Month: Sep 2020

HMRC PAY TALKS – NEED TO KEEP MEMBERS INFORMED

The union’s 10% pay claim for 2020 is well deserved and a recognition of how far the value of our pay has fallen.

HMRC management’s business case for pay linked to contract changes has been agreed by the Treasury. This was announced to great fanfare on 27th July. Management said that it would take a few weeks to finalise talks with unions. In fact it appears talks could go on until end of March 2021. It would seem the official side is trying to place responsibility for this with Unions.

HMRC’s plans involve a multi-year above inflation pay rise, but there will be strings attached. HMRC is looking to change (worsen) terms and conditions. The details of these changes still haven’t been made public, but we can be sure that HMRC will want to retain ‘flexibility’ provided to it by 5/7 contracts .In accordance with the Treasury pay remit, no new money will be made available to fund the pay rise, so there may be more drastic changes being considered.

HMRC will be asking members to sell their terms and conditions to fund their own pay increase – this isn’t a pay rise. Over the last decade members have seen real terms pay cuts while paying more for their pension. In order to recover the position in pay, members shouldn’t be expected to accept detrimental changes to terms and conditions.

Contractual changes can’t simply be made by the employer and there are a limited number of ways to achieve them. Apparently HMRC’s preferred approach is to agree the changes with the recognised trade unions – PCS and ARC. If the changes are agreed by the unions then they will apply to all staff.

Talks have now begun on a ‘without prejudice basis’. This is a polite way of saying that the talks take place behind closed doors, with only the negotiators knowing what’s being discussed. It seems that the discussions on pay and on terms and conditions are being conducted separately – in line with PCS Group Conference policy that the two subjects are to be kept separate.

Lessons to be learned

HMRC is just the latest in a number of departments to look at contractual changes to fund additional pay . An early example was the DWP with their ‘Employee Deal’ in 2016. Millions of pounds of new Treasury money were put into a pay rise that saw some staff get a 21.5% rise over 4 years whilst others, opting out, got 0.25% for each year of the 4 year deal. Regardless of whether one believes ED was the right thing to do or not, and there are varying views in the BLN, the prospects for a serious campaign to win further concessions from DWP were damaged by the Group’s pay negotiators conducting the negotiations behind closed doors and then presenting the DWP Group Executive Committee with a take-it-or-leave-it deal. The result was that despite some improvements, a two-tier workforce has persisted in DWP, and some workers are now even further behind those doing the same job when it comes to pay.

Our PCS negotiators must resist the pressure of talks behind closed doors, designed to exclude members from the process, so the pressure of tens of thousands of members can’t be mobilised during negotiations. This makes it difficult to consult with members and to organise a response when the final terms of a deal are on the table; any campaign has to begin from a standing start. What is dangerous for our union is when the employer’s desire to reduce member participation becomes mirrored in the attitudes of the union’s leadership, as with the national union’s supposed pay campaign. This has degenerated to the point that member participation amounts to signing and sharing a petition. This can hardly be described as a national campaign to fight for a decent pay rise.

A pay and contract package was also offered in the MOD. Circumstances there were different in that all five recognised trade unions needed to agree the package for it to be implemented. By the time the PCS Group Executive considered the package it had already been rejected by one union. The PCS Group Executive rejected the offer without going to the members. Although the GEC decision was correct, the way it was done was used by the employer to turn members against the union and a significant number of members left PCS.

There is a clear lesson here that even if the R&C Group Executive think members should reject HMRC’s offer, members must be kept involved at every stage, so they understand why the deal on offer is a bad one and reject it in a ballot.

The importance of involving members is just as clear from the experience of the MOJ group. Again there was a pay and contract offer and it was put to members. Over 74% of members took part in the ballot, with 93% voting against the offer. This approach not only engaged existing PCS members, it also increased membership in the MOJ group by 10%.

