Today sees the close of an eight week consultation period on the powers an elected mayor should have if the referendums scheduled for May 2012 agree to this. This consultation, begun on November 1st, has been rather over shadowed by the Pensions strike but the outcome of this could have a significant impact on the political control of our council.
Birmingham is one of 12 English cities (Birmingham, Bradford, Bristol, Coventry, Leeds, Leicester, Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle upon Tyne, Nottingham, Sheffield and Wakefield) that the Con-Dem Government would like to see directly elect a mayor with executive powers to replace the current system of councillors choosing a Leader and Cabinet members.
The plan is to hold a referendum in the 12 cities in May 2012 on whether to have a directly elected mayor.
This consultation is over the additional powers the directly mayor should have beyond control of the city council, such as over transport in the city.
UNISON's view on directly elected mayors is that we don't support the idea. We find it difficult to comment on the powers they should have, because we don't believe they should have any.
Speaking personally, I really value the system we have of councillors elected by ward who then choose amongst themselves who should be responsible for the different areas of council services, and a leader for the council.
I know my local councillors and so do my neighbours. If we have a problem or issue, we know we can get to our councillors really easily. There are advice surgeries, regular ward and constituency meetings open to the public and we can even contact them directly if we need to. That's not to say I'm happy with the decisions they make in the council, particularly when it comes to cutting our services and changing our contracts. But I respect the democratic process through which they were elected and the role of the councillors within it. And I believe they are continually responsive to their electors, to at least some degree. And I get to vote for them three years out of four.
Compare that with a single person who is elected by a million inhabitants who then can choose who will be their Cabinet members. How close will they be to their individual electors ? Maybe every four or five years when they are seeking re-election. It's the concept of the big individual political hero, rather than power being in the hands of a hundred or so councillors elected by local wards
I can understand why London would find it useful to have a city wide mayor. Their local authority services are delivered by dozens of local borough councils so it makes sense to have a cooordinating and strategic executive body and a directly elected mayor.
But Birmingham already has that coordinating and strategic body. It's called the council.
The main argument for a directly elected mayor seems to be that it might attract someone with exceptional charisma and strategic abilities to be a champion for the city. Well we've not done so badly with the old system of locally elected councillors. Birmingham has been transformed over the past few decades. It is a city I enjoy living in and am proud to call home. And it is a product of local democracy. But for how long ?
Graeme Horn
Joint Branch Secretary
Tuesday, January 3, 2012
Wednesday, December 28, 2011
Could We Achieve No Compulsory Redundancies Next Year ?
Just before Christmas we had a consultation meeting about next year's budget cuts. We are coming to the end of a three month consultation period which will close on 6th January. There was an update from senior HR officers from each of the council's Directorates on the progress locally in making the cuts.
Birmingham is planning to cut a further £106 million from April 2012, on top of the £212 million cuts this year. The financial information is extremely complex and it is hard to get a real picture of what is happening.
This year's cuts (2011-2) included large savings to be made from reducing home to school transport for children with a range of needs; from tightening the eligibility criteria for receiving adult social care services; and from pushing down the contract rates for private adult social care services. But during the year, these plans have had to be dropped because of public opposition to cuts in school transport; because a judicial review ruled the consultation over social care criteria unlawful; and because the council says after the Southern Cross disaster, they can't squeeze independent sector care providers any harder.
So next year (2012-3), £65 million more cuts must be made to replace these three areas of cuts, plus £41 million other cuts some already planned for, others not. That's £106m, and as you can see it's complicated.
They had projected that these £106m cuts would mean up to 1,069 full time equivalent redundancies. But with some money being found elsewhere, some discovery of double counting of redundancies and with the use of voluntary redundancies, the numbers of potential compulsory redundancies have come down, perhaps to half this number or less. We are awaiting a full re-assessment of the current position on potential compulsory redundancies which is promised for the new year.
So we now ask the question - would it not be possible in an organisation with 16,500 staff to find alternative jobs for 500 or fewer people ? Can we not achieve 'no compulsory redundancies' next year ?
There are three strong weapons which can be used - another voluntary redundancy trawl, reduction of agency staff (still around £20 million plus this year) and reduced use of outside management consultants (still around £12 million this year).
Looking at the projected redundancies, there are several clusters of high levels of job losses. In Home Care 2-300 jobs are threatened. In Connexions 105 jobs are to go. In Childrens Services 140 jobs are to be cut. In the disabled work factory Shelforce, 87 would lose their jobs if Shelforce is closed. Some of these could be reduced by voluntary redundancies.
