committed to insourcing the pensions scheme and taking it back into public ownership, but how and when remains to be seen. BLN’s amendment that the National Disputes Committee urgently consider the advice of counsel sought by the GS, and determine what other measures can be taken to visibly step up our campaign, to achieve relief for members, was passed unanimously meaning the new NEC majority will look at ramping up the campaign to resolve the crisis and put the money our members are owed in their pockets.

Trade Unions Congress

A delegation to the TUC was agreed, as were motions to the Conference which takes place in September which focus on a coordinated approach to challenging privatisation, austerity, and racism/fascism – here

Build the BLN

We call on all reps who want to build a fighting, democratic union with a socialist programme that could win for members to join with us – to join the Broad Left Network – and unite to build a massive Cost-of-Living campaign.

After PCS members in the National Library of Wales smashed the anti-union threshold with over 81% turnout in their recent ballot with a tremendous 95% yes vote for strike action alongside our sister union Prospect who also had a successful ballot, management have caved in on introducing detrimental changes to the National Library pension scheme.

This is a fantastic victory for our members in the National Library and the determined stance the branch has taken since management indicated what they were planning.  This included reducing the accruals from 1/80 to 1/100, increasing the pension age to the state pension age, and introducing additional contributions from members to reduce the employer’s contributions to 12%!   Delegates at the Wales ADC in March were left in no doubt about the branch’s readiness to fight attacks on their pensions with a fighting speech moving motion A15 and the conference gave our full support to the branch. Whilst we are fighting to improve the civil service pension scheme, we must fight to ensure that no members have even worse terms.

We will continue to fight to ensure that we place our manifesto demands on the new Welsh Government to defend our culture sector members alongside all our members and services in Wales.

On culture PCS calls on the Welsh Government to: –

• Restore grant-in-aid to the National Library of Wales and Museum Wales to its previous real-terms level and for annual above inflation increases to meet the rising costs both organisations face each year.
• Establish a sustainable 5-year funding model that will allow both organisations to rebuild from the loss of skills and resources following over a decade of austerity.
• Fully fund pay increases at both organisations, so that threats of redundancies and reductions in staffing levels do not happen every year.
• Ensure a fair pension for workers at arms-length bodies that is on par with those offered to other branches of Welsh Government.

If you want to get involved in the fight for improved pay, pensions, job security and conditions across the union then join the Broad Left Network

The union’s NEC met on the 7th July to ensure that the National Disputes Committee (NDC) could clear urgent business. The NEC majority adopted the Standing Orders, in the face of the General Secretary’s obstruction.Dave Semple, Deputy President, on behalf of the NEC majority made the following statement to make clear that we prioritised members interests, and particularly those members fighting for their jobs-like those in the Foreign & Commonwealth Office who have now been given authority to take strike action:

“The NEC elected majority are enabling the adoption of these Standing Orders, under protest, in order to progress business and protect members’ interests, not because we agree with the content. We wish to have this reproduced in the record of this meeting.”

This was the first NEC meeting since the General Secretary’s walkout from the NEC meeting of 11 June. As she walked out Fran Heathcote cut off the Zoom meeting to prevent the NEC taking key decisions to progress union policy. Since then, the General Secretary has shut down all the national democratic bodies of PCS, including the NEC and NDC.

Against vociferous objections from the elected Senior Lay Officers of PCS – including Bev Laidlaw as President, Dave Semple as Deputy President and Rachel Heemskerk and Hector Wesley as Vice Presidents – the General Secretary instructed the union’s full-time officers not to permit the NDC to clear any business – meaning strike submissions and decisions on support for victimised PCS reps were delayed.

This decision to shut down the NDC is especially egregious as the NDC is constituted in the union’s rule book, which Heathcoteis willing to ignore.

She further abused her powers by publishing two one-sided videos on the union’s website and by sending out an incredibly biased all-members’ email. This material put employers across the country on notice about what was going on and will have damaged the credibility of the union as we try to prepare for a major national campaign on the cost of living, jobs, office closures and much else.

Coalition for Change NEC members – including those in Broad Left Network, Independent Left and Alliance for Change – convened a well-attended meeting for PCS members on 18 June to ensure that reps and members PCS were kept informed of events. Shortly thereafter, a leaflet was produced by the coalition, to take out to members, responding to Heathcote’s disgraceful public attack on the NEC.