Organise now

The MOJ Group experience shows what could be accomplished in the R&C Group. Yet recruitment and engagement with members doesn’t simply materialise because we ask for it – these things must be sought through GEC leadership, supporting work at the branch level across the group. The Broad Left Network demands are:

▪️Fight for the National PCS pay claim – fully funded 10% pay rise with a minimum underpin of £2,400, and no detrimental changes to terms and constitution.
▪️That the full GEC is kept informed by negotiators of the talks with HMRC.
▪️The GEC decides the PCS response at each stage and keep members informed.
▪️The R&C GEC commit now to a ballot of all members on the final offer, making the case for this in the strongest terms with the NEC/NDC.
▪️R&C group negotiate with HMRC to make paid time available to all staff to attend PCS organised meetings on the talks and the final offer.
▪️Support branches to call a series of meetings of members and non-members, whether the meetings are conducted in offices or via Teams or both. The meetings will be to discuss the terms of the offer, seek feedback from members and, when the offer is finalised, to encourage members to vote in the ballot.
▪️Support branches in contacting all members to ensure that PCS holds up to date contact information for all members. This to include discussions with the General Secretary office to ensure that the full time resources of the Group Office and Regional Offices are made available to support branch activities.
▪️Support branches in recruiting new members, using tailored materials around the pay discussions to show how joining PCS gives HMRC staff a voice in the issues that matter to them. Again this needs to include full time resources of the Group Office and Regional Offices being made available to support branch activities.

By taking these steps, PCS R&C Group can finish 2020 in a stronger position: greater density, the ability to communicate with members and ready to deliver again in the National Campaign if another ballot is called. Yet the consequences of not doing this are dire – PCS miss taking advantage of this potentially watershed moment and risk losing members at a time when office closures are already having an impact. Now is the time for the R&C GEC to show bold leadership with a clear purpose.

Waffle won’t win; we need a serious union campaign in DWP

The union’s executive in DWP met on 23^rd September, to discuss what to do about the plans by DWP senior management to push ahead with plans to extend operating hours in Jobcentres and 21 Universal Credit Service Centres (SCs) and to extend the number of claimants unnecessarily attending Jobcentres in person, for face to face appointments.

PCS members in DWP voted overwhelmingly for action; 77% said they were prepared to act in order to prevent DWP plans that pose a risk to their safety.

Even in the few weeks since the ballot the situation has changed dramatically. We have gone from a situation with preparation for the schools in England and Wales to return and the opening up of the economy and socialising with pubs and restaurants reopening, to the chaos we have now. We now have soaring covid-19 infection rates, numerous local lockdowns and the totally blatant disregard for the safety of our members in the haste to book unnecessary huge numbers of face to face appointments which help no-one and put communities more at risk of the spread of the virus.

DWP BLN demands that the disregard of our safety by DWP management needs to be met with a strong response and the need to move to a statutory ballot to stop the extension of services to the public and the extension of opening hours. We can discuss the form of this ballot but we need to give a firm lead and clear message to management that we will stop their plans together. DWP BLN supporters on the GEC argued that branches should have been given the full data and analysis of the consultative ballot to fully arm everyone with all the information to have a genuine say in the consultation of branches that is due to take place. Regions are a vital part of the support for branches and regional/nation committees should be fully involved to work in tandem with branch committees and be fully aware of support branches need rather than being bypassed by the Group.

At same time we need to ensure that not a single member of PCS is left to fend for themselves when it comes to opposing DWP’s plans to extend opening and increase face to face appointments. We must challenge the unsafe and dangerous situation that DWP senior managers are imposing on site by putting unbearable pressure on local managers to book in appointments in every jobcentre regardless of safety. We can use our normal collective methods to mobilise the anger in our offices and oppose the plans – organising safe socially distanced meetings of our members outside in the car parks or in the muster points wherever there is enough room to assemble safely. Not only does the union flexing its muscles rattle the DWP but it also shows members that we can work and act together to stand up to management and oppose the plans. We have argued that the fact that workers can respond immediately to dangerous situations and remove themselves to a place of safety can be used effectively to deal with the immediate attacks we face, whilst we go through the bureaucracy and timeframe of organising a statutory ballot.

Build a safe, socially-distanced face-to-face campaign

Beating the 50% turnout threshold imposed by the Tory government in 2016 is very possible. However it needs to be said that the LU-led GEC launched the consultative ballot and promptly hid behind their computer keyboards.

