Incremental advance

Good news today from UNISON's Health Service Group Executive, who have rejected a proposal to surrender incremental progression in return for an unenforceable pledge of "no compulsory redundancies" among some grades in the NHS (http://www.unison.org.uk/asppresspack/pressrelease_view.asp?id=2111).



Incremental progression - the modest annual increases for staff new to their grade until they reach the top of their grade - is a well established element of many contracts of employment in public services.



Had the unions caved in on this, and agreed detrimental changes to contracts, this would have greatly weakened and undermined the position of the unions, without any guarantee of greater job security.



Some local authorities (including - shamefully - Labour Greenwich) are making similar proposals and these need to be resisted.



The decision of the Health SGE demonstrates a wise recognition of the folly of trying to give up contractual rights or conditions of service in the hope of job security.



The best route to job security is building stronger trade union organisation, and an important element in achieving this is a resolute fight to defend and advance (not undermine) the conditions of the workforce.

Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange

Two cheers for the "big three" for offering leadership against cuts

Returning to work today was like walking into a blizzard of forthcoming job losses and threats to our public services.
However, as distressing and alarming as were the meetings with management at which these threats were outlined, just as encouraging were the meetings with fellow trade unionists, in UNISON and other unions at which we discussed organising fighting back.
This has set me thinking about the nature of the wonderful example of struggle set for us by students and young people in the weeks before the holidays, and what this means for our trade union movement.
A couple of recent contributions to online debate on the left have put the case well for the proposition that a succesful outcome for the movement of opposition to the Coalition Government - and its assault upon our working class - requires the coming into action of the trade unions.
Leading lefty blogger Dave Osler explains well why the social weight of the union movement is needed for the movement to shake the Government (http://www.davidosler.com/2010/12/student-protests-sorry-kids-wait-for-the-old-gits/).
At the same time, the recent and welcome addition to the blogosphere from my comrade Owen Jones - a bona fide student protester no less! - sets out why the radical and invigorating "leaderlessness" of the struggle of students and young people gives rise to weaknesses of democracy and effectiveness (http://owenjones.org/2011/01/03/leaderless-youth-will-not-bring-this-government-down/).
I share the conclusions of these comrades that - if it is to succeed in forcing a climbdown from the Coalition of the millionaires, the struggle to defend our Welfare State must be founded upon the millions of the organised working class.
That's not Marxist dogma, just a pragmatic acceptance of where power lies and how it may be mobilised.
This sensible conclusion poses however the pressing question of whether the trade union leadership is ready to lead this subversive political struggle against the policy of the Government of the day.
Shortly before the holidays the newly elected General Secretary of UNITE, Len McCluskey, seemed to suggest that there was a willingness to lead this struggle (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/dec/19/unions-students-strike-fight-cuts), thereby inviting condemnation from the same "liberal" paper that had invited him to write (http://m.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/dec/20/trade-unions-leading-nowhere?cat=commentisfree&type=article).
In this regard the joint New Year message from the General Secretaries of the "big three" unions is welcome (http://www.unison.org.uk/asppresspack/pressrelease_view.asp?id=2105).
It deserves two cheers. The first for spelling out that Government policy is indeed economic vandalism. The second for articulating a series of practical and achievable progressive policy alternatives.
However, to deserve the third cheer - and to bring cheer to the many workers facing redundancy this year (including those who may well be able to bring their P45s on the - vitally important - TUC demonstration on 26 March) - our leaders need to set out a prescription for action which goes some way beyond simply voting against the Coalition partners in the various elections taking place in May.
We need to mobilise members to campaign actively against all cuts in public services (including those sadly being made by Labour Councils), fighting alongside all those being hit by these cuts.
We need to promote and encourage joint union and community activity, drawing upon the inspiration of the recent protests of the students and against tax avoidance.
And we need to plan now to build for united, national industrial action on whichever issue maximises our chances of causing maximum political damage to the illegitimate Government of the wealthy, by the wealthy, for the wealthy. Readers of this blog will know my view that the most sensible proposal - to build a strike against attacks on pensions - has already been made and needs to be acted upon.
The sooner we act, the better our chances. I look forward to an early opportunity to yell out a full three cheers for a leadership worthy of the movement which is growing around us. (Which almost leads me on to the question of whom to nominate in the forthcoming elections to the UNISON National Executive Council (NEC)...)

Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange

Marching together but striking separately?

This is set to be the toughest year for UNISON activists since the formation of the Union in 1993.

If you have a few moments online and have not yet signed up to UNISON's Million voices campaign you should. Not because simple online petitions will of themselves take us very far, but because we need to support every official action in opposition to cuts if we are to broaden and deepen the necessary opposition.

That is why it is vitally important that we maximise turnout on the TUC demonstration on 26 March. We must march together in our hundreds of thousands, mobilising members who have never been on a demonstration in their lives, and never expected to.

In the mean time, cuts and job losses will be biting in local government in particular - and Kirklees UNISON are showing the rest of us how to respond. We must do what we can to generalise and coordinate every element of a fight back against the Coalition Government's ideological assault upon our Welfare State. However, resistance to cuts and job losses will inevitably be patchy and uneven. Local fights may win some local concessions but they won't be able to turn the tide of Government policy.

Because of the limits upon strike action imposed by the anti-union laws, our best chance of effective unified action forcing a climbdown from the Government would be to fight to defend our pensions. The sooner we mobilise our strength as a unified national trade union movement the better our chance of forcing the Government back.

At the risk of being considered a trot I should point out that the slogan "March Separately but Strike Together!" is probably a better slogan than "March Together but Strike Separately"...

I saw three reorganisations come sailing in...

Merry Xmas one and all.

My Christmas Eve was made by an email with details of three reorganisations with job losses about which consultation will commence on Tuesday 4 January.

At the same time I am sending support and best wishes to one of our Convenors who is fighting today to prevent a wrongful and unfair compulsory redundancy for one of our members.

Eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we shall all be dealing with correspondence in accordance with Section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. (Well not tomorrow itself I hope!)

As I won't be blogging too much for a few days I have added this year's best Christmas Carol for you to watch above - once I have taken it down after the holiday it will still be available on Youtube.

Kirklees take the lead

A hat tip to Solidarity magazine for being online with this news, but a bigger hat tip to Kirklees UNISON and their Branch Secretary Paul Holmes for taking the decision to strike against threatened job losses. A ballot of the Council workforce has produced a majority for action.

A five day strike by a well unionised local authority would not only pile pressure on the particular employer, it would also signal what is possible. It would be a warning to the Government and an example to workers up and down the country. If the credible threat of such action produced significant concessions that too would be a lesson to the rest of us.

Given the uneven organisation of our movement within and between industries, sectors and even branches, we are all looking to the stronger branches, departments and even individual sections for leadership. The Kirklees vote ought to be headline news on UNISON's website. We need some audacity at the top of the Union.

It would be great if we heard from Mabledon Place something similar to what Len McCluskey said this week.

I'm hoping for a New Year message which will be a beacon to illuminate the struggles underway and to give hope to our activists and members throughout the country.

December UNISON NEC report

Personal report from the December 2010 meeting of the UNISON NEC

This is a personal report from the meeting of the UNISON National Executive Council which took place on Wednesday 8 December. An official report is available online at http://www.unison.org.uk/news/news_view.asp?did=6468.

Defending Public Services

The “headline news” from the meeting was that we set aside a “fighting fund” of twenty million pounds to support opposition to public spending cuts. The press release explaining this is online at http://www.unison.org.uk/asppresspack/pressrelease_view.asp?id=2082.

In practice what this means is that the NEC endorsed a proposal from the General Secretary to ring fence from our reserves some ten million pounds to be available for campaigning activity, having been reminded by Northern Ireland NEC member Colm Magee that we already have more than ten million pounds in the Industrial Action Fund.

