Month: Aug 2025

The Broad Left Network stands in solidarity with all LGBT+ people. We recognise and respect the identities, dignity, and privacy of all workers in PCS and wider society. The labour movement must always work to fight for the liberation of LGBT+ workers as an inherent part of the struggle for workers’ liberty overall. 

Refusal to defend LGBT+ members

We are very concerned that our union has seemingly refused to comment  in this BBC article when asked to do so. It contains a report of legal action threatened by the Christian Institute to prevent our civil service members wearing LGBT+ identifying lanyards, listing their pronouns (such as in email signatures) and attending Pride events whilst on official business. 

In this article we explain the importance of this issue and why PCS must speak out.  PCS must defend all its members including those in the Trans+ community. “Trans+” is used here as an inclusive term to refer to all people who are trans, non-binary, intersex, or any other gender that differs from what they were assigned at birth. 

There is a complete absence of LGBT+ voices in the BBC article published 20 August 2025 but what is particularly damning is the silence of PCS. According to the BBC our union leaders “declined to provide a comment” despite being asked and despite the threat of a legal challenge directly attacking PCS members. 

PCS Proud, a self -organised group in PCS, representing LGBT+ members, were not approached by the central union to  comment, nor did PCS warn Proud this attack was likely. The President, General Secretary, the “Left Unity” NEC majority and senior unelected FTOs running the union have visibly turned away from the issue, and the silence is deafening.

This has echoes of national president Martin Cavanagh’s recent refusal to show Proud the PCS response to the recent EHRC consultation about the supreme court ruling that sex for the purposes of the equality act refers to “biological sex.” PROUD provided a suggested response to PCS nationally, but to date, neither PROUD nor reps across PCS have a clue what was contained in the final submission. It is shrouded in secrecy and one can only assume that the response is a further attempt to undermine union policy by equivocating on full defence of Trans+ people. 

PCS Conference Policy is clear – we support LGBT+ workers

Motion A317 here which carried overwhelmingly at PCS Annual Delegate Conference 2024 (and is therefore current PCS policy) states the following:

• Biological reductionism is harmful to everyone, but especially women, girls, and the Trans community
• Actively oppose any organisations or individuals who dehumanise others in words, deeds, or terminology thereby potentially bringing hate or harm to our minority members.
• Oppose the introduction of any policies within the UK civil service which undermine or remove the existing rights of minorities and/or our allies, including any attempts to politicise our lives or identities.
• Issue a public statement through all union media channels stating PCS opposition to all political or ideological beliefs that, through their manifestation, seek to dehumanise and/or increase fear or hate towards vulnerable minorities and affirming our support for the ECHR for all

Biological reductionism in this context,  refers to the notion that gender roles are simply the predetermined result of genes and chromosomes – i.e. a woman is defined solely by “biology”.

PCS is compelled by its own policy to oppose the introduction of a ban on lanyards or Pride attendance. PCS must oppose the Christian Institute who, through their legal action, seek to dehumanise Trans+ civil service workers by attacking their right to use the pronouns which align with their affirmed gender. 

Despite this clear policy and the union’s duty to defend LGBT+ members, PCS actively declined to comment on an attack within the civil service on its own members. This abandonment of LGBT+ members signals to the employer that PCS will not oppose or make any noise about this if they bow to the pressure to segregate and withdraw support for LGBT+ people, at a time where it is clear that the Labour government would like nothing more than to throw Trans+ people (along with immigrants, disabled people and other communities) under the proverbial bus. 

Left Unity’s anti-democratic attacks

The Christian Institute is not legislating against PCS, but the civil service itself. As such, PCS is free to comment on the legal case. In fact, it is the most qualified and appropriate body to comment on such cases that affect LGBT+ members in the civil service. 

While the BBC does not reference the exact question asked of PCS, it does say that PCS refused to comment on how the legal challenge could affect its members and whether the union felt they should be allowed to represent the service in Pride events. We know that the Christian Institute very clearly wants to impinge on the rights, liberty and dignity of Civil Servants based on their anti-LGBT+ beliefs. 

PCS speaks loudly (and correctly) on other legal issues involving Rwanda deportations, the Civil Service Compensation Scheme, WASPI women, etc. to name just a few. There is nothing preventing PCS – the civil servants’ union which represents thousands of LGBT+ members – from commenting on this court case. 

However, on this topic alone, the Left Unity-led leadership of PCS said no comment. This can only be because yet again the LU leadership do not want to make statements or act in support of LGBT+ rights.

