Month: May 2026

A decisive left majority win of 21:14 in the 2026 National elections provided a positive context to this year’s PCS conference. But winning the NEC was only one part of the battle – we had to win support for a fighting programme-a mandate for the new leadership.

And we did – on all the key issues we won the votes and we won the arguments on the conference floor. The “can’t do-won’t do” attitude of the Left Unity/Democracy Alliance defeated leadership was exposed and defeated by the BLN and our coalition partners. Our support on the floor, amongst the delegates was undeniable.

Build a serious campaign to save jobs, improve pay and defend conditions

The outgoing leadership made no attempt to launch a national campaign during their year in office. Their “do nothing” approach was demonstrated by their failure to provide any strategy of its own to conference setting out how were going to win on pay, jobs and the myriad of other issues faced by members. But delegates rejected this and voted to support motion A375 by 204 votes to 133. This was despite the NEC opposition and despite LU attacks on everything from the proposed timing of the struggle to the so-called “shopping list” of demands proposed.

Carrying A375 means that the new NEC will now develop a serious campaign on pay, jobs, pensions, conditions, will put our demands to the Cabinet Office and if progress is not made to move to a dispute, allied to other unions if possible.

The new Executive will meet this week (29^th May) to agree a negotiating and campaign strategy, taking account of conference policy and the 3.5% pay remit just announced by the government. Meanwhile, the General Secretary has wasted no time in undermining the policy just agreed and issued a briefing to members making no reference to the carriage of Motion A375 and one could be mistaken for thinking she was welcoming the details in the pay remit. Despite this, the left Coalition will ensure that the elected lay-member NEC will thoroughly debate the pay remit and set out a way forward to be discussed and decided by members and reps.

Taking On the Far Right

Motion A111, agreed by conference, sets out am ambitious strategy for tackling the threat of the far right:

“Conference believes…a party based on the organised working class that fights for anti-racist, anti-war, socialist policies is vital to prevent the far-right harnessing the growing anger of working-class people with Starmer’s Labour.”

The  NEC must now develop and implement a serious approach to take forward the PCS and the official TUC policy of “Workers’ unity, not division – jobs and homes, not racism”. This must prioritise our anti-austerity programme and, should Labour not implement policies to improve the lives of workers, including PCS members, the NEC is instructed to convene a conference with other unions to discuss the building of a political vehicle for workers.

This will be a major task in the year ahead. If the first priority for the new left NEC is launching a cost-of-living campaign, priority two must be developing an alternative political voice which represents our needs and stops the election in 2029 of a viciously pro-austerity, pro-billionaire, anti-public-sector, racist right-wing government that will spell disaster for working class people.

Urging an “anti-Reform” vote is not enough. We must mobilise the rage of working-class people against austerity behind a positive programme addressing the urgent needs of our communities and build an alternative.

Who Runs the Union

 A concentration of power and control in the hands of the bureaucracy has become a major feature of the Left Unity leadership. This, together with a lack of basic support for reps formed a series of major debates at conference. Delegate after delegate referenced the failure of the leadership to give effect to policy agreed last year enabling access by local reps to their membership data. A crucial tool if we are to organise and support members in our workplaces and branches.

Supporting motion A124 one delegate summed up the frustration felt by reps – “It would be a joy to be able to communicate with our members directly”. Conference agreed, against Left Unity opposition, and carried the motion on a card vote 66,339 to 45,035.

Access to members’ data to ensure branches are well organised, access to high-quality printed materials, access to up-to-date information so reps know how to answer members’ queries – all of these are either not being done at all or being done badly.

Conference carried motion A33 which clearly set out the need to defend our reps from management victimisation such as we have seen at Benton Park View and now in Wales. The left Coalition NEC will heed this call.

Conference Stands with Trans Members

Conference 2025 was a scene of outrage and controversy, as 10 motions relating to the Supreme Court judgment “For Women Scotland v Scottish Ministers” were barred from the agenda. This year, despite more motions being barred from the agenda, Proud, supported by the BLN, forced an emergency motion to be tabled and debated – and put at the top of the Equalities Section.

Motion A348 demanded unconditional support for trans members whose rights are threatened by the Supreme Court judgment and the statutory EHRC code of practice that was issued in the dying minutes of Conference. Despite opposition by LU branches, it sailed through with a clear majority accompanied by huge applause from delegates.

Key to the victory on A348 was the change of heart by the National Standing Orders Committee.  The NSOC has far too often bent to pressure exerted by the president and general secretary.

A change in the composition of the committee with two BLN members elected last year played a crucial role in ensuring that democracy prevailed at Conference this year. This year’s block vote elections secured a further two spots on the NSOC giving a 4-1 left majority on this committee.

Join The BLN

The new National Executive Committee, which includes thirteen BLN members, is determined to implement the fighting programme agreed by Conference and take a lead in challenging Labour’s austerity programme and the threat of the far right.

The BLN campaigned hard during the elections leading to the election of a left coalition led NEC. The BLN were responsible for many of the motions discussed at conference and ensuring their adoption. We are an open, democratic socialist group in the PCS. If you are not already a member, please join.

PCS democracy is being restricted…. again! Our Annual Delegate Conference. meets in May. Conference is a crucial event and the pinnacle of our union’s democracy, not least because it will determine our policies on pay, jobs and the myriad of issues that members up and down the country are faced with.