Since then, a wide swathe of members and reps, mobilised by the Coalition for Change, have been writing into the General Secretary, copied to the President and Deputy President, to demand that she stops her obstructive behaviour and gets round the table with the leaders of the NEC to sort out this mess.

Further, pressure has been mounting on the General Secretary to reopen the NEC and NDC, in order that strike submissions can be agreed for members in FCDO and Sodexo in Belfast. There are almost certain to be other submissions that have been held back on Heathcote’s orders – orders that she gave shortly before heading to Greece for a holiday, leaving the union in crisis and members in limbo.

Senior Lay Officers repeatedly and loudly demanded an NDC meeting to ensure support for these.

For nearly a month, these entreaties to prioritise members’ business were ignored. However, with a key deadline approaching and pressure mounting, the national President, Bev Laidlaw, demanded a meeting with Heathcote on Monday 6 July.It was made clear by Heathcote that unless we adopt the previous Standing Orders, ignoring the President’s ruling and the will of the NEC majority, the NEC would not re-open and the NDC would not meet.

What is going on?

Heathcote’s walkout stunt was an attempt to ensure that the previous NEC’s Standing Orders (rules for debate) stayed in place – including the messy and undemocratic language that Heathcote and former president Martin Cavanagh often hid behind, to rule out anything that disagreed with Heathcote’s recommendations.

Since Heathcote would routinely propose ways to delay a cost-of-living campaign, this has meant that the NEC’s Standing Orders were turned into a bureaucratic blocker on doing much of anything. This year’s NEC, with a Coalition for Change majority, has no interest in being blocked by bureaucratic skullduggery – members want a campaign, and we intend to deliver it.

At the NEC of 11 June, the President issued a ruling that the previous Standing Orders did not bind the current NEC, freeing up the NEC to agree new Standing Orders by majority vote.Heathcote’s allies challenged the chair’s ruling and lost – a majority of the NEC upheld the chair’s ruling. It was at this point Heathcote walked out and shut down the NEC Zoom, to disrupt the validly convened meeting.

A reconvened NEC met a few hours later and agreed a new set of Standing Orders and cleared business to set the NEC up properly for the year – but Heathcote has instructed the union’s full time officers to refuse to carry out the instructions of the NEC, despite the union’s rulebook saying explicitly that full time staff of PCS are “subject to [the NEC’s] control and direction” (SR8.1).

Whether large issue or small, Heathcote’s obstructive position has been that lay reps in PCS don’t run the union. A small example of this was at the NDC of 3 June, prior to the 11 June NEC meeting. The President, Deputy President and 2 Vice Presidents proposed text for a briefing for the union’s negotiators, and Heathcote simply refused to publish it, arguing that lay reps writing briefings was a breach of her contract!

Stalemate has resulted, despite the efforts of the union’s elected leadership to overcome the General Secretary’s obstructions.

Ultimately this left us with a decision. Continue to fight on Standing Orders, to remove this bureaucratic hurdle, or adopt the old Standing Orders in order to clear urgent submissions for industrial action, whilst recognising that they will be used by Heathcote and by Left Unity to try to stymy the work of the NEC in matters both large (like building a campaign) and small (like re-establishing the Devolved Areas subcommittee).

The Coalition for Change, including BLN, unanimously agreed that while Heathcote’s obstruction is disgusting and wildly undemocratic, we cannot allow a continued stalemate that halts industrial action and which forces members to be re-balloted, e.g.because they did not take action within 28 days of winning their mandate.

On this basis, and with a statement agreed between the General Secretary and President that protects our position regarding all that has gone before, we have therefore agreed last year’s Standing Orders and cleared all of the outstanding industrial business via the National Disputes Committee.

On 21 May the Cabinet Office published the 2026 Civil Service pay remit. The purpose of the remit is to set the constraints that government departments must stay within when developing a pay offer for our members. The headline figure of the pay remit is a 3.5% increase to the pay bill.

PCS agreed at Annual Delegate Conference in May 2025 and reaffirmed in May 2026 pay demands that include a rise of at least 10% consolidated (meaning it counts towards pension) rise and a minimum wage of £18 per hour.  This is to reverse the years of wage stagnation inflicted on us in the name of ‘austerity’.

Our 10% demand is about putting our members back in the position we should be. The rate of pay for an AA in HMRC in 2007 was £15,115. Had their pay kept pace with inflation, an AA would currently be on £30,432. For comparison 10% pay rise in 2026 for an AA would put them on £30,653.