No group-wide leaflet was produced to allow for desk dropping or leafleting outside buildings. No arrangements were made for face to face meetings. In branches which are controlled by LU GEC members, those reps who wanted to organise socially distanced, safe meetings using protective equipment were told they weren’t allowed to. Instead, emails, poorly attended online Zoom meetings and badly organised and publicised telephone banking was all that happened. BLN supporters on the GEC proposed a clear route to increase the amount of work being done, so that turnout in a statutory ballot would be maximised. This was voted down by Left Unity.

The strategy we put forward is a strategy to win. We urge all branches not to accept the secretiveness of the GEC, and not to accept their unwillingness to lead a serious campaign; we are circulating a draft motion that allows branches to discuss what they think the Group strategy should be, for this to be sent to the GEC, and used in the consultation meetings to demand a serious strategy.

Build a fighting strategy that defends members and builds the union!

The same people as currently lead PCS in DWP put out a branch bulletin from the national union on 29.06.2020 where they claimed that one of the key reasons why the union is shrinking is because of the way the largest government departments are shrinking. Yet DWP is expanding at a fast rate just now; thousands of agency jobs and thousands of permanent jobs are being added – yet recruitment to the union has been slow.

BLN supporters on the GEC were flabbergasted, therefore, when the Left Unity majority that controls the GEC decided to vote against our simple proposal that we need to produce up to date recruitment material and leaflets, as well as specific up-to-date material for the management grades in DWP, who are being put under enormous pressure by politically motivated decision-making.

Senior managers have been heard to acknowledge that yes they have an obligation to protect staff, but they also have an obligation to vulnerable claimants, which is why they’re pressing ahead with the extension of opening hours and the increased number of face to face appointments. At the coalface, HEO and SEO managers in Jobcentres know very well that face to face appointments simply aren’t necessary just now. These grades need union support, but the GEC simply refused!

Meanwhile thousands of new staff, especially young workers, who have never been part of a union, are being thrust into new workplaces. Ensuring branches have the resources necessary to get stuck into the recruitment work should be a high priority – new and enthusiastic union members are exactly the types who would vote yes in any ballot, if advised to do so by their reps. Failing in this task is failing at basic trade unionism.

Will the Left Unity leadership of the GEC be saved by the Tories?

Given the lack of any visible strategy and lack of proposals to build a serious campaign from the union’s leadership in DWP, some members have wondered whether the government’s so-called “firebreak” to prevent a resurgence of Covid-19 will cause DWP to change course. This is how depleted members’ faith in the current leadership has become.

The message from Westminster has been, work at home if you can. This potentially puts an arrow right through the previous Tory plans to drag civil servants – even those safely working at home – into the office one day a week. In HMRC, for example, plans to bring back thousands of staff have now been reversed. Will this happen in DWP? Will it have an impact on the number of face-to-face appointments in Jobcentres?

Alex Chisholm, Cabinet Office Permanent Secretary, has indicated that Departments will make up their own minds about this – there will be no central order from the government for departments to send staff home etc. This means the only guarantee for DWP staff will be if we build a serious campaign to oppose management plans to extend operating hours and increase the face to face appointments.

What we know for sure is that even if DWP do change course, these plans will be resurrected as soon as the political priorities in Westminster return to panicking at the state of the economy and to blaming it all on claimants and civil servants. The only course available is to build a serious fight for a binding agreement that protects the health and safety of DWP staff and of members of the public.

Staff must be protected. Members must be protected. We urge all branches to fight for the serious campaigning work that we need to win and stop the reckless, unsafe extension of services and extension of hours from 30th November, and for a national statutory ballot to protect all of our members across all Jobcentres and across the 21 affected Universal Credit SCs.

Claimant numbers to increase in DWP Jobcentres from Monday; defend your rights!

On 8^th September DWP announced to all staff their intention to bring claimants into Jobcentres who don’t require an emergency appointment. Jobcentres have been open throughout the crisis, but this has been limited to a small number of vulnerable people. The emphasis of the DWP announcement was to give local managers a great deal of latitude in whether they decide to do this, and how they decide to it.

In Glasgow, for example, DWP senior managers are planning to bring small numbers of the claimants in the 18-24 age group into Jobcentres. Union reps are very clear that there is no good reason for doing this and members, who were told on Friday 18^th September about new face to face interviews with claimants commencing on Monday 21^st September, have expressed their anger that this group are being dragged in for no good reason.