What's going on wioth these cuts? Why reduce well trained and high quality in-house Home Care when the standards of care in the private sector has just been lambasted by the Equalities and Human Rights Commission report ? Why savage Connexions with young people's unemployment at record rates ? Why threaten services for children in need in a city which has had a poor record of delivering a safe life for its children ? Why throw disabled people onto the dole and the mercy of the benefits system when the job market is in such a dire state ?
Surely we could put some more money into these critical services and also find alternative work in the council for those threatened with compulsory redundancy. Let's give people a little longer than the three months period on the 'Priority Movers' register to find another job in the council. Let's look closely at the skills of the potentially displaced and where they can be used elsewhere.
If the will was there, a council of the size and resourcefulness of Birmingham could do all these things and thereby give a guarantee of no compulsory redundancy even for just a year. The payback in terms of staff morale and higher committment would be immense.
But the will is not there. The council decision makers are obsessed with the bottom line of financial spreadsheets and don't pay enough attention to the misery of the real people who are being made compulsorily redundant.
So next year we must fight together for a more humane approach. It is perfectly possible to achieve. It just requires the will.
Graeme Horn, Joint Branch Secretary
Birmingham is planning to cut a further £106 million from April 2012, on top of the £212 million cuts this year. The financial information is extremely complex and it is hard to get a real picture of what is happening.
This year's cuts (2011-2) included large savings to be made from reducing home to school transport for children with a range of needs; from tightening the eligibility criteria for receiving adult social care services; and from pushing down the contract rates for private adult social care services. But during the year, these plans have had to be dropped because of public opposition to cuts in school transport; because a judicial review ruled the consultation over social care criteria unlawful; and because the council says after the Southern Cross disaster, they can't squeeze independent sector care providers any harder.
So next year (2012-3), £65 million more cuts must be made to replace these three areas of cuts, plus £41 million other cuts some already planned for, others not. That's £106m, and as you can see it's complicated.
They had projected that these £106m cuts would mean up to 1,069 full time equivalent redundancies. But with some money being found elsewhere, some discovery of double counting of redundancies and with the use of voluntary redundancies, the numbers of potential compulsory redundancies have come down, perhaps to half this number or less. We are awaiting a full re-assessment of the current position on potential compulsory redundancies which is promised for the new year.
So we now ask the question - would it not be possible in an organisation with 16,500 staff to find alternative jobs for 500 or fewer people ? Can we not achieve 'no compulsory redundancies' next year ?
There are three strong weapons which can be used - another voluntary redundancy trawl, reduction of agency staff (still around £20 million plus this year) and reduced use of outside management consultants (still around £12 million this year).
Looking at the projected redundancies, there are several clusters of high levels of job losses. In Home Care 2-300 jobs are threatened. In Connexions 105 jobs are to go. In Childrens Services 140 jobs are to be cut. In the disabled work factory Shelforce, 87 would lose their jobs if Shelforce is closed. Some of these could be reduced by voluntary redundancies.
What's going on wioth these cuts? Why reduce well trained and high quality in-house Home Care when the standards of care in the private sector has just been lambasted by the Equalities and Human Rights Commission report ? Why savage Connexions with young people's unemployment at record rates ? Why threaten services for children in need in a city which has had a poor record of delivering a safe life for its children ? Why throw disabled people onto the dole and the mercy of the benefits system when the job market is in such a dire state ?
Surely we could put some more money into these critical services and also find alternative work in the council for those threatened with compulsory redundancy. Let's give people a little longer than the three months period on the 'Priority Movers' register to find another job in the council. Let's look closely at the skills of the potentially displaced and where they can be used elsewhere.
If the will was there, a council of the size and resourcefulness of Birmingham could do all these things and thereby give a guarantee of no compulsory redundancy even for just a year. The payback in terms of staff morale and higher committment would be immense.
But the will is not there. The council decision makers are obsessed with the bottom line of financial spreadsheets and don't pay enough attention to the misery of the real people who are being made compulsorily redundant.
So next year we must fight together for a more humane approach. It is perfectly possible to achieve. It just requires the will.
Graeme Horn, Joint Branch Secretary
Thursday, December 22, 2011
£570 Payment For Those Losing Allowances
Cllr Alan Rudge, Cabinet Member for HR & Equalities, announced yesterday a payment of £570 to those on Grades 1 - 4 losing more than £250 a year in shift, weekend pay and reduced night working allowance. Part timers will get the payment in proportion to their hours, so for example a person working half time (18.50 hours) will receive £285 if they have lost over £125 a year. The payment will be made in the January monthly payroll. We understand it will be subject to tax and national insurance, but is not pensionable.
