Fighting for UNISON members at the UNISON NEC

Being a member of the National Executive Council (NEC) of UNISON is a sometimes strange and surreal experience. Members would – I suppose – imagine that the body charged with running the Union between our Annual National Delegate Conferences would meet frequently and pay attention to the detail of what our Union does.

In fact the NEC does neither of these things.

We meet infrequently and as much detailed work as there is to be done is delegated to Committees. The most important such bodies consist of meetings of those already elected to Chair – or selected by - other Committees, hence generally (but not always) they consist entirely of those already predisposed to agree with what has been decided by those in charge.

Those in charge are the key officials and not the leading members of the NEC (although sufficient interpersonal skills are deployed that I imagine that some leading members of the NEC do in fact believe that they are leading the Union). There are leading lay activists who keep straight left and who are genuinely influential but I am not always sure they remember where they came from or where they belong…

I shall look forward to reporting back from next Wednesday’s meeting of the UNISON NEC at which I will be seeking official support for the rally which will be taking place at the House of Commons on Tuesday 11 December in support of UNISON activists who are fighting privatisation and its consequences. I hope we will seize this opportunity to unite the trade union movement with our real allies in Parliament in order to promote the interests of our members.

Our Union could be even better than it is if we could galvanise real unity in action between our very experienced and capable national officials and our equally experienced and dedicated lay activists. To do this we need to unite against a common enemy and forget about squabbling.

Unison has no enemies to our left politically. Sometimes some of our key people forget this. The enemies of our members are those who push forward privatisation and who want to hold down our pay.

I hope to be able to give a positive report in five days time and that we will unite with our friends and allies to promote the interests of our members.

Time to fight over privatisation and pay

Having now recovered from the excitement of the Greater London Employers’ Forum I am looking forward to Monday’s meeting of the Regional Local Government Executive (you knew I was a sad anorak but you didn’t know how sad!)

I hope that the Executive will have an opportunity to discuss the disputes with Fremantle and the London Borough of Newham. In both cases UNISON needs to step up our campaigning against the consequences of privatisation. We should obviously be supporting and encouraging our members to take industrial action, but equally we need to discuss how to step up our political campaigning.

We should make better use of the influence we believe we have with Government – and we should support initiatives which are taken to focus support for these important campaigns. In particular we need more MPs signing up to EDM 276!

At the Regional Local Government Executive we will also be discussing Single Status and the pay and grading reviews which are taking place across London (and the country). Full marks to the Croydon branch for reaching an agreement – as there is a meeting of the National Executive Council next Wednesday I shall have the opportunity to raise any issues which London local government branches may have (so please get in touch if you need to).

Also on Monday’s agenda is the 2008 pay claim. We need early agreement on a claim around which we can mobilise our members for the inevitability of national strike action (unless we want to live within Gordon Brown’s 2% pay norm and see our living standards decline further!) We ought to be lodging our claim early in the New Year and giving the employers a deadline in March to respond (we know that they have been consulting their constituents for some time so there is no reason why they should not).

If we don’t have a satisfactory offer by mid March (and realistically we know we won’t) then we should be planning for strike action around the settlement date in April – not months later.

Sleazy donations or a trade union base?

I realise this is not an incredibly original observation but we wouldn’t have all this trouble if we had a political party founded on the labour and trade union movement which relied more than anything else upon the voluntary effort of working people to get our message across.

We (the trade unions) did have one of those.

We do have the machinery to assert trade union influence over a political party.

But when we could have used that machinery to reinforce our potential influence – we didn’t.

Can someone please advise me of the brilliant strategy endorsed by the leaders of the big unions and which led to our supporting Brown’s constitutional proposals at Party Conference, further reducing union influence over Party and Government policy?

I know that some people who support the leadership read this blog. Don’t be shy – let us all in on the secret…

Out of circulation?

I am indebted to the commentator on the last post who pointed out that I haven't blogged for a few days.

I will remedy this defect over the next few days until you're sick of me. My excuse for yesterday is that I was at a meeting of the Greater London Employers' Forum (GLEF).

Today I am having my toilet replaced.

Guess which of those two activities is more useful and worthwhile...

The GLEF meeting was attended by representatives of a small minority of the London Boroughs on the employers' side - which doesn't suggest that our employers in the Capital give a high priority to collective bargaining I'm afraid.

