As reported below today's meeting of the National Joint Council Committee in UNISON agreed narrowly (but in my view unavoidably and rightly) to proceed with a strike ballot in the light of the narrow vote to reject in the consultation exercise on the employers' pay offer.
Clearly if one could choose the circumstances in which to launch a campaign for national strike action these are not quite the circumstances of choice. However, if the Industrial Action Committee of the UNISON NEC refuses to go ahead with the strike ballot they will be the people who decide that local government workers in England and Wales should suffer a real terms pay cut. I hope that my NEC colleagues on the Industrial Action Committee will not make such a mistake.
The arguments of those in the Northern and North West Regions who favoured acceptance were not, as I understand it, that our members are happy or satisfied with the pay offer. On the contrary we can all see that it is inadequate. The question remains whether or not there is the stomach for a fight on pay.
Obviously there are Regions and branches where a majority have favoured acceptance and I think there are a few important reasons for this to be considered. First, much having been made of the "2% limit" there has always been scope for presenting offers above 2% in a positive light. People may think "phew! that could have been worse" - members will also of course take account of the cost of taking strike action.
The critical factor in my experience in whether workers with a legitimate grievance will take strike action is whether or not they are persuaded that their leaders have a strategy to secure a more satisfactory outcome than that which will be achieved without action. It is therefore to this question that we should now turn our minds.
At present our members are unhappy with the inadquate pay offer but largely unconvinced that the Union has a plan which stands a good chance of securing a better offer. This is reflected in the narrow majorities in the consultation exercise and at the NJC Committee.
In these circumstances I think that the majority of the NJC Committee are to be congratulated in not accepting the employers' offer but have now set themselves, and the rest of us, the task of determining a strategy to win the dispute which can first of all persuade our members to embark upon strike action.
At this stage I have questions rather than answers.
How do we build support for action of more than one day? We know that the employers can ride out a single day, but not having seen longer term strike action on a serious national scale for some years we could have a dramatic effect. How do we maximise the effectiveness of such action? What is the role of national or Regional demonstrations?
Is there any role for selective strike action in local government alongside all-out action? This is remembered as having delivered "victory" in 1989 but in 2002 the Union largely failed to deliver effective selective action. There are no Grangemouths in the public services - or are there? Are there groups whose action could have a disproportionate effect?
How do we seek to coordinate with comrades in other Unions? This could be the critical factor in winning support among our own members for action. The possibility of joint action alongside teachers and civil servants exists, not to mention the possibility of joint action between health and local government (the coming of age for which UNISON has been waiting since 1993). Those who want to win the strike ballot (and that should be all those who care about the interests of our members and our Union) need to find credible and honest ways to present this case to our members.
Time is short and it is helpful (I think) that the Annual Meeting of UNISON United Left takes place this Saturday in London as we rank and file UNISON members need to discuss the campaign that needs to be waged for a "yes" vote in the strike ballot.
One final thought, for now.
I know that there will be those in the Union who do not look forward to the prospect of a strike ballot - but I think they need to look to the future. Our members in local government face Tory employers imposing pay cuts upon us. Given the likely outcome of the next General Election this will be the fate of what is left of the public sector in general.
The future for trade unions needs to be a future in which we mobilise our members to fight for our interests. Those of us who care about the future of trade unionism need to ensure that there is a strike ballot in local government and need to do all we can to win a majority for strike action.
Monday, May 12, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Surely none of us look forward to a strike ballot, whether or not we campaigned for a rejection in the consultative ballot - surely we'd all rather be getting a decent pay award?
One of the biggest problems we face, I think, is that pay often isn't the big issue we think it is - or the prospect of one even two percentage points doesn't seem to motivate people at all and I think that's the case whatever the stance of our union leadership as for the vast majority of trade union members, the stance our leaders take is just a distant drama. I work with an advice centre in a really deprived area and the stories of evictions and repossessions and debt problems are mounting almost daily - many of the clients being public sector workers on the lowest pay levels - and one or two percentage points, even a decent flat rate rise just doesn't have a huge impact - unlike of course the impact of the loss of two, maybe more days pay for someone on subsistence wages. My pont is that it's hard to motivate people who are anxious ad depressed about their future - having sat in meetings where the result of industrial action ballots is blamed on lacklustre leaflets when it's also clear that little else apart from sending leaflets out has been done, I think that every local representative has to be a leader rather than criticising those at national level.
Perhaps we need to widen the campaign to include the issues of the removal of the 10p rate of tax, improvements in the tax credit system - this Government has lost its way perhaps, but it has got a good record of improving the lives of low income families. If our campaign is missing anything, it's not firebrand rhetoric from the top which makes little difference, but perhaps we need to paint a more realistic picture of day to day life for low income families.
I'm afraid I think that joint action with health is a long way off however - my sister in law is a newly qualified midwife and told me last week that she and her colleagues intended to 'bite the employers hand off' in accepting the offer as the addition of increments apparently means many will benefit from incremental as well as cost of living rises. Depressing, I know but it seems a public sector general strike may be a long way off!!!!
Anyway, thanks for the early update - intend to check if I get a ballot paper as a CVS NJC conditioned type person
Leftygirl, yes many of us do look forward to strike ballots for all the reasons that you have stated. We know that we will not 'be getting a decent pay award' without it.
The use of industrial action is, in my opinion, one of the last key areas of strength or bargaining tools that TU's still have following the Thatcher led decimation of our might.
Peace & Love
Leftygirl - I don't know what your sister-in-law would consider to be a poor pay offer, if she is that impressed with the current NHS offer.
I am a qualified nurse and am in line for the largest rise out of all health workers if this 3-year pay offer goes through, and even my cost of living rise would not reach the current level of inflation in any of the three years. In fact the deal removes an incremental point rather than adding more.
Part of the difficulty we all have, I think, is that expectations are so ridiculously low. Some of my colleagues said in response to our offer of 2.75% this year "at least we're getting something, I didn't think we'd have a pay rise this year".
In the face of that, part of the job of the union has to be to encourage some self-esteem amongst our members - we are worth more than this - we do deserve our pay keeping pace with inflation, we do deserve our incremental rises.
I think we do need to widen our campaigns. Pay is the issue on which we can all have a collective dispute and that is its advantage, but in our literature we can pick up on the the other things that are making our members angry - short staffing, cuts in resources, privatisations etc.
Bullying and Oppressive Behaviour Liverpool City Council
I was bullied by a manager for over 12 months. I made a formal complaint to the Local Government Ombudsman with regards to the way City Council dealt with my Grievance and Appeal. I was informed that they were unable to investigate personnel matters. The Grievance was based on Bullying and Oppressive Behaviour the witnesses where not questioned on these matters. Can you please sign my petition?
There are public policy issues beyond my individual dispute in the way in which the system is administered, the inability for a grievance to be addressed fairly and dispassionately, the need for the equivalent of an ombudsman to be able to investigate such contested cases.
There are 34 County Councils and 238 District Councils in England, 32 in Scotland and 22 in Wales. How many employees have been subjected to Bullying and Oppressive Behaviour by managers who have in effect dealt with the matters internally and reached the required result the council wishes to achieve. Local councils investigate there own complaints, which I feel is a conflict of interest.
I feel this matter needs addressing and the way to achieve this is through Legislation in the House of Commons, by introducing a Local Government Bill, or Parliament to extend the powers of the Local Government Ombudsman to include personnel issues. http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/08Bullying/ . When you complete the petition - it will email you a link which you have to click to actually have your name added to the list. Please do remember to check your spam folder if your email doesn't appear and make sure your name is on the list!
I have written to my local Member of Parliament Jane Kennedy who was not responded to my emails. I had contacted my elective local councillor and asked her to raise the issues with the Councillor who chairs the Committee that deals with personnel and human resource issues, the response from my local councillor was " they were not allowed to get involved in personnel issues."
I feel the law needs to be changed, everyone pays council tax, how much council revenue is spent on sickness as staff are absent due to stress/depression brought on by bullying, there is also the cost to the National Health Service, as there is need for psychiatric help and medication. When the person either resigns or is made redundant on health grounds as they are unable to work due to there awful experience they then claim incapacity benefit thus putting a drain on the Department of Works and Pensions.
I feel if the Local Government Ombudsman dealt with complaints this would assist in resolving a lot of the above issues I have mentioned. As a tax payer how many people are off sick in your local council due to bullying behaviour by management. You could always ask Under the Freedom of Information Act how many are absent with Depression/Stress, I think you will be surprised at the figures you receive. The Police don't investigate themselves. Yet local councils investigate complaints within there own department. I think you may find this site interesting http://murdomacleod.wordpress.com/ .
I draw your attention to the following:
Surveys repeatedly reveal that between 10-50% of employees experience bullying which prevents them from fulfilling their duties.
Bullying has nothing to do with managing; bullies are weak, inadequate people who use bullying to try and hide their inadequacy.
Bullying is, in most cases, the tip of an iceberg of wrongdoing, hence the employer's reluctance to take any action.
Employers are often more scared of the bully than the employees and the most common outcome is to get rid of the target and to promote the bully.
The absence of legislation on bullying at work leaves both employees and employers unprotected.
Bullying is the cause of underperformance, not the solution.
Stress is now the number one cause of sickness absence; bullying is a major cause of stress.
The cost of bullying to industry and taxpayers is estimated to at least £12 billion annually. The cost of conflict in the workplace (including harassment, discrimination, violence, legal action, injury to health, insurance, regulatory and legislative bodies, staff turnover etc) could be in excess of £20-30 billion annually. This is equivalent to a hidden tax burden of over £1000 per working adult per year.
Only about 2% of bullying cases make it to employment tribunal due to the inadequacy of UK law in respect of bullying and the absence of provision for compensation for detriment caused by bullying. Only about 0.5% of cases result in compensation for detriment in excess of the legal bill.
Thank you for your assistance
Post a Comment