We have been discussing this with corporate HR for a month or more. There was a report on this in the last branch newsletter mailed out to all branch members. There is also a news article on the branch web site too.
It is important to stress that this does not resolve the dispute and we have been asked to make no commitment to end our opposition to the new Martini contract. It gives some short term relief, perhaps a month or two's losses will be covered for some but by no means all.
As we said in the branch newsletter, the fact that management are able to find £1.3m for this and to prioritise that the money should go to those losing so much pay, just demonstrates that the pressure we are all putting them under is having some effect.
We have held lobbies, taken three days of strike action, taken the issue to councillors in their surgeries and in the constituency public meetings. We have been all over the local media opposing these cruel cuts in pay. UNISON has accompanied members to literally thousands of individual consultation meetings, dismissal hearings and appeal hearings. And we are not going to let the issue drop. Woe betide the Conservatives and Lib Dems in the local elections in May if they are still implementing what amounts to cuts in a third of pay for people earning only £15-19,000 a year.
Why is the payment only to grades 1 - 4 ? We believe it should go to everyone. Management however wanted to make sure that there is no equality bias in the payment and said that there might be if paid to all staff, regardless of grade. They were not prepared to take that risk.
We did manage to secure a little increase to the original offer, from £500 to £570 on the basis that the minimum loss was raised from £100 to £250. It was UNISON specifically which secured this. We recognise that those losing under £500 a year still need some compensation, because they will have this loss not just in one year but in every year from now on.
It might be hard on those losing between £100 and £250 a year, but we hope those members will understand that they are in a very different situation to someone who is facing a loss of say £2,000 this year and possibly up to £5000 from November 2012. There is a balance to be struck here. Ultimately it is management's decision not ours, but our approach was to try to get as much support to those with the greatest need.
What we really wanted to do was to have two or three levels of payment, a smaller one, a middle sized one and a larger one, depending on how much people are losing in total. But management would not support this. Again they said they were worried that there might be equalities differences introduced by this more complicated formula.
So what's next ? We do need to keep up the pressure on the politicians if we are to stop these cruel cuts. Have you been to see your councillors ? Would you be prepared to write to your councillors, and to send us a copy of your correspondence ? Would you help form a group of members in your constituency who would attend their surgeries or the constituency meetings and raise the issue there ? If so, contact the branch because we are continuing with all these actions.
Finally, I have to say this further mitigation step presents quite a challenge to the Labour Group on the council. They are almost definitely going to take power in 2012. The Con Dem coalition are entirely to blame for creating and imposing the Martini contract. But they can legitimately say they have taken some mitigation steps, limiting losses from the core allowances (but not other things like essential car user allowances) to 10% of take home pay for one year and now making a £570 one-off payment. And they have left a sting in the tail for Labour as the 10% mitigation ends in November 2012, with thousands facing further losses of another 10 or 20%.
What will Labour do ?
Next Christmas, will they be the Scrooges the ConDems want them to be ? Or will they try to be Father Christmas with one-off payments which barely last into the New Year. Or will they do the decent thing and restore our members pay ?
Graeme Horn, Joint Branch Secretary
We have been discussing this with corporate HR for a month or more. There was a report on this in the last branch newsletter mailed out to all branch members. There is also a news article on the branch web site too.
It is important to stress that this does not resolve the dispute and we have been asked to make no commitment to end our opposition to the new Martini contract. It gives some short term relief, perhaps a month or two's losses will be covered for some but by no means all.
As we said in the branch newsletter, the fact that management are able to find £1.3m for this and to prioritise that the money should go to those losing so much pay, just demonstrates that the pressure we are all putting them under is having some effect.
We have held lobbies, taken three days of strike action, taken the issue to councillors in their surgeries and in the constituency public meetings. We have been all over the local media opposing these cruel cuts in pay. UNISON has accompanied members to literally thousands of individual consultation meetings, dismissal hearings and appeal hearings. And we are not going to let the issue drop. Woe betide the Conservatives and Lib Dems in the local elections in May if they are still implementing what amounts to cuts in a third of pay for people earning only £15-19,000 a year.
Why is the payment only to grades 1 - 4 ? We believe it should go to everyone. Management however wanted to make sure that there is no equality bias in the payment and said that there might be if paid to all staff, regardless of grade. They were not prepared to take that risk.