(I don't normally say nice things about my own employer but Lambeth were represented by our Deputy Leader, Jackie Meldrum - which, given the recent problems with employee relations in the borough - is a positive sign) (I hope!)

Security of our personal data and ID cards...

Just a quick thought. If the Government cannot keep our personal data safe – then how dare they continue to propose ID Cards (which UNISON opposes)?

If anyone thinks the Government should be trusted with our personal data then I have to say that you have not been paying attention to history.

No good can come of entrusting the Government with our personal information – particularly not when they simply cannot keep it safe!

D Day in Newham

Today the disciplinary hearing against Michael Gavan, Branch Chair of Newham local government UNISON branch continues.

The disciplinary charges against Michael accuse him of acting in the interests of trade union members and not of the employer.

This is one of the clearest cases of trade union victimisation in recent years – if you haven’t already done so messages of support can be emailed to the branch at newham-unison@btconnect.com and messages of condemnation sent to Newham mayor Robin Wales at Robin.wales@newham.gov.uk.

Newham’s rogue elected mayor and extreme anti-union management have to be stopped. The message has to go out that trade union representatives must not be threatened and dismissed simply for carrying out their role – least of all by a Labour Council.

Update on Monday evening - the protest at lunchtime was good with a significant turn out and support from other boroughs. The hearing concluded and a result may be known on Wednesday.

Good news :)

I don’t really do personal stuff on this blog – but I think I’ll take time to congratulate my friend and fellow NEC member Emma on the birth today of her daughter. Well done! It is easy sometimes to forget why we do all this trade union work. As I mentioned on Saturday at the Fremantle demonstration it’s because we care about the future – and the future belongs to all our children, including today’s new arrival.

Fremantle dispute march and rally

It was great yesterday to be able to attend the march and rally in support of the Fremantle dispute.

The shop stewards who have been leading the dispute, together with their dedicated Branch Secretary John Burgess and hard working Regional Official, Eddy Coulson (now unfortunately unwell) more than deserved the wide ranging support that was expressed.

I was pleased to see my good friend and fellow NEC member, Kate Ahrens, addressing the rally, as well as my old friend and comrade Geoff Martin – not to mention the excellent range of speakers from across London who were there to show our support.

The dedication, commitment and sound strategy shown by the strikers and their UNISON branch are a firm basis on which an important victory could now be won.

Three disputes for November...

It’s a good job you don’t rely on this blog for all the news eh? Having been a bit poorly for a few days I’ve not been keeping up to date. So first off – following the disgraceful news that Karen Reissman, UNISON activist in the health service in Manchester has been sacked basically for being a good union rep – good news that UNISON is giving official backing to the continuing fight for her reinstatement!

With 150 members on continuous strike action to secure Karen’s job back this is shaping up to be a vital and serious fight for our Union.

Another activist under threat is Michael Gavan, from Newham local government, whose disciplinary hearing (at which he is facing charges which also essentially amount to being accused of being an effective representative!) is underway. Members in Newham took a solid day of strike action on 31 October ahead of the opening session of Michael’s disciplinary hearing on 1 November.

The disciplinary hearing reconvenes on 19 November – the Newham branch need the same support in London that is being shown for Karen in the North West!

I am looking forward to seeing Michael at the demonstration on Saturday in support of the Fremantle strikers. The Fremantle dispute is a vital dispute for UNISON and also need effective support from the Region (which means UNISON must deploy our resources where they are needed to support the dispute and pay close attention to the wishes and experience of our members on the front line).

None of these disputes will be easy to win. All of them can be won and the key will be the commitment of both the rank and file members and the official Union machine – since each of the disputes is about core UNISON values and basic trade union principles they each in their different ways pose a test for UNISON as much as a threat to the interests of our members.

Karen Reissmann Sacked! Urgent Solidarity Needed

After several months of suspension, fourteen days of strike action and a six day 'disciplinary' Karen Reissmann, chair of the Manchester Mental Health Unison branch has been sacked for the 'crime' of opposing mental health cuts.
The 700 strong branch has voted to go on indefinite strike. Urgent financial and other solidarity is needed.
Unison's national industrial action committee has sanctioned the community mental health team comprising some 160 workers to go on indefinite official strike action from this Thursday. This is a strike Unison must win. Donations need to flood in, with messages of support, invitations for speakers, national publicity and demands of Unison officials that they respect the demand of the branch and that the official strike is spread to cover the whole branch.
Rush donations and messages of support to the Manchester Community and Mental Health Unison branch, 70 Manchester Road, Manchester, M21 9UN. Phone 07972 120 451 or email unison@ zen.co.uk Cheques can be made out to "Unison Manchester Community and Mental Health"

Defending the National Health Service

I am very disappointed not to be attending today’s demonstration in defence of the National Health Service – although I am pleased that there will be a delegation from my UNISON Branch.

