You are:

Wednesday afternoon session - conference report

PCS president Janice Godrich welcomed fraternal guests from other trade unions in Britain, Ireland and Sweden.

The opening session of the afternoon was devoted to a wide-ranging discussion of equality issues.
Moving the first of 13 motions tabled on the subject, A12, Helen Flanagan of DWP Wigan said that the union’s regional equality networks had carried out excellent work in recent years. However, she voiced concern that it was mainly members with paid time off who could attend, and many members not in union positions were denied reasonable time off to take part. “We need to take action to resolve this situation.”
Jane Warburton, HMRC Salford, seconding, agreed that “we want all members to take part”, and that some members working in contact centres were restricted from attending. It was important for members to attend regional network meetings – “they are an opportunity for your voice to be heard.”
Debbie Mallet, East Kilbride HMRC – and recent recipient of a TUC Young Member’s Award - spoke of the need for the union’s structures to involve ordinary members. “It’s increasingly important to remove barriers to young members - this motion will help them to take part.”
Calling for remission of the motion, Lynne Lake, Stockton Revenue Network, said: “We need to negotiate additional facility time.”
Sue Bond, NEC, stressed the “key role” of the regional equality networks in enabling members to travel through the union, but said the union would survey branches before making any decisions about calling for increased facility time. “It won’t be an easy task to tackle the Cabinet Office to make this demand, and use the Equality Act to negotiate agreements for paid time off for equality networks.” The union would consult branches before coming up with the outcome.
The remission was defeated and the motion overwhelmingly passed.
Moving motion A13, Kay Grady, DWP Birmingham South, welcomed the work of PCS in obtaining substantial savings on services for members, but said the union needed to evaluate companies that provide goods and service to ensure they are “equality proof”; “we should not recommend use of goods and service that conflict with our equality rules.”
Seconding, Jawid Iqbal DFT/DCIG Birmingham, said that PCS had a good record of equality and diversity, “but the motion asks it to go a bit further by promoting equality and diversity in the organisations that provide goods and services to our members.”
Zita Holbourne, NEC, said the NEC supported the motion but needed more time than it laid out to “get it right”. The motion was overwhelmingly passed.
It was “obscene, shameful and embarrassing” to live in a country where there was continuing poverty and inequality, said Mervyn Ells, DWP Devon, moving motion A14. He quoted from a recent report on inequality by Professors Wilkinson and Pickett, and called for their findings to be reported more widely to PCS members: “we need a platform to discuss this important topic.”
John Maloney DfT London and HQ region, seconding, said that poverty and inequality had increased since the late ‘70s. He called for a campaign to “redress inequality and its effects on members, and to pursue policies to seek a more equitable income distribution.”
Dee Luxford called for remission of the motion to the NEC and pointed out that the authors were already speaking at a fringe meeting at this year’s conference.
But supporting the motion Kevin Greenway, NEC, said the book was important “to arm us with the facts on inequality. The Tories are back and Parliament is now made up of far more bankers. The book is a useful addition to tackling them and their ideas.”
The remission was lost and delegates passed the motion.
Moving motion A15, Martin Hawkins, DWP Devon, criticised the NEC’s lack of action over motion A47 in 2009, which had called for a national campaign to tackle inequality in the civil and public service.  “Only a small minority of overstretched experienced reps are able to deal with inequality issues – more training would have brought forward more reps to deal with discrimination and inequality,” he said.
Jane Aitchison, Leeds DWP, disagreed. “The lack of progress is not due to lack of effort or commitment by the NEC or union as a whole – but lack of hours in the day. The NEC work on equality is really exemplary. The censure in the motion would be a slap in the face for all those who work so hard on equality.”
John Mcinally, NEC, also pointed to the weakness of equality legislation. “As on pay, there are no easy wins on equality issues. We don’t dodge these, but campaign even harder.”
Replying to the debate, Martin said he’d acknowledged that much good work had been carried out, “but the motion last year called for this area to be given highest priority.” The motion was lost.
Sarah Robinson, DWP Preston, moving motion A277 on Access to Work, explained that after it was withdrawn from DWP it was still possible for staff to have assessments.
“Since 2008, we no longer have access to these assessments but have internal occupational health providers – they don’t have the same specialisms and don’t understand what a disability is.”
Seconding, Lyn Howes, DWP Wirral said that Access to Work staff were fully trained to carry out assessments for those with disabilities and help them to stay in work. “Trillion assessors are more often untrained and recommend a limited range of equipment.”  
James Haskins, Cabinet Office, and chair of the Cabinet Office staff disability network, said he had to get taxis to and from work because of his disability, “but I’ve been told that this may no longer be possible under current spending restrictions. We need Access to Work back in place.”
Giving full support from the NEC, Sam Hall said the government had decided to roll back Access to Work’s support for people with disabilities without consultation. “PCS mounted a campaign against this attack on disabled members.” The union would pull together evidence to show the policy was not working for civil servants, he said.
The motion was passed.
There was a need to protect and promote pensioner rights and address pensioner poverty, said Scott Reid, MOJ Appeal Service Scotland, moving motion A17. “The NEC must use its influence to mount a campaign to put pensions back at the forefront of the union agenda. Workers deserve security, dignity and respect in retirement.”
Seeking remission of the motion, Mike Derbyshire, NEC, pointed out that it was not entirely accurate, and that it stressed the role of the TUC Pensioners’ Committee, which was not practicable to be leading the attack. “The principles in the motion are being dealt with by various forums in the PCS and TUC.”
Scott agreed to remit the motion, but urged the NEC “to do all it can in the trade union movement to defend pensioners and support their interests.”
The discrimination in the PRP system for the non-senior civil service continued, said Chris Hickey, CLG HQ, moving motion A18. “Ten to 11years ago there was controversy in the DTR over PRP – which led to studies in various departments. There’s exactly the same situation throughout the Civil Service today, despite the passage of equality legislation.”
Chris pointed out that white, full-time and non-disabled staff were more likely to do better in box marking than those who were minority ethnic, part-time or disabled. “The time has come to take action. We want the NEC to coordinate complaints. We want to drag the civil service into legal disputes over this issue.”
The motion was passed.
There were gradients running through the civil service on health, report markings and promotion, said John Maloney DfT London and HQ region moving motion A19.  There were no aggregated reports on inequality in the Civil Service, he said.
“The union needs to produce an annual report on inequality in the Civil Service. But we also need to use the results of the study to campaign to combat this inequality. We need to combat it to eliminate it.”
Chris Hickey, CLG, seconding, said “we must ensure that data is collected, analysed and solutions brought forward. We need to provide the evidence to have a national campaign.”
The motion was passed.