We are still waiting for the statement demanded by members in ADC2024 Motion A317. LU have repeatedly blocked by undemocratically using the role of the President as NEC chair to rule out of order or delay the vast majority of NEC motions on trans rights submitted in 2024-2025.

This cowardly refusal also fits in well with LU’s recent history of blocking trans liberation and defending gender critical views, most often by using a bureaucratic smokescreen of legal advice to avoid standing up for Trans+ members. At ADC2025, the leadership of PCS successfully removed Motion A57 from the Conference agenda and did not print up to 25 emergency motions in relation to Trans+ rights. 

The fight for liberation for all

Civil Service Pride and rainbow lanyards are not and were  never the bastion of LGBT+ liberation by themselves. As socialists we know we will only eradicate hatred and discrimination through all working-class people uniting in opposition to the inherently exploitative capitalist system, and demanding sufficient (and abundant) provision for all. 

However, branding expressions of being part of or supporting the LGBT+ community as “political” and seeking to ban them demonstrates a deeper and more dangerous intent. It attempts to establish that support for LGBT+ people is not widely held, and to remove visibility of LGBT+ people as ordinary members of society. This strengthens the capitalist system by making it seem strange and wrong to be LGBT+, and somehow harmful to other people which creates a false divide of “us” and “them”. This sets different groups of workers against each other, blaming society’s ills on workers with slightly different experiences of the same desire for family, privacy etc. rather than the greed and wealth-hoarding of global corporations. It creates the idea that being heterosexual and cisgender (not transgender) is the “normal” and “right” way to be, which puts pressure on anyone who doesn’t fit that mould to change and conform, aka for their real selves to disappear. This is one of the many reasons that anti-trans rhetoric and policymaking in the UK has caused the Lemkin Institute to issue a red flag warning for risk of genocide against Trans+ people. 

The Christian Institute, in its case, suggests that in addition to being allowed to freely oppose the inclusion of Trans+ people through its gender critical ideology, it also seeks to further promote “traditional Christian views about marriage and sexual ethics”.

It is beyond the scope of this article to argue what “traditional Christian views about marriage and sexual ethics” include, but it will usually amount to criticism of the right to equal marriage, the right to divorce, the right to abortion, the right to have sex with people of any gender, and more. We have long held the view that the attacks on Trans+ rights and liberation foretell further attempts to erode, erase and distort the hard won civil rights across all equality strands and for all workers. This legal case is clear evidence of that coming true.

The Broad Left Network demands that the PCS National Executive Committee respect the sovereignty of our Conference policy, and agree to issue a statement in support of our LGBT+ members following its next meeting in September. We urge the NEC to support the motion put forward by BLN member Fiona Brittle repeatedly since May on Trans+ liberation, and act to defend LGBT+ members from these serious attacks. 

Join the Broad Left Network and stand with us as we challenge Left Unity to defend LGBT+ PCS members.

Please also read this statement from the PCS Proud National Committee on the same subject.

Download Newsletter here

Following the Emergency NEC which met on the 29^{th of} May -Report here – further meetings took place during June and most recently on the 23/24^th July. The next NEC begins on the 2^{nd of} September. Significantly this year, the National President has stopped ruling BLN motions out of order, even though they are directly contradicting papers from the GS – could this be because they now have a majority?

This report sets out the key discussions which took place. If you want more detail, then please get in touch with any BLN comrades on the NEC.

National Campaign

Three months of sleepwalking into Starmer’s cuts

Reps and members would be forgiven for wondering what is happening with the union’s national campaign. Annual Delegate Conference, meeting in May, determined that the union needed to get serious to fight against the cuts raining down from Starmer and Reeves’ Labour government.

Since Conference concluded at midday on 23 May, the Labour government has announced a below-inflation pay rise for hundreds of thousands of civil servants, with a pay remit of 3.25%. Further job cuts – including 25% job cuts at the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office – have also been announced.

The outcome of Labour’s Spending Review, SR25, has also been announced. This covers government spending plans up to 2030. Departments are expected to find 15% savings in their “administrative budgets”; this is where most of the staffing budget for each department sits, so it inevitably means swingeing job cuts.

Faced with this onslaught, one would expect the leaders of the largest civil service union to be ready with a plan, including preparation for an urgent national strike ballot. With a bit of fight, a Labour government whose support in the last election was a mile wide and an inch deep could be decisively fended off and concessions won. Look at the U turns they’ve had to do on PIP, when Disabled People Against Cuts stood against them – our union could and must do the same.