This was part of the debate on the first substantial item on our agenda, on defending public services, during which we were also told that the General Political Fund Committee (which, under Rule, is autonomous from the NEC) had “recently committed to reviewing its operational procedures to secure faster and speedier financial support for campaigning work at a local level.”

I attach to this report the written report which was received by the NEC on this item, debate about which rightly took up considerable time. A key focus will be the TUC mass national demonstration against the cuts as Saturday March 26th 2011 in London. It will start at 11am on the Victoria Embankment and finish in Hyde Park with a rally, closing at 4pm. The NEC agreed to seek a pledge from every shop steward to attend the demonstration, further details of which are available online at http://www.tuc.org.uk/theme/index.cfm?theme=alltogetherlanding.

Of particular significance was the report on joint work with UNITE and GMB, with Dave Prentis telling the NEC that he had recently hosted the General Secretaries of both the other “Big Three” unions at Mabledon Place. (More recently I understand that the TUC General Council has agreed to convene a meeting in early January to discuss developing anti-cuts campaigning, and the newly elected General Secretary of UNITE has gained considerable publicity with a call for co-ordination of strike action).

A closer working relationship with PCS is also being developed. This is in line with the joint statement agreed between UNISON and PCS agreed this year at the TUC (which is publicised online at http://www.unison.org.uk/asppresspack/pressrelease_view.asp?id=1967. The full text of the agreement is also available online at http://www.pcs.org.uk/en/campaigns/campaign-resources/pcs-and-unison-joint-statement.cfm). The joint statement committed us, at local level, to “to develop and support links between members and activists. This will include joint workplace meetings, joint public leafleting, locally organised town meetings and joint community activities.” If any branches want local contact information for PCS branches to discuss joint campaigning ask your Regional Organiser (I also have a list of PCS branches in the Region if that is of any use to any UNISON branches).

Public Sector Pay Negotiations

The NEC received a regular update on public sector pay negotiations. There was some confusion about the position of the Union in circumstances where local authorities offer payments which are more generous than the (non) offer from the national employers. UNISON does not support breaking up national pay negotiations, which need not be compromised by local offers which build upon the “floor” set by nationally agreed pay and conditions. The NEC did not receive any information about authorities which are making more generous offers.

Public Sector Pensions Commission

The NEC received a report on UNISON’s submissions to the Public Sector Pensions Commission, which I will circulate with this report. The National Union of Teachers are proposing to ballot for strike action in defence of pensions in the Spring Team. I regret that UNISON is not yet at that point, but it was made clear that strike action remains a possibility once the final report of the Commission is known and, in the mean time, UNISON is urging members to lobby their MPs to support our position (see http://www.unison.org.uk/pensions/pages_view.asp?did=12156). UNISON’s response to the cross-service group nature of the attack upon our pensions is being coordinate by the Service Group Liaison Committee rather than the NEC.

Organising Update

Our membership is projected to increase by 2% this year nationally, with Greater London ahead of the average at 2.4%. More than one in four new members join online. Clearly we can anticipate an increased membership turnover in 2011 if the significant job losses planned by the Government and employers take place.

UNISON Objectives

The NEC endorsed a report simplifying the Union’s objectives for the coming year. Our priorities for 2011 will be as to;
Meet the recruitment and organising challenge posed by austerity measures,including public spending cuts and increased outsourcing

Protect and secure decent employment, pay and pensions for UNISON members, promoting equality and challenging discrimination

Develop our Million Voices campaign in support of quality public services, building our political influence and forging alliances with unions and community organisations

Ensure that the union’s information and communications infrastructure and internal management systems are efficient and effective to meet the changing needs of our membership.

After the NEC meeting

Following the NEC meeting, together with several other NEC members, I visited the student occupation at University College London (UCL). I recommend the “ConDem Christmas Carol” recorded by students during the occupation (online at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fvZmyQVryQ).

Season’s Greetings

I wish everyone a happy holiday and good luck in facing the challenges which the New Year will bring.

Another ALMO bites the dust

A rare hat tip to a fellow UNISON blogger who has the news from Newham that their ALMO is coming back in-house (http://grayee.blogspot.com/2010/12/newham-homes-almo-returns-to-council.html).