This remit is not enough

Inflation is predicted to rise throughout 2026 due to global factors including the ongoing war being conducted by the USA and Israel on Iran and Lebanon. A pay rise equal to the maximum 3.5% will be swallowed up by rises to council tax, energy, food, transport and so on. Our members won’t feel any richer from a 3.5% remit.

It’s become a regular feature of the pay remit that departments can make ‘pay flex’ cases. This involves the department making a business case for using more than the 3.5% remit in developing a pay offer. A new type of pay flex case this year is the ‘Pay Compression Framework’.

Pay compression refers to the way that the minimum wage has risen faster than our pay, so that AAs and AOs have ended up with their pay being practically identical. It also means AA/AO pay has been catching up to the Officer pay range. Departments who choose to use the framework can introduce a 5% differential between AA and AO, and between AO and Officer.

The reference to 5% is eye-catching, and at first glance some members may think this is in addition to the 3.5%.  Any members thinking they could get an 8.5% pay rise would be forgiven for taking a favourable view of this remit. But the detail shows 8.5% simply isn’t on offer.

A department must show why they can’t afford to introduce the differential from the existing 3.5% remit, and the business case will only be for the costs that can’t already be met. The Framework can only be worth around 1.5% more pay to our AO and Officer members. Our demand for 10% is nowhere close to being met by this remit.

Lessons from HMRC: don’t accept strings attached

Back in 2020 HMRC proposed a package pay offer that was linked to giving up terms and conditions. This was called ‘Pay and Contract Reform’. HMRC and some of the leadership in PCS sold PACR on the basis it would put substantial pay in the pockets of our members after years of pay restraint.

At the same time the strings attached to PACR were deliberately ignored or downplayed to make sure the offer was accepted by members. It was only a limited number of reps – including members of the Broad Left Network – that warned of the dangers of PACR.

Sadly, what we warned of has come to pass. The pay that was bought by surrendering terms and conditions has slipped back to being minimum wage. Job cuts were made to pay for the rises, leading to bigger workloads. Alternative working patterns were removed from many who still needed them.

It is important to learn the lessons of PACR. Members need to be suspicious when the employer and some union leaders celebrate an offer. The role of PCS is to look critically at what’s on offer and where it doesn’t meet PCS demands, the deficiencies must be made clear. This is what the Broad Left Network is doing as a serious union leadership.

For this 2026 remit, the Treasury is only funding 2%. Anything above this will need to be funded from existing departmental budgets, which will inevitably mean job cuts.

For a department to use the Pay Compression Framework, they need to agree to AAs being on minimum wage. It was never the case that minimum wage was the rate of pay for the job of an AA. We must reject the attempts to devalue the jobs of our members.

Departments must also introduce a “career advancement path” for AAs. That kind of language sounds positive, but it is a mask for the true meaning: the end of the AA grade. This is what’s already being attempted in HMRC, who plan to abolish AAs by 2027. This will put their work onto the remaining staff at AO and beyond. It will also lead to AOs being the next grade that’s a permanent minimum wage job.

As for the money on offer, there’s nothing meaningful for AAs. They will remain on minimum wage, with anything above that being ‘non-consolidated’ (in other words a one-off payment). For Officers, the start of their pay range is already 11% above the AO spot rate. This means they won’t get anything from the Pay Compression Framework.

The only ones who could gain are National AOs. The Pay Compression Framework would see them move from £28,016 to £29,260 – a rise of £1,244. But National AOs in HMRC got a rise in 2025 of £1,246 without any strings attached. Our demand for 10% would give National AOs a pay rise of £2,802. Our AO members must not accept less now.

It’s also important to highlight that the Pay Compression Framework is silent on the position for London weighting. It isn’t clear what would happen for London AAs, AOs and Officers.

We are clear that PCS pay negotiators in HMRC must reject the Pay Compression Framework.

When we campaign, we win

The new PCS NEC, led by a coalition of fighting socialists including members of the Broad Left Network, voted to reject the remit and demand talks for more money. In the event more money isn’t given, our union will need to mount a campaign to build for a whole civil service ballot for industrial action.

The last industrial action like this was the strikes in 2023 against the Tory government. This led to a 4.5% remit and a one off, pro rata payment of £1,500. The PCS leadership at the time made the mistake of accepting this when the member appetite was to keep fighting for more. But even that limited improvement shows what we can achieve when we fight.

It is essential that PCS pay negotiators in HMRC and other departments hold firm to a fighting strategy. They must be clear with their department that no pay talks can take place until our national demands are answered.

