Month: May 2020

Surprising precisely no-one, after more than seven weeks the Tory Ministers and the Cabinet Office have yet to provide any meaningful response to the reduced and weakened “interim” demands sent voluntarily by Mark Serwotka on behalf of PCS, and endorsed by the Socialist View/Left Unity-led NEC majority.

At a special NEC meeting on 19 February, it was agreed that the General Secretary would write to the Cabinet Office with a list of demands for the PCS National Campaign, in line with Conference policy and laying out a comprehensive bargaining position. This list featured amongst other things the 10% pay claim (including appropriate underpins), equal pay, swift pay scale progression, as well as an end to the age discrimination inherent in redundancy “tapering” and in the imposed 2015 pension changes. A letter containing these demands was sent on 27^th February, and brought before the early March NEC.

Fast forward to the NEC meeting on 26^th March, when NEC members were presented with a paper outlining how Mark and the recently-created NEC Senior Officers’ Committee had agreed and sent a reduced list of interim demands to the Cabinet Office on 23^rd March, one day before the arranged negotiating meeting to lay out the PCS National Claim. The SOC had done this without informing the NEC of their intentions, or seeking NEC approval to change and materially weaken our bargaining demands without prompting from the Cabinet Office. The paper brought before the NEC (three days after this letter was sent, and two days after the meeting with the Cabinet Office) simply asked for the NEC’s retroactive endorsement of this position.

The reduced interim demands read:

1. A suspension of the delegated pay process, and an immediate above inflation pay increase for all staff implemented across the civil service from the centre.
2. A 2% reduction in pension contributions.
3. No changes to the CSCS for at least a year.
4. A moratorium on office closures and redundancies.
5. National bargaining machinery for key coronavirus related issues not resolved at departmental level, including enhanced safety measures for those staff who are required to come into work during the coming period.

The letter explained that PCS expected to be able to return to the full demands at some unspecified future point. The General Secretary explained to the NEC that this decision had been taken because there just wouldn’t be time to negotiate a full list of demands whilst the coronavirus emergency is ongoing. This, notably, was his own assertion and forecast of events, and not as a result of the government rejecting or even querying our initial demands. It’s also a baffling position to take, as having made our demands considerably more vague and less detailed, they could arguably take just as long to negotiate.

Broad Left Network members of the NEC mounted firm opposition to this course of action, which they maintain is a material departure from the democratically agreed national position, and a gross overreach of authority on behalf of the SOC. Voluntarily reducing demands before negotiations have started is a massive strategic error, and one that will drastically undermine our position of strength against the employer. Sending a list of comprehensive demands only to send a stripped-back version less than a month later communicates an unconfident and hesitant leadership, at a time when union membership is climbing due to the visible and excellent work being done by PCS reps on the ground to protect our members during the Covid-19 crisis. We should be pushing forward, not cringing back. The Socialist View and Left Unity-led majority on the NEC of course vociferously supported and agreed with the interim demands, whilst decrying any objection as opportunistic and corrupt.

Most worryingly was the significant reduction in the pay claim from a 10% rise to merely “above inflation.” BLN comrades pointed out that this was the bare minimum required to prevent a pay cut for our members, and so had effectively reduced our opening gambit on pay to the lowest possible value, from which the only place for the Tory government to negotiate us was down. It also wrongly communicates to the employer that 10% is not a carefully-decided and necessary increase, but an opportunistic punt, and that just above inflation would actually be sufficient. This is patently not the case; it is an insult to members who have now fought tirelessly in two unsuccessful ballots, and who will now face even more disadvantage for any action in future due to the weak capitulating of their leadership. It is stunningly short-sighted and naïve to simply hope against hope that, after toying with our new skeleton demands for as long as they can, the employer will turn around and give credible consideration to paying PCS members the 10% increase they need and deserve.

As mentioned, we are now more than seven weeks on from submission of the weakened “interim” demands, and have received only platitudes and placeholders from Michael Gove and his grinning acolytes – unless you count the Cabinet Office expressing the Ministers’ gratitude at the SOC’s “constructive approach” to negotiations as positive news which, as a fighting socialist organisation, the Broad Left Network do not. We’re sure that the Tory Government are thrilled by PCS’s newly meagre bargaining pitch, as it will make their job of oppressing the working class that much easier. Unfortunately for the Left Unity NEC majority, a pat on the back from the employer is not what our members want, and it certainly won’t pay anyone’s rent.

