Discussions are continuing with the Cabinet Office on the details of how it will compensate members for the unlawful changes made to redundancy payments in 2016.
After PCS won a High Court case over detrimental changes to the CSCS scheme, the reforms imposed in 2016 were quashed and better terms dating back to 2010 reinstated. The government has already conceded that members will be compensated and PCS has agreed the majority of their remedy proposals. However, we are disputing some of the specific proposals.
Meanwhile ministers have announced they are dropping their attempts to appeal the High Court judgment, and are launching a fresh consultation on CSCS terms.
We will be doing everything we can, politically and industrially, to beat off this latest attempt to attack members’ redundancy terms, including pressing on with our organising agenda to put us in the best possible position.
Many members will receive large pay-outs as a result of this stunning victory. It’s important to discuss the CSCS win with members and non-members, to spread awareness of our success and to use it as a recruitment tool.
In a letter sent to the deputy director of Civil Service Workforce Policy & Reward, Peter Jinks, on 4 October, we raised a number of points about the method of remedying the situation for past, present and pending redundancy, voluntary exit and efficiency dismissal situations.
The union also called for:
- Appropriate funding to allow MyCSP to allocate sufficient resources to ensure that all remedial action is taken within one month. The four-month period the Cabinet Office says some members will have to wait is too long – this money is their lawful entitlement.
- Changes to the protocols and the efficiency compensation policy – imposed on the back of the 2016 reforms – to be scrapped as a consequence of the court case. PCS takes issue with the government’s claim that these changes “are not affected by the judgment.” The entire rationale cited by the Cabinet Office for introducing changes to the protocols and the efficiency compensation policy was the 2016 changes to the CSCS. Those have now been declared unlawful and have been quashed.
The union has requested a meeting with Peter Jinks to discuss the points raised in our response.
PCS has also written to the other affected unions, highlighting the effect of the judgment and calling on them to engage with us to develop a unified strategy to defend our members’ redundancy terms from further attack.