I hope that today goes well and that it marks a step forward in the campaign that we need to defend our National Health Service. We need a vigorous campaign against the threats to our NHS – working with campaigning organisations as well as fellow trade unionists.

There does seem to me to be a danger of falling into the trap of thinking that a change of tone (or is it an absence of Tone) at Number 10 means that we are off the hook of privatisation. I doubt that those marching today will be taking such a mistaken view.

Good luck to everyone there today!

Support the strike against victimisation!

This story is nicked entirely from the London Region UNISON website. If we can’t have a strike over pay this year, let’s mobilise all our resources to defend our own!

“Members in Newham have voted for strike action following the suspension of activist and Branch Chair, Michael Gavan.
A day of strike action has been agreed for 31st October, which is the day before Michael’s disciplinary hearing. This allows members the opportunity to show their strength of feeling in order to change the Councils mind about pursuing their unwarranted disciplinary process.
There will be a lunch time rally from: 11:30am At St Johns Church, Stratford (in the middle of the Broadway) Nearest tube – Stratford on the central line.
All welcome to come along in support of Michael and the branch.
Link to map
Michael has been accused by the council of "not acting in the best interests of the council" and organising an "unauthorised" meeting against possible privatisation of services. UNISON has denied the allegations amount to gross misconduct, rather it says they are a direct attack on the union, aimed at gagging an effective negotiator.
"It is no coincidence that the Michael has been suspended shortly after the union started a campaign against the privatisation of the refuse and cleaning service," said branch secretary Irene Stacey.Messages of support can be emailed to the branch at newham-unison@btconnect.com and messages of condemnation sent to Newham mayor Robin Wales at Robin.wales@newham.gov.uk”

I cannot be there on Wednesday as I will not be in London, but I hope as many UNISON activists as possible will show their support. If an employer can establish the principle that a union representative can be dismissed for (allegedly!) failing to breach the duty of confidentiality owed to a union member that would be the death knell of independent trade unionism in the workplace.

Good luck to all the sisters and brothers in Newham UNISON!

Local Government Pay - no fight this year...

Although my initial reaction to the news that we had a 51% “YES” vote on a 24% turnout in the national local government strike ballot was that we should press ahead with strike action because we had won the ballot, I can also, on reflection, understand why the National Joint Council (NJC) Committee voted by 24 votes to 3 not to proceed with strike action but instead to accept the employers’ offer.

Given the close result it might well have been difficult to sustain the strike action which would have been necessary to win and – although I suspect that had I been voting at the meeting this afternoon I would have been with the minority in believing that this could still have been done, the real problem is not with the vote at the NJC Committee but with the reasons underlying the close vote in the ballot.

There will be some who will see in the divided views of the membership some justification for their own initial pessimism – however, I think that what has been tested and found wanting in this year’s pay round thus far is an approach to leadership in the trade union movement which believes that the purpose of leadership is to hold a mirror to the members and reflect back their views and feelings, in this case indecision and a lack of confidence.

Leadership ought however to consist in developing, on the basis of the interests and opinions of the membership a strategy to advance those interests which the leadership should then take to the membership in order to campaign for their support. This proactive approach to raising public sector pay was implicit in the policies endorsed at UNISON Conference and at the Trades Union Congress.

This approach has not been put into practice this year. The alternative approach has been exemplified by the decisions of, for example, UNISON’s Health Service Group Executive and of the other local government unions – GMB and UNITE(TGWU) not to recommend rejection of below inflation pay increases, leading to acceptance of these offers by the members. These decisions in themselves can be – and have been – justified on the basis of a belief that the members are not up for the fight that would have been necessary to win.

If that is so, and the UNISON local government ballot result suggests that it may be at least partly true, then the roots of this problem can be traced to the collective failure of the trade union leadership to develop and campaign for an effective strategy to reverse the decline in the living standards of public service workers. I do not exclude myself from this criticism – and I do think we now face a serious challenge to try to construct in reality and from below the unity of purpose which was expressed rhetorically and from above at the TUC.