PCS Leadership complacency since May

Instead of immediately engaging with reps, putting the employer of notice of a pending strike ballot and preparing organising materials asked for by the former NEC majority back in January 2025, general secretary Fran Heathcote and president Martin Cavanagh seem far too enamoured of talks with the senior leaders in the civil service, with lip service only to the idea of a much-needed strike ballot and campaign.

In a paper to the July NEC, the general secretary describes how “discussions with the Cabinet Office should give us some cause for optimism” on the questions of pay and reward. Worse, the general secretary goes on to suggest that pay restoration “be funded through finding efficiencies within the civil service”, i.e. job cuts. In the context of a government that is not hiding its preparations for attacks on the civil service over its term of office, there is no reason for optimism.

The general secretary seems lost in a fantasy by imagining that Labour Ministers are sympathetic to a return to national pay bargaining and were blocked from making progress during the Blair years only by the Permanent Secretaries (the most senior civil servants in each area). She seems to hope that now there’s a new mood at the top of the civil service and is more interested in discussing possible future changes than any movement for members right now. This kind of delusion is dangerous and disarms the union, encouraging members to put their faith in enlightened managers instead of their own power.

In fact, no progress on a return to national pay bargaining was made from 1997-2010 for a lot of reasons – but one was that Labour’s leadership bought fully into the idea of cutting public services. Starmer and Reeves still do. The language has changed slightly since the Cameron and May governments – “we’ve all got to tighten our belts; there’s no magic money tree” etc – but the basic approach to the public sector is the same. Cuts are taken to mean efficiency, and efficiency is taken to mean cuts – it’s always workers expected to pay the price by nobly accepting cuts to living standards and public services, never the profits of big business and billionaires.

Heathcote and Cavanagh appear overawed by the willingness of the Cabinet Office to meet with and speak to them, when previously the senior leaders of the civil service barely bothered even with this. However empty talks are not worth much more than no talks at all and are in fact serving as a smokescreen for no action.

This is not the first time they’ve been a little too credulous. In July 2023, Heathcote – then national president, with Cavanagh her deputy – presided over the dismantling of our national strike campaign based on a £1,500 one-off payment to members and a promise of talks on pay. They balloted members to accept the £1,500 based on these offered talks – which predictably went nowhere.

But we have also been here before with the current Labour government, during the Facilities Management dispute across a dozen sites in London and East Kilbride from late 2024 into mid-2025.

Only after months of determined strike action by privatised facilities workers in government offices did Labour’s Georgia Gould step in. Action was paused to allow for talks, but progress quickly stalled, and a victory only finally came after further ballots and action even after the intervention by Gould and the Cabinet Office. The lesson here should be clear; Labour will only step up if forced.

All this underlines that there is no room for complacency or credulity, which seems to be about all that is on offer from the Left Unity-led PCS NEC.

Will there actually be a national campaign? July NEC’s decisions

So, several months on from Conference, what has been decided?

The NEC agreed to demand an agreement on pay, jobs and flexible working across the civil service, which really is just a restatement of Conference policy with fewer added extras.

A “ballot-ready strategy” has now been endorsed, although this seems to be heavy on arranging administrative tasks such as phone banking, and light on things reps actually need for worker-to-worker conversations, like well-crafted leaflets putting the union’s case that a fight can win or support with members meetings. Delivering a successful ballot requires a campaign to reassure members that their efforts won’t be wasted this time, not just endless cold calls. Furthermore, there’s no reason any of this couldn’t have been agreed in May – why the delay?

Heathcote recommended branch members’ meetings to run mid-August to mid-September – why not immediately following the July NEC at least, but more importantly why not from the end of May? Could it be that the average LU NEC member wouldn’t have a clue what to say unless they had Paul O’Connor writing them a speakers’ brief? Or that the later they start, the less likely they are to deliver a successful ballot turnout and force Heathcote et al to have a fight on pay at all.

National PCS-run activist meetings have been lacklustre affairs so far, with no serious attempt to set out a strategy of build a serious campaign capable of winning.

Levy refund – weakening of Left Unity’s apolitical election promise

A levy refund plan has been agreed by the NEC majority, to repay the six months of levy payments which members paid from September 2024 to February 2025.