We sit on the National Standing Orders Committee (NSOC), a committee elected by members which determines the running order of branch’s motions to be debated at Conference. We stood with a team of candidates on the programme supported by the Coalition and the Broad Left network and were elected. Participating in this committee has been an eye opener.

We start from the position that all motions should be published, unless there is an exceptional reason why they shouldn’t be e.g. a motion is libellous or defamatory.

Following the disgraceful removal of motions from the agenda last year, we expected to have a battle to ensure all motions were published, let alone the order in which they would be debated. But we believe that a new, undemocratic precedent has been set and the rules are now being misused to remove motions and prevent debate because the current Left Unity/Democracy Alliance majority don’t want motions tabled on issues they don’t agree with.

This, in our view, does not sit well with the democratic traditions of our union. We must therefore disassociate ourselves with the actions of the majority of the NSOC and the actions of the General Secretary and President of this union (including unelected bureaucrats) and we want to set out why.

19 motions were sent for legal advice this year. This includes 10 motions on trans rights, 5 on issues that supposedly fall solely within the General Secretary’s terms of employment – including motions supporting victimised and sacked reps – and 4 relating to an amendment to Supplementary Rule 6.22(g). The NSOC is perfectly entitled to take legal advice,and we would defend that right. This is set outunder Supplementary Rule 6.22(g), which enables the NSOC to exclude from the conference agenda motions it considers may result in legal proceedings against the union. 

We believe motions should be put before conference where elected delegates can debate them and decide what they want to do with them. If a motion is carried, and when the motion is implemented, legal matters that could then bring PCS into conflict with the law is surely something for the National Executive Committee (NEC) to consider when they discuss how to implement the policy. Our policies on the anti-Trade Union laws are an example of this – we operate within the law but still campaign in line with union policy to get these abolished.

Our view is that there has been an increasing and unsettling misuse of Supplementary Rule 6.22(g), which has been used to strike out motions we consider neither libellous nor defamatory. This has been done to motions by the NSOC itself but also to motions which were accepted by NSOC yet still sent off for legal advice regardless and without NSOCagreement. This interference is unacceptable and can only lead us to conclude that the current Left Unity/Democracy Alliance majority disagrees with them and doesn’t want them discussed.

The motions on Trans+ rights, an issue on which the union’s leadership has a history of using undemocratic methods to undermine, have now been removed from the agenda, not published and will not be discussed. No legal advice has been received which confirms that these motions are either libellous or defamatory. They were sent for legal advice on the grounds that at some hypothetical point in the future the implementation of these motions (motions that have not even been discussed, let alone carried) might lead to legal action being taken against the union.  As we’ve already said, that is surely a matter for the elected NEC to take into account, if the motions are discussed and if they are carried!

Further examples of undemocratic interference include the facilitation of a meeting with the General Secretary and National President, ostensibly to discuss timetable arrangements. Not only was the meeting accommodated but they brought with them two unelected full-time officers. Between them they attempted to influence the decision-making of the NSOC.

They cynically argued that motions on the union’s National Campaign were factually incorrect and should be removed, that motions submitted by the union’s NEC should be placed in different sections, and that some motions – e.g. the allocation of full-time officer resource and union support for victimised reps – should be excluded because they undermined the General Secretary’s powers.

Meeting with the NSOC in this way is a privilege not afforded to branches and therefore shouldn’t be afforded to the NEC either. The NEC has the right to put forward motions (and it does put forward motions) like every other part of the union, the NSOC is elected by members, independent of any other committee or branch in the union and must be allowed to discuss free from pressure and interference.

Not content with having one bite at the cherry, the General Secretary and National President requested another meeting with the NSOC to raise further objections to other motions!

Unfortunately, this won’t come as a surprise to many because the General Secretary when she occupied the position of National President and whilst chairing national conference, was exposed attempting to orchestrate a filibuster to stop motions being debated – funnily enough these were also motions on trans rights.

We consider it important to expose these attempts to manipulate and undermine a conference agenda which includes motions the union’s leadership does not want tabled, debated or agreed. We also believe it important to report that on 22 April, each member of the NSOC received a letter from the General Secretary, in which she states that the NSOC deserves respect in light of the difficult task we have and that branches were going to be reminded to “respect the union’s legal obligations, its rules, its procedures, and its democracy””. We consider this an act of hypocrisy given the events reported above and we think the General Secretary should heed her own advice.

We believe the NSOC should prepare and publish the conference agenda without interference from the leadership or branches in advance of the requirements set out in Rules A14 to A16. There is a published timetable which enables any branch to meet with the NSOC, after the (proposed) Conference motions and order of business (SOC 1) is published. It is at that point meetings with branch delegates can take place to argue for changes with a final recourse to conference itself via a ‘reference back’

We have argued consistently that the issues which have come directly from our membership should be given priority. These are the issues which impact on their working lives and given the political and industrial situation it is crucial they are published and heard. It is increasingly evident that the Left Unity/Democracy Alliance union leadership will resort to undemocratic practices to ensure these issues are not given the prominence they deserve. 

We urge you to support motions on the agenda to amend supplementary rule 6.22g, use your vote in the national elections and block vote elections and elect candidates that are determined to fight for the interests of members.  

Zakk Brown

Craig Worswick

National Standing Orders Committee