We did manage to secure a little increase to the original offer, from £500 to £570 on the basis that the minimum loss was raised from £100 to £250. It was UNISON specifically which secured this. We recognise that those losing under £500 a year still need some compensation, because they will have this loss not just in one year but in every year from now on.
It might be hard on those losing between £100 and £250 a year, but we hope those members will understand that they are in a very different situation to someone who is facing a loss of say £2,000 this year and possibly up to £5000 from November 2012. There is a balance to be struck here. Ultimately it is management's decision not ours, but our approach was to try to get as much support to those with the greatest need.
What we really wanted to do was to have two or three levels of payment, a smaller one, a middle sized one and a larger one, depending on how much people are losing in total. But management would not support this. Again they said they were worried that there might be equalities differences introduced by this more complicated formula.
So what's next ? We do need to keep up the pressure on the politicians if we are to stop these cruel cuts. Have you been to see your councillors ? Would you be prepared to write to your councillors, and to send us a copy of your correspondence ? Would you help form a group of members in your constituency who would attend their surgeries or the constituency meetings and raise the issue there ? If so, contact the branch because we are continuing with all these actions.
Finally, I have to say this further mitigation step presents quite a challenge to the Labour Group on the council. They are almost definitely going to take power in 2012. The Con Dem coalition are entirely to blame for creating and imposing the Martini contract. But they can legitimately say they have taken some mitigation steps, limiting losses from the core allowances (but not other things like essential car user allowances) to 10% of take home pay for one year and now making a £570 one-off payment. And they have left a sting in the tail for Labour as the 10% mitigation ends in November 2012, with thousands facing further losses of another 10 or 20%.
What will Labour do ?
Next Christmas, will they be the Scrooges the ConDems want them to be ? Or will they try to be Father Christmas with one-off payments which barely last into the New Year. Or will they do the decent thing and restore our members pay ?
Graeme Horn, Joint Branch Secretary
Monday, December 19, 2011
Birmingham's New Organising Campaign
Today started with a meeting with our new Birmingham Branch Organising team, to review what was done last week and to plan what they will do this week.
We have been exceptionally fortunate to have received some short-term funding from the UNISON National Fighting Fund and other national and regional sources to set up a team of Local Organisers to pioneer the use of the 'organising approach' in a major local authority.
What we want to do is to build up strong local organised workplaces where members are working together to support each other in facing the challenges at work. We are also identifying people who can become stewards or workplace representatives, who will be well trained and supported by the branch to maintain the strong workplace organisation. We will thereby attract more staff to join the union and make us even more effective.
Recruitment without strong sustained local organisation is doomed to disillusionment and failure. Organisation needs recruitment, if our members are to have real influence with their management.
UNISON has been applying the 'organising approach' developed by public sector unions in American, Australia and elsewhere. The 'Three Companies' project had great success in building union organisation in three private catering and cleaning companies working on public sector contracts. Workplaces with hardly a few members turned into 70% plus membership and established effective organisation, winning real improvements in the conditions at work for or rather by members.
Now we want to see whether we can use these techniques in local government. Sheffield Branch is also running an organising project.
We will be focusing on three different areas - the schools in one parliamentary constituency, Yardley; the Adults Assessment and Support Planning division which faces privatisation in a social enterprise in 2013; and one of the big mega-administration buildings (Woodcock Street) where the council is concentrating thousands of staff. We will be looking at how we build a unionised community for the many staff who are working from home. There may be other focus areas later in the year, depending on progress with these three.
It's early days, but the team has been getting out to workplaces, meeting members and stewards, distributing newsletters and publicity.
Graeme Horn, Joint Branch Secretary
We have been exceptionally fortunate to have received some short-term funding from the UNISON National Fighting Fund and other national and regional sources to set up a team of Local Organisers to pioneer the use of the 'organising approach' in a major local authority.
What we want to do is to build up strong local organised workplaces where members are working together to support each other in facing the challenges at work. We are also identifying people who can become stewards or workplace representatives, who will be well trained and supported by the branch to maintain the strong workplace organisation. We will thereby attract more staff to join the union and make us even more effective.
Recruitment without strong sustained local organisation is doomed to disillusionment and failure. Organisation needs recruitment, if our members are to have real influence with their management.
UNISON has been applying the 'organising approach' developed by public sector unions in American, Australia and elsewhere. The 'Three Companies' project had great success in building union organisation in three private catering and cleaning companies working on public sector contracts. Workplaces with hardly a few members turned into 70% plus membership and established effective organisation, winning real improvements in the conditions at work for or rather by members.