Members should take confidence in what we have achieved before and can achieve again. At the same time unions for teachers and for local authorities are preparing to fight in the autumn. This is the beginning of a new public sector fight for pay and we will be a leading part of it.

This article sets out what happened at the 11th June NEC, what the NEC standing orders are, and why members should care about any of this.

By far the most important function and duty of the PCS National Executive Committee (NEC) is to implement policies as determined by our Annual Delegate Conference.

At the moment, this means launching the campaign to improve pay, to protect jobs and working conditions and to ensure that we tackle the relentless cost of living increases on our members. Additionally, holding the government to account on the Capita pensions crisis; responding to the EHRC code of practice; and defending our victimised reps in HMRC. The NEC was mandated to act on all these issues, and more at Annual Delegate Conference (ADC) last month in May, and indeed at last year’s ADC too.

Members rightly expect the NEC to progress these issues quickly, and to take our responsibility seriously. Members of the Coalition between BLN, Independent Left and Alliance for Change (“the Coalition”) that make up the newly elected NEC majority including the National President Bev Laidlaw are committed to launching a fighting campaign to win for members. The General Secretary, Fran Heathcote, has attempted to sabotage the NEC, and prevent it from meeting or making decisions, to try to block any of this business from being taken forward – this isunacceptable and unconstitutional. This culminated with the General Secretary and the NEC minority walking out of a properly convened meeting which took place on the 11^th June.

This is the most recent example of the General Secretary (GS) stalling progress. The GS is responsible for issuing communications, but to date nothing has been published to members telling them about the policy carried by ADC in May to launch a cost of living campaign to improve pay, defend jobs and a number of other issues. Nothing has been published telling members that at the emergency NEC meeting on 29^th May agreed to reject the insulting and insufficient unfunded pay remit of 3.5%, submit our pay claim for a 10% pay rise and demand national talks are reopened with the Cabinet Office. Articles written and submitted by the Deputy National President Dave Semple for the PCS website explaining the campaign and need for members to get ready to fight have been actively blocked from being published by the GS. A significant amount of the NEC’s instructions have not been carried out.

What happened at the 11^th June NEC?

Within 30 minutes of the meeting starting, the GS incorrectly claimed the meeting was in breach of the union’s rules as the NEC majority wished to adopt a new set of standing orders, which are the procedures governing how the NEC meetings are conducted, instead of the GS’s suggested version. A full factual account of the meeting can be read here. After some debate, the GS declared the NEC was “out of order” (something only the President can do) as we would not adopt her standing orders, and so the committee couldn’t decide any business. The GS left the meeting and encouraged her allies on the NEC to do the same. The President was then removed as a co-host of the Zoom call and the call was ended despite the NEC still being quorate (a majority of voting members present.)

This is particularly odd, as the NEC has already met this year without standing orders being adopted – the emergency NEC on 29^th May met to discuss and agree a response to the UK Civil Service pay remit, and instructions agreed at that meeting were taken forward by the GS (though many remain outstanding as mentioned.) None of the NEC nor the GS challenged this approach at the time.

The President restarted the 11^th June meeting at 14:30 after a brief adjournment. Theentire NEC, GS, Assistant General Secretary (AGS) and all Full-Time Officers (FTOs) usually present were invited and sent joining details. 20 voting members of the NEC from the Coalition including the President, Deputy President and two vice Presidents joined the NEC meeting, making it quorate and valid. AGS John Moloney also attended. The GS and all NEC members from the “Democracy Alliance” slate chose not to attend. The NEC adopted new standing orders, and dealt with all items of members’ business including to immediately progress work on a cost-of-living campaign in line with motion A375 agreed at ADC 2026, including advice for delegated bargaining areas.

In short, the GS used her control of the PCS systems to try to suspend the NEC. This is in direct contravention of PCS rules. She undermined the power of the NEC and President to conduct the business of the union, which is enshrined in the PCS Principle and Supplementary rules. Principal Rule 8 states: “The management and control of the Union, and the handling of its whole affairs, shall be vested in the National Executive Committee” and Supplementary Rule 7.12 states: “The President shall preside at all NEC meetings, put such motions to the vote as may be seconded, and be the judge of order.” Principle Rule 14 states: “In case of conflict between a principal rule and any other rule of the union, the principal rule shall prevail.” It is clear therefore that even if the standing orders are to be considered rules, they cannot prevent the NEC from exercising the full control of the union vested in the NEC by principle rule 8.