Commercial sector

The next afternoon session was devoted to motions covering the union’s commercial sector, with all tabled motions discussed
Moving motion A25 on workers in facilities management, Angie Fenwick, EDS/AFPAA Glasgow, explained that these workers – cleaners, security, catering staff and others – “perform arduous duties for subsistence wages, are treated appallingly by their employers, and have little trade union membership in this sector.”
The union needed to create an effective facilities management group, she said. “Facilities management workers deserve the same level of representation as everyone else.” PCS should also work with other unions to organise these workers to win fair pay, respect and treatment, said Angie.
Katherine Earp, DEFRA/Natural England, seconding, said that these workers “must have the effective representation they need to make sure their jobs are secure, and be allowed to be trade unionists.”
Andy Lawson, DWP London, applauded the work of the commercial sector. “Management treat commercial sector staff like second-class citizens. We should make the case to bring these services back in house.”
Supporting the motion, Chris Morrison NEC, and Vice-chair of the commercial section group, said it made modest demands, “but is one of the most ambitions motions because of the environment that these workers have to endure on a daily basis, and the union-bashing tactics of their employers.
“There’s a moral imperative for PCS to take part and encourage all workers to join trade unions ... all workers, public or private, want decent pay. Let’s organise.”
The motion was passed.
Moving motion A26 on “inshoring”, Angie Fenwick, EDS/AFPAA Glasgow, said that the Tier 2 visa system was supposed to be used to move workers to the UK to fill skills gaps – but in the IT industry, some of these gaps were artificially created.
“We need an investigation to establish the facts of government use of Tier 2 visas ... We need to look at how employees from other countries are treated – and make sure they are treated fairly with good conditions and high pay.”
Eric Shaddick, Aspire South, agreed and added: “We must not leave these young lads exposed to hostile anti-union atmosphere when they return home.”
A call to remit the motion was defeated, and it was passed.
Andy Taylor, HMRC Telford Aspire, moving motion A27, said that the union had won the moral argument against offshoring, but the government and employers were only interested in hard cash. “Has anyone done the relevant sums?” The motion asked for the commissioning of a report looking at the costs of offshoring.
Seconding, Kerry Furness, HMRC South East Essex, described offshoring as being about “unscrupulous companies with unscrupulous practices.” But “we should be supporting workers wherever they come from,” he said.
The motion was passed.
The pay of DWP staff privatised into Haden, now Balfour Beatty Workplace, had not progressed in three years, said Charles Hancock, DWP Fylde Central, moving motion A28. “It’s been impossible for staff to catch up with colleagues, even doing the same job,” and the gaps had been widening.
Alan Dennis, NEC, said that some parts of the motion had been overtaken by events: “activists in BBW have already opened negotiations with the employers to establish maxima and minima pay rates – already conceded – and are negotiating a pay structure to maintain pay progression in future years, and a mechanism for rising through the pay structure.”
The motion was passed.
Many workers in outsourced countries don’t enjoy UK terms and conditions, said Ross Kinshields, HMRC East Kilbride, moving motion A29, demanding that the UK minimum wage be extended to workers in countries outsourced.
Asking for remission, Mark Baker, NEC, said the motion had confused outsourcing and offshoring. “We support the essence of the motion, but it will be more effective to take it forward through our links with other unions overseas. The UK national minimum wage is unenforceable abroad.”
Ross and the conference agreed to remit.
“Nobody’s talking to our members about redundancy threats,” said John Pearson, EDS Fylde and Preston, moving motion A30. Although legally required redundancy consultations must include the number and description of employees proposed to be made redundant, “certain employers supply such information with the confidential stamp on it, and we’re told we can’t pass it on to our members.” The motion called on the union’s bargaining units to repudiate such confidentiality.
Calling for remission, Rob Williams, NEC, said negotiations on redundancy must be as open and transparent as possible, but the motion would cause problems. “It risks alienating members and exposing union to possible litigation under data protection and privacy laws ... We need hard bargaining.” If remitted, the union would look at how we could share information more effectively, he said.
Conference agreed to remission.