Now we want to see whether we can use these techniques in local government. Sheffield Branch is also running an organising project.
We will be focusing on three different areas - the schools in one parliamentary constituency, Yardley; the Adults Assessment and Support Planning division which faces privatisation in a social enterprise in 2013; and one of the big mega-administration buildings (Woodcock Street) where the council is concentrating thousands of staff. We will be looking at how we build a unionised community for the many staff who are working from home. There may be other focus areas later in the year, depending on progress with these three.
It's early days, but the team has been getting out to workplaces, meeting members and stewards, distributing newsletters and publicity.
Graeme Horn, Joint Branch Secretary
Thursday, December 15, 2011
A Day On The Front-Line
Yesterday, I had my day all planned. Branch Officers Group in the morning and an afternoon at the fortnightly corporate trade union consultation meeting.
Then events intervened.
First there was a crisis at the Priory Rooms where management are holding dismissal appeal hearings for staff losing pay from the removal of allowances in the new 'Martini' contract. They have erected little booths in the meeting rooms at the Priory so that 8 - 10 dismisal appeal hearings can be held simultaneously. Most of the staff are UNISON members and they all need a UNISON representative. Up until recently we have been able to cope but the number pushed through by management have increased and we were short-handed.
So we cancelled Branch Officers Group and I went to help.
This is the third time our members have been through these one-to-one meetings, first a consultation on the new contract proposals, then a dismissal (and re-engagement) hearing and now an appeal against dismissal. The people we represent are in a heartbreaking situation. One person I represented was losing £3,800 out of around £16,000. She had children and a mortgage. Another is feeling forced to go for voluntary redundancy. He's lost the same, and another £80 per month because of loss of essential car use allowance.
It is always good just to be there for people. I hope we can make the process a bit more tolerable. And I hope our members know that we understand they are being treated like they just don't matter. Three times our members have gone through explaining just how devastating these pay cuts are. And three times, the council has just ploughed on regardless. Still we were there.
I could see just how deeply upset our UNISON reps are, who have been doing this day after day, sometimes for weeks at a time. I can only marvel at how dedicated they are and how caring they are. Without them, our members would have suffered so much more. But this takes a huge toll on our UNISON reps.
Then in the afternoon, I was covering for a colleague who has finally gone down with the bug she's been fighting off for weeks. I went to a staff briefing and UNISON members meeting for members working in the Older People's Access Service, which handles all calls and contacts for adult services, providing advice, assessment and support to meet care needs. Management is consulting on a decision already made to transfer them to be employed by Capita on 12 April 2012. There will also be a move of 8 or so miles from Perry Barr to the Capita call centre at Fort Dunlop.
Members are understandably worried about whether their council salaries, terms and conditions will be preserved by Capita. And what will happen to their pensions if the Government gets its way to end the 'Fair Deal' under which privatising firms like Capita have to have 'admitted status' to the LGPS. And what guarantees are there that Capita will not suddenly announce a re-location to some remote part of the country where new regionalised pay rates are lower.
These and many other issues will have to be examined in the next three months of consultation. But what really matters is that the OPAS workforce stands together, and bargains together, with the assistance of the union and the branch. The best route to a reasonably secure future is to have a high union membership, a number of active stewards, and members who clearly show they are working together and become a force that commands respect.
If I was moving into a private employer like Capita, I'd want to be in an organised workplace.
This is just a small snap shot of what our UNISON branch and section officers and convenors are doing every day. Every day is a day on the front line.
Then events intervened.
First there was a crisis at the Priory Rooms where management are holding dismissal appeal hearings for staff losing pay from the removal of allowances in the new 'Martini' contract. They have erected little booths in the meeting rooms at the Priory so that 8 - 10 dismisal appeal hearings can be held simultaneously. Most of the staff are UNISON members and they all need a UNISON representative. Up until recently we have been able to cope but the number pushed through by management have increased and we were short-handed.
So we cancelled Branch Officers Group and I went to help.
This is the third time our members have been through these one-to-one meetings, first a consultation on the new contract proposals, then a dismissal (and re-engagement) hearing and now an appeal against dismissal. The people we represent are in a heartbreaking situation. One person I represented was losing £3,800 out of around £16,000. She had children and a mortgage. Another is feeling forced to go for voluntary redundancy. He's lost the same, and another £80 per month because of loss of essential car use allowance.