After the NEC meeting, the GS sent out an all-members email, published a video on social media and put an article on the PCS website giving her view of events. None of these were sanctioned by the NEC. These gave an inaccurate and biased account of the NEC meeting, without any detail or explanation to back up the GS’s accusations. No opportunity was given for the President or NEC majority to explain their reasoning or decisions to members. Even more concerning is the GS’s statement that she will ensure the “day to day” business of the union continues – this means making decisions without the required NEC control or oversight. This is completely against the PCS rules.

Why do the standing orders matter, and why should members care?

Simply put, if the GS uses a fight over standing orders to refuse to enact or allow her staff to enact any of the NEC’s decisions, it will be almost impossible to organise a campaign and strike ballot if acceptable improvements aren’t achieved through talks.

The standing orders are a set of principles and procedures that the NEC agree will govern their meetings for the year. It contains things like how debates will be conducted, who has the right to speak, and who has the right to bring business to the NEC and when and how votes will be taken. It sets out the powers of the President as the Chair of the NEC. There is nothing in the standing orders agreed by the majority of the NEC which, “break union rules designed to protect members’  from organised factions” as the GS has claimed. This is total red herring in order to mislead the membership.

It is important therefore that these procedures are democratic and allow for maximum debate and clear procedures for decision making. In 2024 when the Coalition first had a majority on the NEC, former National President Martin Cavanagh used the Standing Orders as a mechanism to veto any motion submitted by NEC members that disagreed with the recommendations in papers submitted by the GS. He knew that, without a Left Unity majority, Coalition NEC members’ motions to build for a national campaign and strike ballot in September 2024 (in line with union policy) would be agreed if he allowed the vote to happen. So a set of Standing Orders were forced through – despite the majority of the then NEC disagreeing with them, to enable him to do this.This created a log-jam situation where the NEC majority could vote down the GS’s papers which capitulated to the employer, but were prevented from voting through our alternative fighting strategies.

So, this is not a petty squabble over obscure rules and procedures. The GS has declared that the NEC cannot meet or decide things until her standing orders are accepted. This seems in keeping with the actions of Cavanagh and the GS in 2024, doing anything possible to prevent motions progressing a fighting campaign they and the rest of Left Unity don’t want. They have tried to pursue a partnership-like cosy relationship with the Cabinet Office for years, providing industrial peace at the expense of members.

The GS’s actions are actively harmful to members interests and progressing the campaign to win them a long overdue fair pay award and protect their terms and conditions, job security.  Having now lost the NEC majority and the position of President (and all motions supporting their policy stances at Conference), Left Unity apparently will now stoop to using legal advice paid for by members and the PCS bureaucracy to block the democratically elected NEC.

This is an unacceptable power-grab by the general secretary. The rules are explicit that the general secretary does not decide how to take forward members’ business; that is for the annually elected lay NEC to do underPrincipal Rule 8. The general secretary does not interpret the rules; that is for the President to do underSupplementary Rule 11.6: “The President shall determine any questions as to the interpretation of the Union’s Rules, including any questions as to whether or not the Rules are silent.” The general secretary is explicitly at the direction and under the oversight of the NEC under Supplementary Rule 8.1.

Ask the General Secretary to change approach, and join the NEC in the fight

Members elect an NEC and President to carry out the will of all members agreed at ADC. The General Secretary has acted undemocratically, trying to prevent that from happening. We ask that she changes her approach and join us in fighting toimprove members’ pay, jobs, pensions and working conditions.

Help us to regain proper lay-led, democratic control of our union – join the Broad Left Network today and send this to any reps and branches who want a fighting PCS governed by socialist principles, who will challenge the employer rather than doing their dirty work for them.

We were elected by you to be the PCS National President and Deputy President. That means we’re here to defend the democracy of our union and to make sure that the union delivers for you.

The new NEC has hit the ground running, and has already put in place plans:

• To build a serious national campaign on pay, jobs and hybrid working
• To put a claim to the Cabinet Office including for a 10% pay rise, £18p/h minimum wage, progression and a job security guarantee that protects our civil service members in the context of planned 15% staffing cuts.
• To coordinate ongoing strike action between those areas already in dispute – and to seek routes for private sector and devolved sector members to join in the fight.
• To defend trans rights in the face of the new EHRC guidance.

This is the first step towards a radical overhaul of the union.

Unfortunately, the General Secretary of PCS, Fran Heathcote, is content with the status quo and opposes real change in our union.