ALMOs (Arms Length Management Organisations) are a half way house to privatisation foisted upon tenants and local authorities by the last Government, the "raison d'etre" for which has now been destroyed by this Government.



Council housing is far and away the most economic and most democratic means for the provision of social housing and the death of any ALMO is to be welcomed. If even the Mayor of Newham can see what needs to be done, other Labour Councils (with - which would not be hard - more progressive leadership) should surely follow suit.



When massive cuts are being forced through at the behest of a Tory Government there is no case whatsoever to continue the needless expense of duplicate and management structures of an ALMO.

Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange

Len in call for action

The General Secretary of UNITE has some things for us to think about over the coming holiday period (http://m.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/dec/19/unions-students-strike-fight-cuts?cat=commentisfree&type=article).

What does Len say?

He says the students have set a challenge to the trade union movement to take action to defend our welfare state.

We must rebuild working class confidence.

We must not let the law paralyse us.

We must reject all cuts ("'What do we want? Fewer cuts later on', is not a slogan to set the blood coursing.")

And - worth quoting at length - an interesting take on how we deal with Labour Councils;

"These are Con-Dem cuts, and this is a capitalist crisis. An attempt to blame Labour local authorities for the problem is a shortcut to splitting our movement and letting the government off the hook. That doesn't mean Labour councils should get off free. There are, alas, Labour councillors embarking on union-bashing under cover of cuts, something we won't tolerate. Labour needs to understand that any social alternative to the present misery needs strong trade unions."

This is a positive and refreshing intervention from the General Secretary of a large trade union, including explicit support for the Coalition of Resistance (which - I suggest - settles the argument as to whether CoR, or Right to Work, or even the National Shop Stewards Network will be the key vehicle for coordinating struggle).

I could (and probably will) quibble that the trade unions may need to trespass further over into the "political wing" of the movement and say more to Labour Councils than that they ought not bash unions. As left as this sounds it is left Labourism and potentially hamstrung as ever by the divide between "political" and "industrial" wings.

However, for now, it's the season of goodwill and this welcome intervention deserves a hearty welcome.

Since UNISON has made the running in making the arguments upon which the General Secretary of UNITE now relies, I wait with interest for a similarly forthright intervention from Mabledon Place.

Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange

Putting some money where our mouth is

UNISON activists should draw some encouragement from the combative tone of the online announcement of the decision announced at yesterday's NEC to set up a "fighting fund" (http://www.unison.org.uk/asppresspack/pressrelease_view.asp?id=2082).



I'll report properly on the meeting soon - it was, understandably, dominated by discussion around our opposition to public spending cuts. Our campaigns will need funding - and as important as allocating resources was the news that, for example, our General Political Fund Committee is hoping to make it easier for branches to access resources.



Unfortunately we have some way to go before we catch up with the Executive of the National Union of Teachers, whose call for strike action over pensions in the spring did not find an echo from the majority - however there is a recognition that national industrial action over pensions will be required - just a feeling (which I do not share) that the time is not quite upon us.



With UNISON encouraging members to support today's student protests we are now pointing in the right direction. Now we need to find the accelerator.

Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange

Keep the post public

Having just heard a CWU speaker at an inquorate meeting of the UNISON Greater London Regional Council I thought I would blog a link to the Keep the Post Public Campaign (http://www.cwu.org/support-the-campaign.html). You can sign an online petition at that link.



The idea that there should be a universal postal service from Westminster to the Shetlands is such an obvious one - and is a fine example of a natural monopoly best provided as a public service.



Nineteenth century Tories and Liberals understood this - but their twenty first century equivalents disagree. The CWU are focusing their lobbying on 71 Coalition MPs. That makes for a less visible campaign nationally.



There is, however a national rally at Westminster next Wednesday at 11am (http://www.cwu.org/december-15-rally.html) for those who can get to Central London mid morning.



And if tou can't do that, whoever your MP is you can download a postcard to send them (http://www.cwu.org/assets/_files/documents/aug_10/cwu__1282555800_03014_KTPP_postcard_to_MPs.pdf).