It is always good just to be there for people. I hope we can make the process a bit more tolerable. And I hope our members know that we understand they are being treated like they just don't matter. Three times our members have gone through explaining just how devastating these pay cuts are. And three times, the council has just ploughed on regardless. Still we were there.
I could see just how deeply upset our UNISON reps are, who have been doing this day after day, sometimes for weeks at a time. I can only marvel at how dedicated they are and how caring they are. Without them, our members would have suffered so much more. But this takes a huge toll on our UNISON reps.
Then in the afternoon, I was covering for a colleague who has finally gone down with the bug she's been fighting off for weeks. I went to a staff briefing and UNISON members meeting for members working in the Older People's Access Service, which handles all calls and contacts for adult services, providing advice, assessment and support to meet care needs. Management is consulting on a decision already made to transfer them to be employed by Capita on 12 April 2012. There will also be a move of 8 or so miles from Perry Barr to the Capita call centre at Fort Dunlop.
Members are understandably worried about whether their council salaries, terms and conditions will be preserved by Capita. And what will happen to their pensions if the Government gets its way to end the 'Fair Deal' under which privatising firms like Capita have to have 'admitted status' to the LGPS. And what guarantees are there that Capita will not suddenly announce a re-location to some remote part of the country where new regionalised pay rates are lower.
These and many other issues will have to be examined in the next three months of consultation. But what really matters is that the OPAS workforce stands together, and bargains together, with the assistance of the union and the branch. The best route to a reasonably secure future is to have a high union membership, a number of active stewards, and members who clearly show they are working together and become a force that commands respect.
If I was moving into a private employer like Capita, I'd want to be in an organised workplace.
This is just a small snap shot of what our UNISON branch and section officers and convenors are doing every day. Every day is a day on the front line.
Tuesday, December 13, 2011
Hooray for Birmingham Against The Cuts
Last night we have our roughly fortnightly organising meeting of Birmingham Against The Cuts, the first since the Great Pensions Strike of 2011 !
We started with a discussion on Workfare - the compulsory work to get your benefits, which is forcing unemployed people to work without pay for an effective rate of £2.25 an hour. Some of our activists are planning a boycott and protest campaign in mid-Feb to mid March outside some of the retail outlets who are exploiting Workfare. Poundland is an example. The irony is that many of the exploited unemployed people would struggle to be able to buy a lot in the very shop which has exploited them.
And there is growing evidence that the public sector is eying up the opportunities presented by workfare. Newark council replacing an admin worker with a workfare person. 800 London Underground staff made redundant and 200 workfare people taken on. We'll be discussing the issue at our branch committee next week.
Red Pepper magazine has an excellent article on workfare in this month's edition, introduced with this harrowing quote.
'She found another placement for me at Primark. I worked from 10am to 4.30pm or 5pm with a half-hour break. They didn’t pay any money. It was nearly six months – January to June. When I finished the volunteer work I went to the manager: "Do you have any vacancies?" They said "We’ll call you when we do." I haven’t had a call.'
Karina, jobseeker placed at Primark under the Flexible New Deal
Then we moved on to the campaign against Academy Schools. Local campaign groups have had at least a partial victory in delaying the adoption of Academy status by Bournville School. Now three unions are taking strike action at Montgomery School. Again BATC is supporting the campaign.
The main discussion of the evening was over budget cuts in the council. BATC has performed brilliantly in opposing the cuts at the public consultation meetings held in each constituency. Several meetings have voted overwhelmingly for reversing the £212m cuts this year and re-instating the pay cuts under the Martini Contract. They also voted to reduce the pay of chief officers and cabinet members by the same proportion that they cut council services. More consultation meetings have been added and more BATC supporters are being mobilised.
Libraries in the city are a major focus for ourselves and BATC. The Central Library in Birmingham has this week reduced its opening hours by 25%, losing 3 hours a day. They say it is because staff need time to work on preparing to move to the new super library being built in Centenary Square. But the truth is that staffing levels have been reduced so low that basic services are being hit. Handsworth Library has reduced opening days. The local BATC group have collected 800 signatures on a petition against this. Balsall Heath Library also faces cuts in hours and a local BATC is campaigning against this.
We agreed to call a lobby of the next full council meeting on January 10th to highlight the library cuts.
Another major struggle supported by BATC is over the proposed closure of 5 Childrens Homes. Two of these are respite unites for disabled children, Charles House and Cambourne House. Charles House parents and families group has run a huge and effective campaign to save their home. The Chief Officer for Childrens Services and the Cabinet Member have had to face dozens of angry parents. Management say they have not decided yet which services will close but we now expect the announcement on January 10th, just days after the closure of the public consultation exercise. The Charles House group has been strongly supported by BATC's Stirchley and Cotteridge group - an amazing example of active local campaigning. The parents even asked for a collection for the local BATC group. There are tremendous reports on these meetings and activities on the BATC website.