Personnel policy

The next conference session debated motions covering personnel policy.
Members seeking medical retirement “had more chance of winning the national lottery, said Martin Edwards, DWP HQ Sheffield, moving motion A31.
“One member paralysed from the neck down received official notification that she may experience ‘spontaneous recovery’,” he said. “That was extremely distressing for the member.
“We want a fairer policy that takes into account medical evidence, and for members not to suffer financial detriment.”
Bernice Morrison, NEC, confirmed that medical retirement was more and more difficult to obtain. “The process is often elongated because the medical advice is less than convincing. Many branch secretaries find it a struggle to support members on the basis of medical evidence.”
The motion was passed.
The Civil Service Fast Stream “is elitist and divisive and should be scrapped,” said James Cox, Home Office Greater London, moving motion A32. Almost a third of those appointed had been to Oxbridge, and white applicants were consistently favoured over black and minority ethnic, he said.
Vicky Searle, Liverpool HMRC, disagreed. She said dozens of her young members applied to Fast Stream every year as internal candidates bypassing the formal qualifications – “it’s an opportunity they value.”
Supporting the motion, Joy Dunn, NEC, said Fast Stream “is one of the greatest examples of institutionalised inequality and part of the “conveyor belt of class privilege.”
“We need genuine rights and opportunities for all. We’ll take a new policy to the Cabinet Office.”
The motion was passed.
Successfully moving motion A33 on carers, Lee Ryan, HMRC North West England, said that carers suffered greater physical and mental ill health, plus the additional pressures of the economic crisis. “We need a national strategy to place carers away from bottom of the pile – and support for Carers’ Week, 14-20 June.”
Seconding, Sue Catton, DWP East London, said “we need a workable national carers’ strategy. Despite flexible working regulation, there’s unwillingness by employers to recognise the needs for time off.”
Apprentices were being taken on across the Civil Service, said Mike Wheeler, DWP Avon, moving motion A585. “We’re not opposed to that, but concerned to protect their rights – they need to have a real job at the end.”
Tony Conway, NEC, said PCS had clear policy against cheap labour schemes. “We stand for high quality training for all members, including young people, with the rate for the job and full involvement of the unions.” The union had reached an agreement in 2010 for departments to consult the union side, and apprentices to be offered standard terms and conditions. “We have an agreement and the safeguards.”
The motion was passed.

Communications Awards

President Janice Godrich presented the second annual communications awards to the category winners during the course of the afternoon session.
 

Social Bookmarking

How to use social bookmarking