Senior managers in multiple areas, such as Greater Manchester, have indicated that because they are under ministerial instruction, they have no choice but to proceed to increase the number of claimants coming in. This is not true. It is open to managers to analyse the risks for their areas and to agree that no additional claimants will be brought into offices, particularly in locations where Covid-19 is resurgent. Handling appointments by telephone is safe and effective.

While some area managers are suggesting that the approach will be voluntary, this is not true everywhere. Some staff are simply being told that they will have appointments, as if they have no choice. The union’s advice is very clear: this is a voluntary matter both for you and for claimants and if you are worried about safety, do not volunteer.

Lack of consultation with PCS – don’t volunteer!

Local management are obliged to consult union reps and Health and Safety reps about this change, but insufficient time has been allowed for this by national DWP managers. Our advice, as PCS reps, to all members in Jobcentres is to:

·         Insist that your line manager provides you with confirmation that a review of the Jobcentre Front Facing Risk Assessment has been carried out with TU present.

·         Contact your local union rep and TU-appointed Health and Safety rep to make sure they have agreed the risk assessment.

If there has been no risk assessment, or it has not been agreed because managers have not put in place safety measures insisted upon by the union’s Health and Safety reps, we urge members to refuse to be involved with the appointments.

Given that the Group Executive Committee were aware of these changes, the union branch bulletin that was published late in the afternoon of Friday 18^th September has come out much too late to support branches in organising an effective response ahead of the morning of Monday 21^st. Despite this inadequately timed response, the GEC bulletin contains a useful list of questions and safeguards that can be discussed by reps with members and put in place through local negotiations with management.

Broad Left Network supporters who are PCS reps in DWP are strongly opposed to management’s plans to ramp up the face to face work in Jobcentres. It is unnecessary and unsafe. We urge union members not to volunteer to be involved with these appointments until all steps are taken to ensure members’ safety at work.

DWP ballot – time to ramp up the campaign

The union in DWP has recently conducted an informal ballot over this issue; nearly 80% of all staff said they would be willing to take action against the measures DWP are taking, including extension of operating hours, which the union believes are threatening health and safety. It is vital that all members look after each other and collectively insist on safety at work.

The view of BLN supporters in DWP is that the DWP Group Executive Committee should proceed to a statutory ballot. Further, the Group Executive Committee must now authorise and support all necessary measures, including leafleting outside offices in a socially-distant, safe manner, car park meetings and ensuring where members are being put into dangerous situations, we ensure that everyone understands their rights under H&S legislation and we fully back our members taking action to protect their safety.  This robust approach will build the support we need to beat the 50% turnout threshold imposed on union ballots by the 2016 anti-union laws.

PCS in DWP would then be able to prepare legal strike action should DWP continue ploughing ahead with changes which threaten the health and safety of our members and that of the public.

It is clear from the indicative ballot that members are deeply unhappy and are prepared to take action. That force must now be brought to bear against DWP which is also determined to bring in late opening and Saturday working to put even more pressure on our members and adversely impact safety. With the Cabinet Office insisting that all staff must work at least one day from the office, it is likely that without a serious campaign from the union, there will be a steady erosion of the safety measures we currently have in place.

A robust response from the union is therefore necessary, challenging every breach of safety legislation by DWP and developing a collective response across vulnerable areas like the Jobcentres and Universal Credit. Only this will force DWP to put safety first and protect our members in their offices.

In the middle of June, the Sunday Times published a leak which suggested that the government was rowing back on commitments to reform the Gender Recognition Act 2004. Proposed reforms, over which a huge national consultation was launched in 2018, included reducing the archaic, expensive and needlessly stressful process trans people are required to endure to change their gender. Trans people should be able to self-identify as their affirmed gender.

Due to be published on July 30, publication of the government’s report into reform of the

Gender Recognition Act has now been delayed until September. This delay brings nothing but uncertainty for trans members of our union and trans people in our communities; the government has promised no roll-back of trans rights without saying what exactly that means. Pronouncements by Tory Minister Liz Truss suggest the government is planning to oppose self-ID, to deny medical services to trans children and to make it harder for trans women to access public services.

Even Tory pronouncements that should command unanimous support, such as a potential ban on the barbaric practice of gay conversion therapy, are being met with calls that a ban should not include conversion therapy aimed at trans people.

