This option recommends that subject to a value for money analysis many of DSDA’s services will be outsourced to the private sector. Additionally, vehicle management will transfer to the defence support group (DSG) and complex munitions may also transfer as part of team complex weapons work, depending upon a viable business case. DSDA will also lose its agency status and the IPG will reform into a JSC services organisation.
What the letter doesn’t say is that if this option is accepted it will put the majority of our members in DSDA’s jobs at risk and will probably see the closure of Ashchurch and a significant downsizing of the Bicester site.
To date there has been minimal engagement with the trade unions regarding the emerging options and we have been given no opportunity to influence the direction that the OEP has taken. In fact, the first that we knew of the options under consideration was when we were issued with a draft of a report commissioned by Price Waterhouse Coopers late in the afternoon of Friday 16 October, for discussion on Monday 19 October. At the meeting on 19 October PCS and the other trade unions expressed a preference to explore a different option, one that would retain more work in house. However, this was not given due consideration and the original recommendation was taken to the DE and S board on Wednesday 21 October for endorsement and the director’s letter to staff was subsequently issued without the agreement of the trade unions. Below is a joint statement from all the DSDA trade unions on the issue.
Our union would like to stress to members that the decision to outsource is still only an option and one of a number of options being considered at this stage. It will require a ministerial announcement to become policy and in the interim, PCS and our colleagues in the other MoD trade unions will be putting the case most forcibly to maintain the work within the MoD.
Our union would like to reassure members that whatever changes may occur in the JSC in future, we will ensure that the provisions of JSP507 (particularly the business improvement policy) are adhered to. This means assessing the value for money of any proposed external provision and benchmarking it against in house delivery.
Furthermore, our union would like to point out that only last year DSDA management signed a joint agreement with the trade unions on the application of the Cabinet Office protocols.
PCS see the issue of the director’s letter to staff, although possibly well intentioned, unhelpful, when nothing has yet been agreed. However, it has brought to light the very real threat to the jobs of all our members in DSDA, coming at a time when the department is looking to slash compensation payments through changes to the civil service compensation scheme.
Over the coming weeks John Wilson and other GEC colleagues will be visiting sites to talk to members about the threats that we all face and we can be under no illusion that tough times lie ahead. We will only succeed in protecting our member’s jobs from cuts and privatisation if we have a strong membership willing to take action if necessary. Therefore, it is in all our interests to make sure that everyone in the workplace is aware of the threats facing us, which means ensuring that non-members join us and become involved.
For further details please contact John at wilsonj105@mod.uk or call John on 01785 787108
The joint trade union side has had very limited exposure to the options being generated by Price Waterhouse Coopers (PWC) for the MoD’s OEP steering group (and indeed only saw the final draft report on 15 October 2009).
Notwithstanding this limited opportunity to engage in the development of options under consideration, and to understand the options generated by PWC (with the support of DSDA’s OEP project team), we have been asked to express an opinion on the options to be presented to the ECMB.
We do so therefore on the basis of our limited exposure to the options generation process and on a without prejudice basis as to our further support, or agreement to any particular direction of travel which should be the subject of meaningful consultation with the trade union sides.
Our preference, based on the final draft PWC report, would be for an option constructed along the principles of option three (i.e. retention of the maximum possible provision within the public sector and the boundaries of the joint support chain). We believe that this is consistent with the principles that led to the in-house solution winning the FDSCi competition and provides the best assurance that support to the frontline can be maintained, in all situations, by control of and ownership of end to end support chain processes.
However we recognise that the priorities of the OEP process militate against a fully in-house solution, particularly one which requires access to public sector investment. This has led PWC (and the JSC) to favour option 5b, as a means to address the DSDA ‘investment deficit’ and bring to bear what PWC considers to be more effective private sector solutions, expertise and investment.
The trade unions, whilst accepting that in-house options may not be able to address all these concerns, would still wish to see a solution adopted which encompasses more in-house provision than outsourced.
We would wish to use the provisions of JSP507 (and particularly the business improvement policy), initially to assess the value for money of any proposed external provision and to benchmark against potential to models of in-house delivery developed with DSDA and JSC management. We believe that these could meet the requirements of option 5b, bringing in private sector expertise and investment where necessary, but retaining sustainable skills, expertise and experience within the retained JSC core.