Total Votes Cast 39
Votes to accept 8
Votes to Reject 31
Friday, October 08, 2010
Hutton Review
Hutton Review
As you may know the Con Dem coalition commissioned Lord Hutton to look into public sector pensions including possible changes to the Local Government Pension Scheme that some workers in Universities are affected by, particularly those who were moved over as part of the post 1992 changes.
Lord Hutton has now issued an interim report, conveniently just before the Comprehensive Spending Review due later this month. So any savings Lord Hutton suggests could be incorporated in Government savings projections.
Bryan Freake from Unite has done a short analysis on the interim proposals. These are attached. I thought those who understand these issues would like to see what Unite is saying but also to keep you informed on a debate that is likely to end in a push to reduce LGPS and other public sector pensions.
Be ready for the fight back and come to the TUC Rally at Westminster on the 19th October to lobby your MP against cuts in Education budgets and public sector pensions. Details of the travel arrangements can be obtained from your local Unite office.
When the cuts come and your pension scheme or state entitlements are affected don't be someone who did nothing to stop them!
Hutton Interim Report
Unite analysis of the short–term implications
On the options for short term reform the report says :-
* the CPI change (if implemented) has reduced the value of the package by 15%
* any other change in accrued benefits is rejected (as outside terms of reference)
* 'there is a rationale for increasing member contributions to ensure a fairer distribution of costs between taxpayers and members'
* 'it is a matter for the Government to decide the manner and level of any increases in contributions necessary' (and makes no suggestion)
* notes 1% across the board could raise £1 billion (less tax relief)
* recommends against anything which might lead to lower-paid workers opting out
* suggests there may be a case for targeting increases more on the higher-paid and extending the application of tiered contributions
* suggests phasing of increases might be appropriate to discourage opting out especially given the current pay freeze
* since 'effective benefit levels vary considerably between different schemes, particularly pre- and post reform schemes, then changes in employee contributions could be made to reflect this'
Other points in the report relevant to this
* recent reforms have reduced benefits for active members by around 10% (additional to CPI savings)
* cap and share arrangements are recognised as containing further cost increases
* the cost of public sector pensions is projected as around 1.9% of GDP for the next ten years but subsequently falling (before any new reforms) to only 1.4% in 2060
* ' It is mistaken to talk about gold-plated pensions as being the norm across the public sector. In the most part the pensions that are paid out to public service employees when they retire are fairly modest by any standard'
* 'I have rejected a race to the bottom ………and hope reformed public service pensions can once again be seen as …..a benchmark for the private sector to aim towards'
* 'public service pensions should provide an adequate level of retirement income for public service workers with a reasonable degree of certainty'
* the likely direction of longer term reform will be a move away from final salary on fairness grounds with CARE top of the agenda for consideration
* the Government is invited to review the appropriateness of the (key ) long term discount rate (notional investment return) which is 'at the high end of what is appropriate' and notes that a reduction from 3.5% over inflation to 3% over inflation might raise contribution costs by 3%
Summary comment
While calling for increased employee contributions and reformed benefits the Report takes a more balanced look at the costs of public sector pensions than the Government and may be helpful to an extent in disarming some critics .
A key point not dealt with is how proposed contributions can be reconciled with cap and share valuations as would have been suggesting that members would have to suffer some significant increase in contributions/reduction in benefits taking effect in 2012 onwards.
Extending tiered contributions in the short term might be questioned if the longer term reform involves a move to CARE, as both seek to achieve a fairer balance between contributions paid and benefits received.
The suggestion that contribution increases might be differentiated to reflect differences within and between schemes could lead to proposals, for example, that employees retaining retirement at age 60 could be invited to pay more than those who have 65, or that civil service schemes members could be asked for larger increases, as their current contribution levels are lower.
The Report gives no explicit support to changes being negotiated though Hutton is on record as supporting this
Clearly, we now await the Government to pronounce on contributions, possibly in the pre-Budget report
As you may know the Con Dem coalition commissioned Lord Hutton to look into public sector pensions including possible changes to the Local Government Pension Scheme that some workers in Universities are affected by, particularly those who were moved over as part of the post 1992 changes.