It is bad enough that Mark and the Senior Officers’ Committee altered and sent demands without a full and accountable vote of the NEC, thereby side-stepping both ADC and the elected leadership of PCS on such an important and fundamental issue. But on top of this undemocratic action, they have also weakened our bargaining strength with no reward to show for it, and almost certainly secured worse outcomes for our members in the long run.

Claimants and staff have a common interest:- an effective social safety net for all those affected by the crisis, and full protection for our members in providing the service

Workers and claimants are now facing the consequences of Tory austerity cuts, from health care workers having insufficient PPE and testing, to DWP not having the IT to enable staff to work from home safely,  sufficient permanent staffing to process and pay benefits to and the lack of cleaning materials and protocols to maintain social distancing and safety in the workplace.  

Given the enormity of the crisis in the DWP a left leaning leadership should want to ensure democracy involving elected branches, regions and the Group Executive Members.  This being important to ensure members and claimant needs are fully understood and acted on.  The response from the SV faction of DWP has been the opposite.   The GEC was sidelined for example to one emergency meeting before Easter and with another only being taking place as part of the scheduled meetings for the year .   In contrast the Yorkshire and Humber Region with BLN supporters have been organising weekly meetings and using social media to engage reps more frequently.  

At the emergency Group Executive Meeting the lack of democracy was further highlighted when the SP and BLN supporters motion was ruled out of order by the SV Group President on the grounds that it mentioned the death of a DWP member – too sensitive an issue.  That ruling was really cover in our view to prevent a discussion and debate on key demands and details to hold them to account. 

In fact their own recommendations only appeared 6 minutes before the meeting and was the first time most of us including the officers had seen the demands that the GEC was going to vote on. At the meeting BLN attempted to amend the recommendations but our amendments were ruled out as being too detailed. Only small amendments were allowed. When it came to the vote the Group President rather than allowing a decision on those amendments put their recommendations to the meeting for agreement which meant all amendments fell when their motion was carried.  

Our demands clearly influenced the SV approach but SV did not go far enough. We wanted an additional 20,000 permanent staff and protocols developed covering the following points:

* A clear road map that lays out the immediate steps DWP is taking to enable every single DWP worker to work from home unless this agreed by TUS as impossible or in cases of domestic violence.

* An agreement that where a member of staff who stays at home cannot work, for example, due to childcare needs, they are placed on paid special leave.

* A definition of “key worker”, with the object of the union being to minimise the number of members counted as key workers, whilst taking account of the crucial work members of all grades and from all business areas may be able to perform in delivering front line benefits, as an emergency measure.

* An agreed list of critical tasks which require staff to attend an office, on condition that proper equipment is provided and the explicit commitment that staff remain on paid special leave in all cases where this is not adhered to.

* An agreed list of offices which should remain open to deliver crucial services to the vulnerable which cannot be delivered by staff working from home.

* A cast iron guarantee that DWP will not seek to use the Covid crisis to bring in agency staff, with all the dangers – including risks to health and safety – that this implies.

In absence of this protocol or until it is established, we also wanted the GEC to support branches with the task of conducting updated risk assessments across every building to ensure capacity limits are updated to take account of the need for social distancing.  

We recognise the employer may not agree to those demands and consequently there needed to be a threat if the demands could not be met so we demanded Branches must be supported to serve Section 44 notices and prepare walkouts where social distancing is not respected and where consultation is not satisfactory to ensure the safety of staff.  

We also pushed the GEC to bring outsourced contracts back in house must be a priority. This means supporting branches to recruit to the union staff from Interserve, G4S and other privatised services delivered in DWP buildings. 

The BLN motion sort also to instruct Group Officers to keep the GEC fully informed about negotiations, including by the organising of telekits to ensure GEC members are able to play a full role in shaping the demands and strategy we adopt over the coming period. Where it becomes clear that our demands will not be agreed, we also demanded an emergency GEC should be called and Group Officers should propose our next steps. This should include consideration of responses under the Health and Safety at Work Act, the Employment Rights Act and strike action if necessary.