Print it out and put a stamp on it!

Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange

Baby steps to national action?

I have been promoting locally UNISON's call to our members to lobby Members of Parliament in opposition to cuts in our pensions which are being introduced at the end of March, and some comrades have (understandably) bemoaned the timidity of our national leadership in making such a limited call upon members to take action.

However, I notice that a similar call has been made by the National Union of Teachers, a union which has shown the way in making an "in principle" commitment to balloting for national strike action on this issue.

PCS are calling an indicative ballot, rather than an industrial action ballot, in defence of the Civil Service Compensation Scheme (and have also asked members to lobby MPs).

If we do believe that national trade unions, confronting national attacks, should consider and prepare for national action then we need to lead members forward in steps as large as we can, and as small as we must.

There are still some on the wilder wing of the movement who prefer to promote "guerilla struggle" as if this were an alternative to national action. Of course limited action by strong sections must and will take place, but on its own it will do no more than protect pockets of strength and organisation.

We need national action if we want to do more than simply mitigate the worst of the coming cuts, and we need to recognise that every call for action from the top is an opportunity for agitation on the ground.

Making the rich pay

It’s great to see protest on the streets about tax evasion today.

UNISON’s alternative budget pointed out that “significant sums could be raised without affecting the incomes of the majority if we made sure the financial sector and the super-rich paid a fairer share”. Our sister union PCS has also been backing tax justice campaigning for some time.

With a ConDem Coalition Government entirely in hock to the tax dodging super rich, it is up to the people to try to make sure that those who can afford to do so pay their way. Nonviolent direct action can get a point across – and UK Uncut are showing what needs to be done. (Old lefties like myself may even have to forgive Polly Toynbee for the SDP if she keeps getting carried out of high street stores by security guards…)

Many trade unionists may not be in a position to superglue ourselves to windows – but we can mobilise mass popular support for the cause advocated by those taking the direct action (and fundraise for the legal defence that they will inevitably need). Why should our services be cut whilst the wealthy keep making profits that aren’t fairly taxed?

Save EMA - take action

Good to see UNISON promoting Save EMA day on Monday 13 December.

The campaign to save Educational Maintenance Allowance (EMA) deserves the support of all trade unionists and working people – EMA is a weekly allowance for low paid teenagers continuing in education. In 2009/10 some 635,000 learners received at least one EMA payment, and around 80 per cent of those the full £30. These are not well-off families: the maximum payment is only paid to those with total household incomes of less than £20,817 in 2009/10. (Source – NUS).

You would think that Parliamentarians would understand the need for a bit of cash help to cope. Even after massive reductions, MPs claimed £3.1m in expenses in the first four months after the general election – and there are one thousand times fewer MPs than there are learners in receipt of EMA.

Last Wednesday week I was struck by the support for EMA at Lambeth College, where we collected 400 signatures at lunch time from existing students, the great majority of whom will not themselves be hit by this. I hope that UNISON branches across our Service Groups will respond to the call for action on 13 December.

Lobby your MP - don't cut our pensions!

I'm always pleased to see fellow UNISON NEC members blogging - particularly when its our Chair of Policy reporting on some positive action to defend our pensions (http://unisonactive.blogspot.com/2010/12/lobby-your-mp-to-fight-cpi-switch.html).



UNISON is asking our members to lobby MPs to support reversing the Government's decision - announced by the Chancellor in June - to uprate pensions (and benefits and tax credits) in line with the Consumer Prices Index (CPI) rather than the Retail Prices Index (RPI) from next April.



Here is the link to the UNISON site with a model letter for MPs (http://www.unison.org.uk/pensions/pages_view.asp?did=12156).



And here is the link to the Early Day Motion (EDM 1032) so you can see if your MP has signed up yet (http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDetails.aspx?EDMID=42021&SESSION=905).



I'm pleased to see that we are finally taking this action. As I was saying on Monday (http://jonrogers1963.blogspot.com/2010/11/pensions-time-for-leadership.html) the question of the national attack upon all our pensions calls for forthright national leadership.