Lord Hutton has now issued an interim report, conveniently just before the Comprehensive Spending Review due later this month. So any savings Lord Hutton suggests could be incorporated in Government savings projections.
Bryan Freake from Unite has done a short analysis on the interim proposals. These are attached. I thought those who understand these issues would like to see what Unite is saying but also to keep you informed on a debate that is likely to end in a push to reduce LGPS and other public sector pensions.
Be ready for the fight back and come to the TUC Rally at Westminster on the 19th October to lobby your MP against cuts in Education budgets and public sector pensions. Details of the travel arrangements can be obtained from your local Unite office.
When the cuts come and your pension scheme or state entitlements are affected don't be someone who did nothing to stop them!
Hutton Interim Report
Unite analysis of the short–term implications
On the options for short term reform the report says :-
* the CPI change (if implemented) has reduced the value of the package by 15%
* any other change in accrued benefits is rejected (as outside terms of reference)
* 'there is a rationale for increasing member contributions to ensure a fairer distribution of costs between taxpayers and members'
* 'it is a matter for the Government to decide the manner and level of any increases in contributions necessary' (and makes no suggestion)
* notes 1% across the board could raise £1 billion (less tax relief)
* recommends against anything which might lead to lower-paid workers opting out
* suggests there may be a case for targeting increases more on the higher-paid and extending the application of tiered contributions
* suggests phasing of increases might be appropriate to discourage opting out especially given the current pay freeze
* since 'effective benefit levels vary considerably between different schemes, particularly pre- and post reform schemes, then changes in employee contributions could be made to reflect this'
Other points in the report relevant to this
* recent reforms have reduced benefits for active members by around 10% (additional to CPI savings)
* cap and share arrangements are recognised as containing further cost increases
* the cost of public sector pensions is projected as around 1.9% of GDP for the next ten years but subsequently falling (before any new reforms) to only 1.4% in 2060
* ' It is mistaken to talk about gold-plated pensions as being the norm across the public sector. In the most part the pensions that are paid out to public service employees when they retire are fairly modest by any standard'
* 'I have rejected a race to the bottom ………and hope reformed public service pensions can once again be seen as …..a benchmark for the private sector to aim towards'
* 'public service pensions should provide an adequate level of retirement income for public service workers with a reasonable degree of certainty'
* the likely direction of longer term reform will be a move away from final salary on fairness grounds with CARE top of the agenda for consideration
* the Government is invited to review the appropriateness of the (key ) long term discount rate (notional investment return) which is 'at the high end of what is appropriate' and notes that a reduction from 3.5% over inflation to 3% over inflation might raise contribution costs by 3%
Summary comment
While calling for increased employee contributions and reformed benefits the Report takes a more balanced look at the costs of public sector pensions than the Government and may be helpful to an extent in disarming some critics .
A key point not dealt with is how proposed contributions can be reconciled with cap and share valuations as would have been suggesting that members would have to suffer some significant increase in contributions/reduction in benefits taking effect in 2012 onwards.
Extending tiered contributions in the short term might be questioned if the longer term reform involves a move to CARE, as both seek to achieve a fairer balance between contributions paid and benefits received.
The suggestion that contribution increases might be differentiated to reflect differences within and between schemes could lead to proposals, for example, that employees retaining retirement at age 60 could be invited to pay more than those who have 65, or that civil service schemes members could be asked for larger increases, as their current contribution levels are lower.
The Report gives no explicit support to changes being negotiated though Hutton is on record as supporting this
Clearly, we now await the Government to pronounce on contributions, possibly in the pre-Budget report
Friday, August 20, 2010
Freedom of Information requests
Freedom of Information requests
Earlier this year many of you assisted the union by passing on the Freedom of Information requests to your HEI on pay for those staff above the 51 point pay spine.
I would like to record my thanks for everyone who took part.
Rick Graham has been working on the data returns and has compiled a dataset and graphs of the information that you might find useful. I would also like to place on record my thanks to Rick for his work.