Meanwhile the creation of a “sustainable fighting fund” has been punted to the National Disputes Committee and a future consultation with branches, to conclude by the end of November 2025 – two months after the statutory ballot on pay members demanded at ADC 2025 is supposed to kick off. Presumably LU needs the extra time to work out how they can phrase asking members for money to support strikes, at the same time as paying some back because their entire election campaign was based on repaying money which should be used to support strikes and to fight the employer.

And that is pretty much it. That’s the whole plan. If that leaves you underwhelmed, and feeling like the heart of the NEC isn’t really in the idea of a strike ballot in September 2025, then you wouldn’t be alone.

Broad Left Network supporters, and allies in the wider left coalition for change – 7 out of 35 NEC members this year – opposed the above as not remotely going far enough or fast enough, and proposed a motion here that would have set PCS immediately on a “war-footing”, with preparations to match the urgency of such a posture – and the urgency of our position vis a vis a cuts-making Labour government. This motion complimented and continued the similar, highly detailed motion we submitted to the May NEC (which can be found here). Both were rejected by the NEC majority in favour of Heathcote’s delays and pleasantries.

The current situation – delegated pay, and where do we go now

Delegated pay bargaining, which negotiators were quickly instructed to enter by Heathcote immediately after the Civil Service Pay Remit was published in May, is at different stages in different areas. Major employers such as DWP, HMRC and MOJ have now concluded talks. Other areas remain outstanding with some submitting business cases for more money – but nowhere is making sufficient progress for most members.

If we’re not to simply waste all this work – negotiating on behalf of members, keeping them informed during talks, holding consultation meetings to vote on rejection of the pay award, building up pressure on the employer by mobilising members – then we need a national campaign now. That is not the course set by the current NEC.

If the NEC majority and PCS leadership remain this complacent, BLN supporters across PCS will have to come together to discuss what to do on pay in each area. We cannot rule out the need to submit employer-specific trade disputes and to build a campaign amongst a coalition of PCS branches and groups prepared to override the inaction of the National Executive Committee.

If you aren’t prepared to wait indefinitely, while the NEC tries to bury a serious national campaign in mud and confusion, join the PCS Broad Left Network and work with us to build a fighting, democratic PCS and the campaign members deserve.

Other issues to note from July NEC

Current Disputes:

Updates were given including:

• Sacked Activists at HMRC Benton Park View
• MyCSP striking for union recognition
• Ofgem
• Land Registry

Organising and Education update: Membership 187, 297 as of 25/8/2025.

Political Fund Ballot: timetable agreed, and ballot will run from 6^th October. (Separately the BLN will produce material explaining why a yes vote is required and linking this in with broader political and industrial developments).

TUC Congress motions and NEC delegates agreed

The following affiliations were agreed:

Alternative to Asylum and C4C Affiliation

Strike Map

NHS

4-day week movement

Devolved Nations update which included Scotland and Wales but not NI. This provided detail on workplans for the next period. Scottish Government pay campaign was discussed, a fuller article on the BLN position can be found here.

English Devolution: a paper was agreed, despite BLN comrades raising reservations to the direction of travel, without a clear analysis on proposals across the piece.

FM Dispute: this has now been settled with members voting to accept the final offer. BLN raised reservations about the way in which this dispute had been handled whilst acknowledging the magnificent work from local reps, and particularly the strikers.

FM Workers Democracy: a paper was carried setting up an Association for FM members. BLN NEC members argued the paper should be “kept on the table” as it was clear members, reps, branches and groups had not been consulted. BLN are concerned this could be used to avoid current democratic lay structures which have been critical of the union’s handling of the FM dispute.

Supreme Court Trans Ruling presentation: – Thompsons Guest Speaker and barrister presented on the ruling, in a session which was announced just beforehand to be covered by legal privilege and therefore not for sharing to any member, branch or group despite keen interest. BLN NEC members were left unimpressed by the presentation, and without any sense that the BLN approach (shared by PCS Proud and indeed the vast majority of the union) of condemning the unjust ruling and fighting to defend Trans, intersex and non-binary (Trans+) workers is illegal, or should change whatsoever.. BLN moved that their motion on Trans+ liberation (which can be found here) should finally be taken after being pushed to the next meeting by the Cavanagh in his capacity as Chair in May and again in June. Cavanagh and the NEC majority opposed this, and it was once again pushed to September, where Heathcote is expected to bring a paper on what in her view PCS needs to do in light of the ruling.