The General Secretary believes that the 3.5% pay remit published by the Cabinet Office last month is evidence of progress in talks. She agrees with the Cabinet Office that the minimum wage will be rate for the job of AAs.

We disagree, and the union’s National Executive Committee disagrees. The union’s Annual Delegate Conference gave us clear instructions as to pay, terms and conditions, defending trans rights, and on many other matters. Your NEC intends to follow those instructions.

In contrast, the General Secretary seeks to ignore these demands and instructions. She believes she knows best.

The NEC and we do not accept this.

We are fighting to build a national campaign in the UK civil service over the pay remit. Your NEC wants to sort out the decades-long problems faced by you, including real-terms pay cuts over the last 16 years, threats to tens of thousands of jobs, major office closures, escalating workloads and increasing restrictions to hybrid working, where it exists at all.

If the General Secretary was content to disagree, but otherwise to carry out the democratic decisions of the NEC, then this would be just a debate at the NEC as to how we progress union business.

Instead, the General Secretary is obstructing and delaying any action that might build towards a national campaign.

• The General Secretary has failed to pass along contact details for our key representatives in areas the NEC has instructed the President to contact.
• The General Secretary has failed to pass along correspondence from Group Executive Committees that have written to the NEC about the national campaign.
• The General Secretary has persistently issued major papers the night before NEC and National Disputes Committee (NDC) meetings, meaning that elected members are always under pressure of time to respond to her latest delaying tactics, instead of getting out to build and organise amongst members. NEC members do not have 100% facility time, nor a large staff of paid officials to write up our proposals. We have to do this ourselves, in non-work time.
• The General Secretary has provided no update on progress towards giving representatives access to members’ data in line with A226 carried at ADC 2025, despite repeated requests.
• The General Secretary has failed to comply with the instruction to issue communications to members explaining the decisions and actions taken by the NEC so far, including writing to the Cabinet Office to submit a pay claim and demand national talks.

Instead of doing these things, the General Secretary claims her contract gives her powers that it does not. Her contract of employment is clear – she must follow the instructions of the NEC.

NEC meeting of 11 June 2026

On 11 June 2026 the General Secretary and a minority of NEC members ‘walked out’ of an online NEC meeting, that had been convened and proper notice given to all.

The General Secretary or one of her staff then closed the Zoom meeting, attempting to de-rail a scheduled NEC meeting which was still quorate.

To be clear that there is nothing in the rules that allows her to end NEC meetings. Nor is walking out an adult thing to do.

Before the Zoom meeting was shut down, the General Secretary cited rules that she believed were being broken. These were related to the NEC’s democratic decision to agree standing orders which would facilitate the ability of the NEC to implement conference decisions. The paper to move the standing orders is always in the name of the President.

Extraordinarily, the General Secretary did not issue the paper put by the president but replaced it with her own, that ignored the ruling by the President. When the President permitted the moving of an amendment to that paper, the General Secretary and 12 out of 35 NEC members walked out.

It is not the role of the General Secretary to interpret the rules. This power under Supplementary Rule 11.6 is reserved to the President (on matters of interpretation) and to the NEC (in cases where the rules are silent). Instead, when the General Secretary could not get majority support for her approach, she sabotaged the NEC meeting, and had it closed when she did not have authority to do this.

As President, Bev Laidlaw instructed that the NEC reconvene in a different Zoom meeting room to continue with business. The majority of the NEC did so and at that meeting, we agreed important actions, including a national Cost of Living campaign and a response, in line with Conference policy to the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s Code of Practice for services, public functions and associations, and the danger in which it puts some of our members.

We and the elected majority on the National Executive Committee now call on the General Secretary to cease acting against the democratically elected leadership and to work with us to action the policies agreed by our Conference.

We want every single member to know that this NEC answers to Conference and it answers to members, as per the rule book. We are fighting hard to do the work of members and call on the General Secretary to do the same.

We want Fran Heathcote to urgently meet with us to discuss and agree a way in which we can work together in the interests of members and for the elected NEC to retain the “management and control of the union, and the handling of its whole affairs,” as provided for Principal Rule 8 of the union’s rules.

This is your union and you deserve better than the General Secretary’s power plays. We have serious work to do, and we hope that the General Secretary can act in a serious manner and that together we work to achieve what you deserve and need.

Bev Laidlaw PCS President      Dave Semple  PCS Deputy President

Leaflet here