Rick's work flows on from earlier material published by both the Times Higher Education Supplement and the Guardian Newspaper. You may be interested in that material which can be found here
/university-vice-chancellor-payFrom above Guardian article: VC Pay increases
1 London Business School 78%
2 University College 137%
3 Liverpool University 188%
4 Imperial College 162%
5 Nottingham University 103%
6 Oxford University 220%
7 King's College 100%
8 Bristol University 125%
In short the data shows that at a time when many of you were being asked to limit your pay by accepting the 0.5% offer as part of the 2009 pay round many Vice Chancellors and senior professorial staff were achieving pay increases of 150% even 200%. Many staff above the 51 point pay spine was also receiving substantial increases as the FOI requests show. In fact the increases have continued into 2010 despite the incredibly low offer from UCEA of 0.4% for staff on the 51 point spine and the insistence by UCEA to show restraint.
I am sure as many VC's wallow in luxury in their Tuscan villas you will remember them when it comes to vote on the 2010 pay offer.
Ballot material and letters to members on this years pay offer is currently awaiting checking by Unite lawyers before being issued to members for a full consultative vote. I will forward that material on to you as soon as it has been cleared by our lawyers.
Yours sincerely
Mike Robinson
National Officer
Education
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Workplace representatives guide to the web
Unite understands that many workplace representatives are now able to access the internet either in the workplace or at home. Whether it is preparing a pay claim, checking out health and safety issues, understanding new issues in the workplace or checking basic employment rights, the internet can provide a useful first stop for information.
Unite Research department has produced a guide which contains links to a wide range of sites which have been found to be useful in meeting the needs of workplace representatives.
Please click on the link below to access the guide:
Reps_guide_to_web2009.pdf
Unite Research department has produced a guide which contains links to a wide range of sites which have been found to be useful in meeting the needs of workplace representatives.
Please click on the link below to access the guide:
Reps_guide_to_web2009.pdf
Health and safety 'undermined'
Shifts in health and safety policy over the past decade have compromised workplace safety, according to a report by University of Liverpool and Liverpool John Moores University. The authors claim their findings cast doubt on public perceptions that health and safety has 'gone mad'.
The report, 'Regulatory Surrender: death, injury and the non-enforcement of law', pointed to policy changes which have affected the ability of the Health & Safety Executive (HSE) to enforce health and safety law. Researchers found business premises inspections had fallen by 69% over the period, while investigations of health and safety incidents had declined by 68%. The report also found a 48% reduction in prosecutions of companies who had breached HSE regulations.
The Government recently announced a wide-ranging review of health and safety laws in response to claims that UK industry had been 'saturated' by legislation under the Labour government. Researchers at Liverpool, however, found that the HSE's power to inspect and enforce health and safety regulations has been reduced, resulting in increased numbers of employees at risk from accident or injury at work.
Dr David Whyte, Reader in Sociology at the University of Liverpool, said: "The idea that health and safety has 'gone mad' does not seem to hold true. The collapse in inspection, investigation and enforcement has dramatically reduced the chances of businesses being detected and prosecuted for committing safety offences. Most serious injuries now are not even investigated."
The report, 'Regulatory Surrender: death, injury and the non-enforcement of law', pointed to policy changes which have affected the ability of the Health & Safety Executive (HSE) to enforce health and safety law. Researchers found business premises inspections had fallen by 69% over the period, while investigations of health and safety incidents had declined by 68%. The report also found a 48% reduction in prosecutions of companies who had breached HSE regulations.
The Government recently announced a wide-ranging review of health and safety laws in response to claims that UK industry had been 'saturated' by legislation under the Labour government. Researchers at Liverpool, however, found that the HSE's power to inspect and enforce health and safety regulations has been reduced, resulting in increased numbers of employees at risk from accident or injury at work.
Dr David Whyte, Reader in Sociology at the University of Liverpool, said: "The idea that health and safety has 'gone mad' does not seem to hold true. The collapse in inspection, investigation and enforcement has dramatically reduced the chances of businesses being detected and prosecuted for committing safety offences. Most serious injuries now are not even investigated."