Finally, several Rule Ten complaints were heard (See rule 10 here). This is the rule that deals with very serious complaints and are subject to oversight from the NEC.  The detail is understandably confidential and the BLN respects and understands this.  However, we raised – yet again – several points regarding errors in the process, the lack of detail given to the NEC and therefore the lack of meaningful oversight. This includes refusal to show the NEC the actual complaint to decide whether it should use its power clearly stated under Rule 10 to decide whether to commission an investigation. Instead, Heathcote reads out her own summary of the complaint and informs the NEC “for noting” rather than decision that she has already instructed an FTO to investigate. These points have all been consistently ignored by Heathcote, Cavanagh and NEC majority but we will keep pushing.

In conclusion there continued to be a lot of business not reached including new constitutions for groups, motions from the BLN on trans rights and political representation. Importantly our motions setting out an approach in the context of political developments around Jeremy Corbyn was not reached, here nor our motion on trans rights, referenced above.

In solidarity

Fiona Brittle
Marion Lloyd
Rob Ritchie
Bobby Young

HMRC has now published its pay offer. The employer has chosen to limit pay to stay within the Civil Service Pay Remit Guidance for 2025. This gave HMRC a ‘pot’ of around £90 million for pay rises, made up of 3.25% plus the option of a further 0.5% “to be targeted at specific departmental workforce issues”. 

Such a low remit doesn’t address low pay, doesn’t address the cost-of-living crisis and doesn’t address pay lost as a result of government imposed pay freezes and pay caps over years. RPI inflation was 4.4% in June 2025 when the HMRC pay settlement date fell. It means that most HMRC members will suffer real terms pay cuts again this year. This reinforces the importance of building a serious campaign across HMRC and the whole union to win our national pay demand for a 10% pay rise and pay restoration to reverse the erosion of members’ wages.

We need a national campaign on pay. A strategy to build this campaign was agreed at the PCS Annual Delegate Conference 2025 – motion A383. This called on PCS to “proceed to a ballot by no later than mid-September 2025 if there is not satisfactory progress made to meeting our demands”.

The current Left Unity led National Executive Committee (NEC) has no interest in building a campaign. June and July were wasted by the NEC. Instead of preparing members for a fight, pay negotiators were instructed to enter pay discussions at departmental level, therefore immediately diluting our ability to go back to the Government nationally to demand more money. Despite the NEC agreeing that August should be used to speak with activists and members about a campaign, there is little sign of much activity and even less signs of the serious work required to build support for a national ballot in September.

The HMRC Group Executive Committee (GEC), which includes members of the Broad Left Network, must continue to provide the leadership required to build the necessary campaign to win on pay in HMRC. In July, the GEC agreed to run a “multi-stranded union campaign” on seven major issues affecting members, including pay. The GEC are taking steps to be prepared on each of these. Broad Left Network members on the GEC supported this approach.

However, it is crucial that the GEC learn from the mistakes of Left Unity and do not repeat them. Yes, we must organise meetings to discuss with members but it is vital that we use these meetings to set out proposals for a serious campaign, capable of winning and test this approach with members. This will give confidence to members.

The Broad Left Network calls on the HMRC GEC to agree a fighting strategy to win. The GEC needs to set clear activities and a timescale to ensure we can win a statutory ballot in 2025 if HMRC is unwilling to agree to PCS demands, which are to fight for:

Pay

• A fully consolidated pay rise of at least 10%
• £18 per hour minimum wage
• Pay restoration for money lost since 2010
• London pay entitlement of at least £5,000
• All fully funded centrally and not at the expense of jobs or conditions.
  

Jobs

• Oppose privatisation – End the planned pilot of the Managed Service Provider;
• End the use of Brook Street labour and give permanent posts to all those that want one.
• Insourcing of Facilities Management and Security staff;
• No cuts to the CSG headcount.

Working conditions

• Implement a four day working week with no loss of pay;
• End mandatory office attendance expectations;
• Ensure correct grading – we should all receive the proper remuneration for the work we do; 
• End the long hours culture – ensure all workloads are manageable;
• Introduce a collective agreement to protect members from micromanagement;
• Rebuild Employee Relations in HMRC – ensure meaningful consultation with PCS at all levels.

We call on branches in HMRC to organise member meetings to discuss these demands and the campaign required to win them. We must  prepare PCS members for the battle ahead.

Join the Broad Left Network (www.bln.org.uk) and stand with us.