The alternative is a continuing squeeze on the living standards of public sector trade unionists – and a continuation of the flaccid failure to offer effective leadership. The 2008 pay campaign starts now, and it does not start from a very good place I am afraid.

Update on Monday evening – here is the official version; “Local government workers across England, Wales and Northern Ireland have slammed this year’s below-inflation annual pay award, but stopped short of outright industrial action at this stage, putting employers and the government in the ‘last chance saloon’ over pay.”

If they don’t come up with a better offer next year we will mobilise some really really scary clichés – never mind the “last chance saloon”!

Seriously I am pleased that we are committing ourselves in public to start a campaign for 2008 based on securing fair pay and conditions improvements and defeating plans to attack national conditions and negotiating machinery. The question is, what are we actually going to do though?

To strike or not to strike?

A joint meeting of UNISON's Local Government Service Group Executive and National Joint Council Committee is taking place this afternoon to decide what to do in the light of the result of our strike ballot.

As I understand it the turn out was, in the light of the postal dispute, respectable, and the result is a "YES" but a fairly narrow "YES". A difficult decision confronts the meeting this afternoon, but my view - and the view of the activists I have been talking to in our branch office - is that a "YES" vote should lead to strike action.

Our arguments for action are good - and could now be presented far more effectively than they were during the ballot campaign.

Update at 4.15pm. The National Joint Council Committee have voted decisively not to proceed with strike action and to accept the employers' offer. A disappointing outcome about which I will post more considered comment later.

Hands off Iran!

I am no fan of the Iranian regime. Their treatment of trade unionists is appalling – witness the case of Mansour Osanloo, or the assassination attempt on Majid Hamidi.

However, the cause of Iranian trade unionists will not be assisted by U.S. imperialist warmongering – the enormous flaw in the liberal/progressive case for intervention is that the US (and this goes just as much for the UK) never intervene in the interests of progressive politics or humans rights but only in the interests (as their rulers perceive them) of the US (or the UK).

The hypocritical attacks upon the Iranians from the US and UK Governments, who are happy to do business with the appallingly reactionary and repressive Saudi regime, have nothing whatsoever to do with supporting the Iranian people. If there is a progressive case for sanctions against Iran there is a better case for sanctions against Saudi Arabia, but it isn’t being made by our Governments.

So, as well as showing solidarity with Iranian workers under attack by their reactionary Government, trade unionists in the UK need to prepare to campaign against an attack upon Iran. It is a vital role of our movement to stand against war, and we have the opportunity to stop the UK Government supporting a US attack on Iran.

Postal workers show how to deliver higher pay?

The Postal Executive and full Executive of the Communication Workers Union (CWU) are recommending a deal to their members in their dispute with Royal Mail.

I know that respected activists have expressed various reservations about the proposed deal. Postal workers will have to decide what to do about the recommendation.

As a local government worker what stands out to me however is that the workers stand to get 5.4% on their pay from this month.

We, on the other hand, have been offered 2.475% (with 3.4% to the very lowest paid).

GMB members in local government have voted to accept this poor deal, and members of most health unions, including UNISON, voted to accept even less.

What is the difference between the sectors which have had below inflation pay rises and the postal workers?

Two words.

Strike action.

It works.

If you are a UNISON member in local government reading this then make sure you return your strike ballot by Friday and remember to vote “YES”.

Update on 23 October - with thanks to a better informed comrade who suggests that the tone of this post thus far is unreasonably upbeat. I note from one comment on this post already that it is the "ultra left" who may characterise the deal as a "sell out".

Well I have often been accused of being "ultra left" - but I prefer to consider whether a deal has sold the members short rather than sold them out. In this case what I have failed to take adequately into account above is that the deal is over two years, making 5.4% much less impressive. Although there is an additional - conditional - 1.5% due on 1 April, I understand that there is an argument that that is money that was due anyway.

If any readers can point me in the direction of a blog or website where postal workers are debating the pros and cons of the deal I shall post a link.

I still believe that strike action works, but obviously the extent to which it delivers for our members is dependent in part upon the strategy and tactics adopted by the leadership of each dispute.

Carry on blogging!

I’ve been called a blogger.