This is a start.

Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange

Tory cuts - what Labour Councils should do

Yesterday I wondered aloud what Labour Councils should do in the face of Tory cuts (http://jonrogers1963.blogspot.com/2010/11/tory-cuts-what-should-labour-do.html).

Today the snow held me back in London after work and gave me the opportunity to speak with experienced comrades both from UNISON and the LRC.

From these discussions I think that, as well as exploring and seeking to understand the full range of options open to Labour Councils - including refusing to set a lawful budget if to do so would be a breach of trust with local people - we need clearly to articulate two simple, lawful and achievable things which every ruling Labour Group can do and every opposition Labour Group can advocate.

First, as well as proposing (if in office and feeling this necessary) a "lawful" budget making cuts, each Labour Group (in office or opposition) should also publicise a "needs budget" setting out the spending they would wish to make, were reasonable resources available to meet social need.

Secondly, in order to campaign for the Government to provide additional resources in order to enable their authority to implement the "needs budget", Labour Groups should call for and seek to lead anti-cuts mobilisations.

For London boroughs, for example, it would be a simple matter to organise a march from the Town Hall to Westminster for a lobby of local MPs in support of provision of the resources needed for the provision of local services.

Labour Councils can make the sad, foolish and anachronistic choice of Lewisham's Steve Bullock and set their face against anti-cuts protests (http://m.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/nov/30/lewisham-anti-cuts-protesters?cat=commentisfree&type=article).

Or Labour Councillors can prioritise their role as leaders of their local community and set out both the needs of local people and their plans to fight for the resources needed to meet those needs.

Trade unions need to put pressure on our Labour comrades to come out on the side of the people and to make the right decision.


Update on Wednesday morning - thanks to the anonymous commentator who referred me to what UNISON Scotland are doing.

Their model motion for local authorities is well worth looking at.

Tory cuts - what should Labour do?

On a night on which riot police have had to evict local people from Lewisham Town Hall in Catford, the role of Labour Councils at a time of Tory cuts is moving once more centre-stage.

Labour needs to campaign against the Coalition Government’s cuts and expose the impact upon Council services of their social and economic policies. The Council for which I work is sending both Members and senior officers to give evidence to Parliamentary Select Committees to this effect and are to be commended for doing so.

However, as opposition to the ConDems is increasingly visible on the streets, Labour Councillors, if they cannot bring themselves to put themselves where they belong – in the front rank of the protests – should at least try not to get in the way or oppose the opposition.

Lambeth Leader Steve Reed is right to warn about the deceit of the Coalition parties who will try, wherever they can, to blame Labour Councils for cuts – but is wrong to caricature anti-cuts campaigners as “A couple of supporters of hard-left fringe groups” demanding “a repeat of ‘Red Ted’ Knight’s ruinous illegal budgets of the 1980s.”

Leaving aside the observation that the budgets of the Knight administration up to May 1986 were not “ruinous” and that their only “illegality” was in a failure to set a budget by a certain deadline, the law has – as Steve knows – changed so fundamentally in the past twenty five years that no is – or could – advocate the same tactics today.

It is insufficient to assert goodwill, blame the Tories and trust that a Labour Council can make the cuts less awful (albeit that may be true). Since the interests of local people in areas such as Lambeth (and Lewisham) are best served by either bringing the Coalition Government down or forcing it into a massive “U-turn” we need a political strategy to fight the cuts more than a managerial strategy to implement them.

At a minimum, Labour Councils should surely produce a “needs budget” which shows what we think our communities need their local authority to spend – if only to illustrate the funding shortfall, caused by the Government’s economic policies.

This would enable a meaningful political debate within the Labour Party and the labour movement about what Labour Groups should do, and whether the assumption that it is always better to be in office and never more important to be tribunes of the people is in fact correct.

Trade unionists – like the people who rely upon local services – have no option but to resist the cuts. Labour Councils should be on our side.