We will be lobbing the council on 10th January to Save the Childrens' Homes too.
Then we discussed the closure of Shelforce, a council run factory/workshop for disabled workers. Our UNISON steward and the members there are organising the Save Shelforce campaign. BATC will be publicising their new ePetition.
Next we moved on to a couple of social events
Stirchley and Cotteridge Against The Cuts Thursday 15th December - with comedian, band, music
Birmingham Uncut Saturday 17 December.
Details on the BATC website
BATC is part of a network of anti-cuts groups in the Midlands. They meet regularly and are working on a regional conference on campaign organising skills in March 2012.
Finally, the date for the next meeting - Monday 9 January 6.30pm at the UNISON Birmingham Branch Office.
These meetings are open to anyone and if you want to become involved you would be very welcome. As you can see, UNISON is deeply involved with and strongly supported by anti-cuts campaigners throughout the city.
Graeme Horn, Joint Branch Secretary
We started with a discussion on Workfare - the compulsory work to get your benefits, which is forcing unemployed people to work without pay for an effective rate of £2.25 an hour. Some of our activists are planning a boycott and protest campaign in mid-Feb to mid March outside some of the retail outlets who are exploiting Workfare. Poundland is an example. The irony is that many of the exploited unemployed people would struggle to be able to buy a lot in the very shop which has exploited them.
And there is growing evidence that the public sector is eying up the opportunities presented by workfare. Newark council replacing an admin worker with a workfare person. 800 London Underground staff made redundant and 200 workfare people taken on. We'll be discussing the issue at our branch committee next week.
Red Pepper magazine has an excellent article on workfare in this month's edition, introduced with this harrowing quote.
Karina, jobseeker placed at Primark under the Flexible New Deal
Then we moved on to the campaign against Academy Schools. Local campaign groups have had at least a partial victory in delaying the adoption of Academy status by Bournville School. Now three unions are taking strike action at Montgomery School. Again BATC is supporting the campaign.
The main discussion of the evening was over budget cuts in the council. BATC has performed brilliantly in opposing the cuts at the public consultation meetings held in each constituency. Several meetings have voted overwhelmingly for reversing the £212m cuts this year and re-instating the pay cuts under the Martini Contract. They also voted to reduce the pay of chief officers and cabinet members by the same proportion that they cut council services. More consultation meetings have been added and more BATC supporters are being mobilised.
Libraries in the city are a major focus for ourselves and BATC. The Central Library in Birmingham has this week reduced its opening hours by 25%, losing 3 hours a day. They say it is because staff need time to work on preparing to move to the new super library being built in Centenary Square. But the truth is that staffing levels have been reduced so low that basic services are being hit. Handsworth Library has reduced opening days. The local BATC group have collected 800 signatures on a petition against this. Balsall Heath Library also faces cuts in hours and a local BATC is campaigning against this.
We agreed to call a lobby of the next full council meeting on January 10th to highlight the library cuts.
Another major struggle supported by BATC is over the proposed closure of 5 Childrens Homes. Two of these are respite unites for disabled children, Charles House and Cambourne House. Charles House parents and families group has run a huge and effective campaign to save their home. The Chief Officer for Childrens Services and the Cabinet Member have had to face dozens of angry parents. Management say they have not decided yet which services will close but we now expect the announcement on January 10th, just days after the closure of the public consultation exercise. The Charles House group has been strongly supported by BATC's Stirchley and Cotteridge group - an amazing example of active local campaigning. The parents even asked for a collection for the local BATC group. There are tremendous reports on these meetings and activities on the BATC website.
We will be lobbing the council on 10th January to Save the Childrens' Homes too.
Then we discussed the closure of Shelforce, a council run factory/workshop for disabled workers. Our UNISON steward and the members there are organising the Save Shelforce campaign. BATC will be publicising their new ePetition.
Next we moved on to a couple of social events
Stirchley and Cotteridge Against The Cuts Thursday 15th December - with comedian, band, music
Birmingham Uncut Saturday 17 December.
Details on the BATC website
BATC is part of a network of anti-cuts groups in the Midlands. They meet regularly and are working on a regional conference on campaign organising skills in March 2012.