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Day of Dissent part 1
Unite AGM 21st June 2010
Room CCG.04 3pm
The chair welcomed members to the meeting and said how delighted he was that nearly everyone were wearing their T shirts
1) Apologies
Apologies were received from Andy Talbot, Peter Donovan and Tracy Boakes
2) New Members
As we had a few new members members were asked to introduce themselves
3) Minutes and matters arising
Minutes of the previous meeting were unavailable
4) Reports from Chair
Nick Seeley gave a report on the extent of the Framework negotiations indicating that UCU although balloting on the framework agreement were in dispute over hourly pay, Field leaders and professorial staff. He indicated that our long running dispute over the holiday differential for staff would not be resolved until agreement had been reached. Tactics to use would be an equality claim
Nick also gave a report on the continuing success of Hera – currently we are down to 7 red circled posts with hopefully some of them being resolved in the forthcoming regarding round.
5) Reports from Secretary
Tony Britton gave a report on the current state of the National pay negotiations. Once again an extremely tight remit from the Employers gave them little room for manoeuvre and the offer had improved from an initial 0.3% unconsolidated to 0.4% consolidated . All the unions had rejected the offer. The two academic unions UCU and EIS had already gone into the dispute resolution procedure even though the employers had not yet made their final offer. A further meeting was to be held but currently no date was set.
It was reported that the offer would be put to the members for consultation with a recommendation that it be rejected from the National committee. The secretary argued that as a consultation ballot it was extremely important to get the maximum turn out. He reassured members that no industrial action could take place without a full ballot and in preparation for this we would be e-mailing members requesting that they update their details as it was shown in the current BA dispute how the courts would overturn a ballot result under challenge from an employer.
6) Elections
The chair stood down for the next item called for nominations and the following people were elected
Chair Nick Seeley
Vice Chair John Tucker
Secretary Tony Britton
Health & Safety Kevin Head
Stratford Rep #1 Kevin Clough
Stratford Rep #2 Julia Freeman
Docklands Rep #1 Sylvia Easy-Hemmings
Docklands Rep #2 John Callaghan
Ray Stoker was re-elected as Auditor and it was agreed that we would seek to increase our number of reps on SSIG and JSCNC to enable some training of reps
7) Any Other Business
It was reported from one of our members of security that they were unhappy with the messages they received from their line management regarding grievances that they had taken out. They requested that we write to senior management to ensure that they knew the problems our members were facing. It was agreed that following the cancellation of the JSCNC we would write a letter outlining our concerns.
It was also agreed to write thanking the catering service for the buffet.
8) Date of next meeting
It was agreed to hold a meeting next year but the request was made that it was earlier in the academic year .
Sunday, May 23, 2010
2010 Pay latest
The third New JNCHES negotiating meeting took place on the 5th May.
UCEA opened by advising there was increasing pessimism on their side about finances and budgets within HE. The trade unions countered that with inflation at 4.3% their members were also pessimistic about the way their pay has been eroded by inflation and the absence of a decent offer from UCEA.
UCEA did advise it was interested in one aspect of the joint trade union side claim and that was in relation to training, career development and apprentice proposals. A document had previously been tabled for the TU side that showed with the new statutory right for staff to request training coming into force on the 6th March some workplaces had introduced agreements on how to promote and handle this important aspect. In particular Unite and Unison had been instrumental in achieving an agreement at University of Birmingham. In FE the Employers Association, AoC, had also signed up to a joint agreement with the trade unions and this was presented to UCEA as a good example of true co-operative working.
Another Unite initiative was less well received and that was the proposal for fee remission for children of staff working at universities. Unite provided examples outside of the UK to show what other countries were doing. UCEA felt this was unhelpful towards equal access for all. I look forward to working families being given equal access to Oxford, Cambridge, St Andrews, Cardiff, Trinity Dublin and Queens Belfast.
The joint unions again reiterated the aim of getting a workable job security agreement. UCEA still seem to be unable to grasp why this issue will not go away.
After the inevitable adjournment UCEA returned to advise that they had no mandate to move on job security. They were still interested in the trade union ideas on training, career development and apprentices and would come back on this perhaps through one of the new sub committees set up after the 2009 pay discussions.