Pensions - time for leadership

Dave Prentis makes some sound and important points on the front page of the UNISON website (http://www.unison.org.uk/) just now.

I'll quote him verbatim;

" This week, news emerged that the value of public sector workers' pensions has dropped by up to 25%. This is due in part to the government's decision to use the CPI rather than the RPI to calculate pension increases.
This means the cost of providing public sector pensions has already fallen and workers are losing out when they retire. Further attempts to cut pensions for social workers, teaching assistants and nurses would be unjustified.
It's time the government turned its attention instead to the private sector, where two thirds of companies do not pay a penny towards their workers' pensions – leaving taxpayers with a multibillion pound means-tested benefits bill."

I agree completely that further attacks on public service pensions would be unjustified. However - following the Comprehensive Spending Review - we know at least one attack (a three per cent increase in contributions) is already on the way. We can also reasonably anticipate further attacks from the final Hutton report (which Dave doubtless hopes to influence with his reasoned and well founded observations - and to which UNISON is making submissions).

Also however, as unjustified as further attacks on our pensions will be, the attack made in June by changing the basis of uprating from RPI to CPI is and remains a disgrace.

In July when the TUC began to spell out the scale of this theft from our pensions I observed that "We may not be ready for a national strike ballot next week or next month, but we need to be declaring disputes, making preparations and mobilising members." (http://jonrogers1963.blogspot.com/2010/07/osborne-has-cut-our-pensions-shall-we.html).

I went on (and on and on as I do);
"We shouldn't swallow this first Coalition attack upon our pensions just so we can use its effects to show that our pensions, having become less generous, are more "affordable." What is "affordable" is always a political and never an economic choice.
The alternative approach is that set out by Dave Prentis in his speech as General Secretary to UNISON National Delegate Conference - national strike action to defend public service pensions.
We have a lot of work to do to persuade and mobilise our members.
Will we get on with it?"

I regret that the emerging response to the proposals from the National Union of Teachers (http://jonrogers1963.blogspot.com/2010/11/teaching-us-how-to-protect-our-pensions.html) for a strike ballot for action over pensions in the Spring Term (reflected in comments on an earlier post - http://jonrogers1963.blogspot.com/2010/11/follow-leaders.html) suggest that the answer to the question I posed on 8 July is "not yet" or at least "not yet sufficiently".

Without the unifying framework of national action we are destined to months and years of guerilla action against particular the cuts.

We will win some battles at a local level. Some jobs and some services will be rescued in the future as they have been in the past.

However, we cannot defeat a national Government with purely local campaigns. The attack on pensions provides an opportunity for us to mobilise nationally.

This is an opportunity that must be seized by our national officers. At a local level our activists are inevitably prioritising local campaigns.

The impact of those local campaigns can be magnified by a national intervention which goes beyond exhorting the Government to be reasonable and starts exhorting our members to be militant.

If our members are not yet motivated to fight on pensions this is at least in part because we have been too slow to promote this issue over the past five months.

It is not too late to put this right. The NUT are showing the way.

Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange

A leader showing wisdom

President of the National Union of Students Aaron Porter has to rise in anyone's estimation for apologising for tardy support for student occupations against fees and cuts and pledging more forthright support in future (http://m.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/nov/28/student-leader-apologises-over-dithering?cat=education&type=article).



The particular pressure on Lib Dem MPs who made a clear and unequivocal pledge combines with the Parliamentary arithmetic to create the possibility of a significant defeat for the Coalition. Unity in the campaign to impose this pressure is important since it is unity in favour of urgent action.



A united student movement is in a better position swiftly to mobilise its faster moving forces en masse than is the TUC. However the trade unions can and must turn supportive words (http://www.unison.org.uk/news/news_view.asp?did=6426) into deeds.



I hope that now there is no question that the NUS is supporting all nonviolent action the unions at every level will encourage our members to support the students in every way possible.

Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange

Resistance is fertile

The spirit of the many thousands of young people who have today protested against the ConDems is an inspiration and a challenge to the organised working class.