Mind you, I’ve been called worse (usually anonymously…!)

But these days I am not the only blogger on the UNISON NEC (although there are those who say that I never was but that other bloggers were just in the closet – and no, I am not posting a link to the anonymous blog to which I refer, because it was just never funny or intelligent enough to warrant that respect…)

Now though you don’t have to listen only to my ramblings if you want more than just the official version of what is going on on the UNISON NEC, you can hear from John, Emma and Kate – not to mention James and Angela.

That’s almost 10% of the UNISON NEC blogging now.

Come on the rest of you – what do you think those laptops and Blackberries are for???

Who're SUE?

I blogged a little while ago about the dispute between UNISON and its main staff trade union (UNITE) over some proposed staffing changes.

The UNITE members protesting outside UNISON Regional Office were joined briefly by one or two members of another trade union – SUE (the Society of Union Employees).

But who’re SUE?

A cursory glance at the internet reveals – according to the Certification Officer website – that they have 288 members employed by UNISON, but are not affiliated to the TUC (and have no political fund).

Google only reveals that SUE once spoke up for a senior official facing allegations of bullying.

Now I would be the first to accept that employees of a trade union are hardly in an identical position to all other workers, and that there are difficulties and contradictions in unionising the employees of a trade union.

But can someone explain to me how union officials in a TUC affiliated trade union can come to the conclusion that their interests will be best served by membership of a union which is apolitical and outside the TUC?

And why doesn’t the organisation have a presence on the internet?

The anonymous opponents of migration in our movement...

There are those in our trade union movement who worry about the influence of far left organisations in our trade unions. I often get stick for being prepared to work alongside comrades who are members of outfits such as the Socialist Workers Party or the Socialist Party.

I am not troubled by this.

I prefer to work with good trade unionists regardless of political affiliation, whether they are in the Labour Party, the Communist Party, or no party at all. I also believe it is important to be open about political affiliations.

But there are other political parties in our movement which operate much less openly – one such is the Communist Party of Britain (Marxist-Leninist) which produce a journal called “Workers” in which all the contributions are anonymous (!) presumably because they are written by a small number of people holding well paid jobs as officials on our movement.

Workers is, oddly enough, anti-immigration. Their argument is pretty simple, migration increases the supply of labour and that depresses the price of labour. GCSE level economics is more advanced than much of what passes for discussion in our movement, but this a pretty limited argument which, characteristically for “Workers”, leads nowhere in terms of any practical guide to action for trade unionists. Do the comrades think we should be lining up with the anti-immigration brigade? What good would that do?

Mass migration is not going to stop. Capital flows ever more freely around the world (and that is a flow which we ought to be arguing for controls over). We can’t get back to a politics based upon the interests of “our” working class in “our” country, as distinct from the interests of our class the world over. We need to recognise that employers will try to depress wages and that their state will help them to do so – we need to fight as trade unionists to organise workers into trade unions, to push up wages – and to campaign for policies (such as an increase in the minimum wage and an amnesty for so-called “illegal” migrants) which will support workers’ interests.

Migrant workers are here now and the job of the trade unions is to organise workers regardless of nationality. That’s why UNISON is right to set out to organise migrant workers and to support Strangers into Citizens – perhaps the authors of Workers, including those in our own Union, would like to emerge from their anonymity and have a real debate?

There certainly is a danger in the movement adopting progressive policies on migration without winning support for them at a rank and file level. We need to take on and defeat the shallow and unimpressive arguments of the anti-immigrant brigade, to the left as much as to the right.

Local disputes show the need for national action

Bad news in Birmingham where the local authority – England’s largest – is seeking to impose a pay and grading deal which could see pay cuts of up to £10,000 a year for 12% of the workforce. The challenge of introducing equal pay in local government without the funding required to do so in a fair and reasonable way is only going to provoke more disputes.

Ironically this happens a year to the day since the Local Government Employers called upon their members to reach agreements on equal pay with the unions. And of course, it is ten years since we agreed the Single Status deal…

This approach of imposition heralds the future of employee relations in local government if the employers get their way and reduce national bargaining to a completely hollow shell. We are at our strongest when we can use the unity that comes from being part of a national union – that’s why the most important task for UNISON activists in local government is to mobilise for a yes vote in the national strike ballot.

If we can strengthen our national organisation we can get better settlements of our local disputes.