In an earth shattering move UCEA increased their 0.25% offer on pay to 0.4%. This was still less than the then prevailing 4.3% inflation rate and is worth only £52 per year to anyone on the lowest grade. The offer is unconsolidated which means salary scales would not alter. UCEA urged trade union negotiators to accept the offer quickly because with an impending election things could only get worse. How right they were.
The joint trade unions noted the offer was still a pay cut and advised it was not enough to protect inflationary pressures especially for low paid staff. UCEA advised they were prepared to weight the 0.4% to lower paid grades if staff at the top of the grades would take less. Needless to say our academic colleagues are not in favour of this idea.
In the end negotiations concluded with agreement to meet again on the 28th May. I expect this to be the final meeting and with UCEA and the trade unions so far apart I cannot see a solution resulting in acceptance by the joint unions.
Last year I warned everyone to get their membership records up to date. This still applies. One of the reasons is to avoid any complications that could appear if we go to a full national ballot. As my colleagues covering British Airways have discovered the High Court is not renowned for its pro trade union sympathies!
A further report will be sent out after the next meeting on the 28th May.
Yours sincerely
Mike Robinson
National Officer
Education Sector
UCEA opened by advising there was increasing pessimism on their side about finances and budgets within HE. The trade unions countered that with inflation at 4.3% their members were also pessimistic about the way their pay has been eroded by inflation and the absence of a decent offer from UCEA.
UCEA did advise it was interested in one aspect of the joint trade union side claim and that was in relation to training, career development and apprentice proposals. A document had previously been tabled for the TU side that showed with the new statutory right for staff to request training coming into force on the 6th March some workplaces had introduced agreements on how to promote and handle this important aspect. In particular Unite and Unison had been instrumental in achieving an agreement at University of Birmingham. In FE the Employers Association, AoC, had also signed up to a joint agreement with the trade unions and this was presented to UCEA as a good example of true co-operative working.
Another Unite initiative was less well received and that was the proposal for fee remission for children of staff working at universities. Unite provided examples outside of the UK to show what other countries were doing. UCEA felt this was unhelpful towards equal access for all. I look forward to working families being given equal access to Oxford, Cambridge, St Andrews, Cardiff, Trinity Dublin and Queens Belfast.
The joint unions again reiterated the aim of getting a workable job security agreement. UCEA still seem to be unable to grasp why this issue will not go away.
After the inevitable adjournment UCEA returned to advise that they had no mandate to move on job security. They were still interested in the trade union ideas on training, career development and apprentices and would come back on this perhaps through one of the new sub committees set up after the 2009 pay discussions.
In an earth shattering move UCEA increased their 0.25% offer on pay to 0.4%. This was still less than the then prevailing 4.3% inflation rate and is worth only £52 per year to anyone on the lowest grade. The offer is unconsolidated which means salary scales would not alter. UCEA urged trade union negotiators to accept the offer quickly because with an impending election things could only get worse. How right they were.
The joint trade unions noted the offer was still a pay cut and advised it was not enough to protect inflationary pressures especially for low paid staff. UCEA advised they were prepared to weight the 0.4% to lower paid grades if staff at the top of the grades would take less. Needless to say our academic colleagues are not in favour of this idea.
In the end negotiations concluded with agreement to meet again on the 28th May. I expect this to be the final meeting and with UCEA and the trade unions so far apart I cannot see a solution resulting in acceptance by the joint unions.
Last year I warned everyone to get their membership records up to date. This still applies. One of the reasons is to avoid any complications that could appear if we go to a full national ballot. As my colleagues covering British Airways have discovered the High Court is not renowned for its pro trade union sympathies!
A further report will be sent out after the next meeting on the 28th May.
Yours sincerely
Mike Robinson
National Officer
Education Sector
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Education Sector Day of Dissent
Joint unions in Education sector Unite, Unison, GMB, UCU, EIS, AMC and ATL are planning a Day of Dissent on Monday 21st June, the longest day and also the day before what will probably turn out to be the most infamous day for working people, Budget Day 2010!