I was moved at lunchtime today by the spontaneous enthusiasm of students at Lambeth College to sign up to a petition against the truly savage cut that will take away the EMA.



That a Cabinet with a majority of millionaires can take from teenagers from low income households the thirty quid a week that helps them stay in education tells you more than you ever wanted to know about the nature of this hideous Coalition.



We must of course build towards a million strong demonstration on 26 March, but in the mean time we must learn from the example of the young people who have turned anger into action up and down the country.



This means we must reject the counsel of those who would "march in March and not before" - we must lobby before breakfast, protest before lunch, organise before tea and agitate before supper. The Welfare State our grandparents bequeathed us is at risk - and if we wish to be able to look our grandchildren in their eyes we must now turn every effort to its defence.



I have just left a freezing Parliament Square where I have watched the Met Police unlawfully kettling two thousand mostly young people in Whitehall. I saw police officers prevent a Member of Parliament from going down Whitehall to see what was going on.



Some damage may have been done in Central London - but that is nothing to the damage being done to our public services. If they will kettle kids to try to contain our protests we need to raise the temperature and bring things to the boil.



Respect is due to the trade unionists kettled in there with them, who include the General Secretary of the CWU and the Assistant Branch Secretaries of Lambeth UNISON.



Kettles can only be so big. There are so many of us. We have the power to defeat the Government. We need our leaders to rise to this challenge. We also need warmer coats and more layers...

Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange

Follow the leaders?

In the spirit of supporting other trade union bloggers when they get blogging right - by posting signed rather than anonymous articles - I'll link to a report of the UNISON Local Government SGE meeting over at UNISON Active (http://unisonactive.blogspot.com/2010/11/local-government-sge-policy-seminar-18.html).

That said, I'm disappointed at the tone of the report, and by what it tells us about thinking in some quarters about the role of trade union leadership in relation to our current and coming struggles.

Our rapporteur (who will in my mind I fear always be "the other" Glenn)(and for whose bid for the NEC a bell tolled most unfortunately) is critical of those who tried and failed to commit the SGE to supporting the sensible (and unanimous) decision of the Executive of the National Union of Teachers to prepare to ballot for strike action in defence of pensions (thereby implementing the very policy to which our General Secretary committed UNISON at our Conference in June).

I will pass by the implicitly perjorative references in the report to the "minority" stautus of those who lose a vote - although any union rep who is not sufficiently confident to be the one person in the room who is right (whilst respecting the right of the majority to be wrong) lacks the strength we will need from our leaders over coming years.

What troubles me more is the view, presented strongly in this report, that the role of a leader is to reflect the views of members (rather like a mirror).

Therefore if we know today that - were they asked today - the majority of our members would not jump at the chance of joining the NUT on strike to defend our pensions in the Spring Term, it follows that we must argue against any such proposal (even whilst agonising about how hard it is to be "democratic" and reflect the views of members when these are less forthright than our own).

I fail to see what is "leadership" in that approach. It sounds and feels a lot more like a, fairly passive "followership".

Now clearly, if you want to lead, you cannot do so by being so far ahead of the people you are leading that they can't see you. This is my worry about - for example - calls for a General Strike which we know isn't going to happen any time soon (however much we may wish otherwise).

However, if you aspire to leadership you do need to be a step or two (rather than ten) in front of the people you are hoping to lead - and that means that it is certainly not your role simply to reflect members' opinions back at them.

Rather it is the role of a union leader (from a shop steward all the way down to General Secretary) to analyse the interests of the members you represent, formulate a strategy to advance those interest and then advocate that strategy to those members.

You may or may not persuade members that your assessment of their interests and of the action they should therefore take is correct, but at least by doing so you will be discharging your duty as a leader.

In his Conference speech in June, Dave Prentis correctly identified the issue of pensions as one on which we could take national action to inflict a defeat upon the Government. He rightly urged us to take national action in our own interests.

It's a shame that Dave's supporters are now backing away from our General Secretary's accurate analysis.

What we need now is leadership which is less like a mirror and more like a beacon.

Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange