Write to your MP to oppose DfE office closures

Six offices of the Department for Education are earmarked for closure, impacting over 350 staff.

The DfE plans to close offices in Croydon, Exeter, Leeds, Newcastle, Peterborough and Watford. At the same time it is refusing to consider proposals for increased homeworking or hybrid flexibility measures that could help avoid compulsory redundancies and reduce the impact on staff.

Many of the affected buildings are government offices that will remain open for other departments, meaning that withdrawing DfE staff will not necessarily generate savings for the public purse.

Use our e-action to ask your MP to write to the minister about the office closures.

Members’ ballot

PCS members are taking part in a consultative ballot over the office closure plans, the potential job cuts and the current arbitrary office attendance rules.

The ballot closes on 11 March.

Human impact

Staff are concerned about the impact on childcare, caring responsibilities and their wellbeing. Many warn that adding up to 90 minutes to their working day will inevitably affect morale, productivity and service delivery.

One PCS member currently travels just 20 minutes to their local Leeds office. Under DfE’s proposals, they would instead need to travel to Manchester, a journey that can take well over an hour and up to two hours on busy days by public transport.

They said: “If I was applying for this job now, I wouldn’t even put Manchester or Sheffield down without considering moving house.”

Wrong choices

PCS general secretary Fran Heathcote said: “DfE cannot close offices, enforce a rigid 60% attendance rule yet refuse flexible working and wash its hands of the consequences. Our members are expected to add hours to their days or face losing their jobs, all without PCS seeing a shred of convincing evidence that this makes financial or operational sense.

“If permanent homeworking to protect staff can be offered elsewhere, why won't DFE do the same? This is a choice. And right now, DfE is choosing to put loyal civil servants in impossible situations rather than work with us on sensible solutions. Our members deserve better.”