Finally, the date for the next meeting - Monday 9 January 6.30pm at the UNISON Birmingham Branch Office.
These meetings are open to anyone and if you want to become involved you would be very welcome. As you can see, UNISON is deeply involved with and strongly supported by anti-cuts campaigners throughout the city.
Graeme Horn, Joint Branch Secretary
Monday, December 12, 2011
Collective Grievances About Unpaid Weekend And Shift Allowances
Most of this afternoon I have been working on getting ready for a collective grievance on behalf of senior staff working in adult residential homes who have not been paid weekend and shift allowances since 2008.
In 2008, the city council's new Single Status contract included additional allowances for all staff who work weekends and alternating shift systems. But some groups of staff have never received these enhancements. Managers, assistant managers, team leaders and other staff in the older adults residential homes are a case in point. They have routinely worked shifts starting at 7.00 in the morning and ending at 10.00 at night, seven days a week. They are owed thousands of pounds because the council has refused to pay the contracted allowances.
A group of over 20 of these staff have been pursuing a collective grievance, with representation from UNISON, for the last couple of years. We've got as far as having our grievance upheld at Stage 2 but the council is still refusing to pay. They say because of the current economic climate "the department is not in a position to pay you the outstanding monies owed". I have tried making the same argument to British Gas about my energy bills but to no effect !
So now we are preparing a Statement of Case for Stage 3 of the grievance procedure, a hearing in front of three councillors. This will be fascinating to see what they make of the situation. We do believe that the council is preparing to make an offer of settlement to the different groups of staff who are owed money for these unpaid allowances. But it may take some time for this to be put into effect.
In the meantime, the city council have imposed another new contract which removes these allowances as from 1 November 2011. That means that staff have three months minus a day in which to lodge an employment tribunal case for breach of the 2008 contract. We are preparing to lodge these legal cases for the members concerned. But we need a completed Case Referral Form for all the affected members individually. We have a rapidly growing pile of these completed forms and we are encouraging anyone else who believes they are due unpaid allowances to send us a form.
So today I have been writing the Statement of Case, sifting through evidence we need to submit with it, answering emails from the members, sending out a bulk email to all the members in the collective grievance about what we are doing, sorting through the referral forms to see they have all the information we need and contacting individuals to fill out the gaps.
We are doing the same thing for other groups of staff in the same circumstances. One huge group is the workers in Childrens Homes. We believe hundreds of them are owed allowances dating back to March 2008. There's an even bigger collective grievance for them that my Assistant Branch Secretary is working on.
Graeme Horn
Joint Branch Secretary
In 2008, the city council's new Single Status contract included additional allowances for all staff who work weekends and alternating shift systems. But some groups of staff have never received these enhancements. Managers, assistant managers, team leaders and other staff in the older adults residential homes are a case in point. They have routinely worked shifts starting at 7.00 in the morning and ending at 10.00 at night, seven days a week. They are owed thousands of pounds because the council has refused to pay the contracted allowances.
A group of over 20 of these staff have been pursuing a collective grievance, with representation from UNISON, for the last couple of years. We've got as far as having our grievance upheld at Stage 2 but the council is still refusing to pay. They say because of the current economic climate "the department is not in a position to pay you the outstanding monies owed". I have tried making the same argument to British Gas about my energy bills but to no effect !
So now we are preparing a Statement of Case for Stage 3 of the grievance procedure, a hearing in front of three councillors. This will be fascinating to see what they make of the situation. We do believe that the council is preparing to make an offer of settlement to the different groups of staff who are owed money for these unpaid allowances. But it may take some time for this to be put into effect.
In the meantime, the city council have imposed another new contract which removes these allowances as from 1 November 2011. That means that staff have three months minus a day in which to lodge an employment tribunal case for breach of the 2008 contract. We are preparing to lodge these legal cases for the members concerned. But we need a completed Case Referral Form for all the affected members individually. We have a rapidly growing pile of these completed forms and we are encouraging anyone else who believes they are due unpaid allowances to send us a form.
So today I have been writing the Statement of Case, sifting through evidence we need to submit with it, answering emails from the members, sending out a bulk email to all the members in the collective grievance about what we are doing, sorting through the referral forms to see they have all the information we need and contacting individuals to fill out the gaps.
We are doing the same thing for other groups of staff in the same circumstances. One huge group is the workers in Childrens Homes. We believe hundreds of them are owed allowances dating back to March 2008. There's an even bigger collective grievance for them that my Assistant Branch Secretary is working on.
Graeme Horn
Joint Branch Secretary
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)