Ahead of publication of the government’s report, members of the union’s NEC had sought to propose and pass a motion which would have made clear the union’s opposition to Tory backsliding, to the divide-and-rule tactics and full support for self-ID instead of the current over-medicalised process by which trans people have to be diagnosed with a mental disorder (gender dysphoria) before they can self-identify as their affirmed gender.

Unfortunately, despite being proposed three NEC meetings ago, this motion has still not been debated by the NEC. PCS President, Fran Heathcote, keeps scheduling very short meetings, or refusing to schedule meetings every two weeks as was agreed as NEC policy earlier in the year, and the President also chooses where on the agenda issues are debated.

The current Left Unity/Democrat leadership of the union has not had the best record on trans rights. The NEC was censured in 2019 by Annual Delegate Conference over the General Secretary placing his signature on a letter in the Morning Star which deliberately misrepresented trans people as the perpetrators of violence rather than the true position, which is that they are overwhelmingly the sufferers of violence.

Tory delays give us another opportunity, however, to mobilise the union behind efforts to improve trans rights. Organisations such as Amnesty International and Stonewall have already published condemnations of the Tory retreat on GRA reform, and there have been demonstrations by trans people and their allies across the country.

Members of our union can be encouraged to get involved, but we must also recognise that more must be done if we are to win ground in the battle for trans rights. Trade unions must be mobilised to defend public services, and thereby to defend a vulnerable minority.

Liberation struggle is class struggle: oppose divisive Tory tactics

Right-wing attempts to drive a wedge into the LGBT+ movement have been noted above; the other big tactic employed by the right is to attempt to drive a wedge between trans people and women over the question of access to public services.

A minority of vocal anti-trans activists, who claim to speak for women, have sought to portray trans women as predatory men whose consuming obsession is changing their gender so as to get access to public services such as refuges. In the context of austerity, where organisations such as Rape Crisis and Women’s Aid have faced huge cuts and are unable to meet existing demand from women for support, this lie has found an echo amongst a layer and it needs to be refuted.

To give just one example of the extent of this lie, a Scottish government survey of all 12 regulatory bodies that cover women’s refuges for the whole of the UK found that the existing safeguards in the Equality Act 2010, which allow for certain spaces to exclude trans women, had never needed to be used. The bodies also reported that, although trans women had been accessing their services for years, there had been no incidents involving trans women reported in any refuge throughout the UK. Meanwhile every study available shows the horrendously high rates of assault, domestic violence, sexual assault, rape and murder suffered by trans women.

The trade union movement must fight for all who need access to fully funded public services to support them against domestic abuse and against rape. Housing needs to be available to allow those who are domestically abused to escape their abuser immediately. The law needs to be changed to protect those who suffer from domestic abuse from further victimisation by their employer. The fight for these services, against austerity and against prejudice, is one that should fall squarely on the shoulders of the trade union movement.

Perpetuating myths such as those told by opponents of GRA reform can only serve to divide those who should be united in opposing Tory austerity and cuts to public services. They serve to increase the isolation of trans women and the evidence suggests that during the period of the consultation, in which mainstream press pages have resounded with attacks on trans women, instances of physical attacks on trans people have increased. Nor do these ideas offer a way forward in the fight to defend public services against the austerity onslaught, which falls on working class women disproportionately.

In our own union, there have been examples of senior union reps who deliberately refer to trans people by the wrong gender, or by the wrong name. Combating prejudice and misinformation, and building a powerful, united campaign to improve the lives of trans people is possible, and our union must play a leading role.

It is a mistake to do anything that exacerbates divisions in the working class – along the lines of gender, sexuality, race, etc – as the proponents of identity politics and anti-trans ideas do. The defenders of capitalism already use division to weaken our struggles against exploitation, austerity and oppression. Instead we need to fight for the maximum unity of the working class in struggle around a socialist programme of jobs, homes and services for all.

We call on the leadership of PCS to publish a statement which outlines the steps the union’s leadership is planning to take in line with Annual Delegate Conference policy to support and campaign for reform of the GRA, to demand self-ID for trans people, to demand high quality public services to support all women against domestic abuse and violence, especially in the era of Covid-19 when women have been isolated with their abuser, and to oppose the divisive lies being spread by the media and by the government about trans people.