I don't think anybody could mistake the plans by the current Government to take not just an axe but a chainsaw to public sector finances including major parts of the education sector. We await the Government budget plans which have already been well trailed including the intention to destroy so called "Gold Plated Pensions" in the public sector.
On top of that workers are already seeing the attempt to limit pay increases in both HE & FE with currently 0.4% and 0.2% unconsolidated amounts on offer worth £52 and £26 per year respectively to our lowest paid members in higher and further education. This is at a time when inflation has just hit 5.3%.
The joint unions in the sector Unite, Unison, GMB, UCU, EIS, AMC and ATL are asking all reps, stewards and members to organise meetings during a lunchtime or your own time to show dissent at what is being proposed to you and your standard of living.
Let me make it clear this is not industrial action which requires a formal ballot. Rather its campaigning activity to be undertaken outside of working time.
All union members in the education sector are asked to co-ordinate activities with other unions in their locality. It is suggested this could be a workplace gathering during a lunchtime or other convenient period. "Town" meetings are another alternative perhaps at or outside local town halls. Cities such as Manchester, Leeds, Birmingham, Glasgow, Cardiff, Sheffield, Newcastle, Bristol, Southampton or any other large conurbation may wish to organise city wide meetings or at a particular focal point.
The joint unions in the sector are producing leaflets or posters and these will be available shortly, as will further details on a dedicated website at Defend Higher Education Link
A special event is planned for London, again details nearer the time.
The Day of Dissent should be carried out on the same day to maximise the effect. Please do all you can to inform members about the planned event of Monday 21st June. Copy this email on to staff in your workplace as example.
Please do all you can to show your dissatisfaction on the Day of Dissent. If you need further details or want to contact other unions to plan your action contact your sector Regional Officer or the Unite Regional Office who will put you in touch with local officials from other unions.
Let’s show our dissent!
I don't think anybody could mistake the plans by the current Government to take not just an axe but a chainsaw to public sector finances including major parts of the education sector. We await the Government budget plans which have already been well trailed including the intention to destroy so called "Gold Plated Pensions" in the public sector.
On top of that workers are already seeing the attempt to limit pay increases in both HE & FE with currently 0.4% and 0.2% unconsolidated amounts on offer worth £52 and £26 per year respectively to our lowest paid members in higher and further education. This is at a time when inflation has just hit 5.3%.
The joint unions in the sector Unite, Unison, GMB, UCU, EIS, AMC and ATL are asking all reps, stewards and members to organise meetings during a lunchtime or your own time to show dissent at what is being proposed to you and your standard of living.
Let me make it clear this is not industrial action which requires a formal ballot. Rather its campaigning activity to be undertaken outside of working time.
All union members in the education sector are asked to co-ordinate activities with other unions in their locality. It is suggested this could be a workplace gathering during a lunchtime or other convenient period. "Town" meetings are another alternative perhaps at or outside local town halls. Cities such as Manchester, Leeds, Birmingham, Glasgow, Cardiff, Sheffield, Newcastle, Bristol, Southampton or any other large conurbation may wish to organise city wide meetings or at a particular focal point.
The joint unions in the sector are producing leaflets or posters and these will be available shortly, as will further details on a dedicated website at Defend Higher Education Link
A special event is planned for London, again details nearer the time.
The Day of Dissent should be carried out on the same day to maximise the effect. Please do all you can to inform members about the planned event of Monday 21st June. Copy this email on to staff in your workplace as example.
Please do all you can to show your dissatisfaction on the Day of Dissent. If you need further details or want to contact other unions to plan your action contact your sector Regional Officer or the Unite Regional Office who will put you in touch with local officials from other unions.
Let’s show our dissent!
Latest Pay News
Pay latest
After the first three meetings with JNCHES the TU side have managed to shift the UCEA position by a mammoth 0.15 %.
Although statistically this represents a whopping 60 % increase in the original offer this is somewhat akin to Manchester United claiming to win the premiership on the grounds that they have more seats than Chelsea . (Fill in your own election coalition here)
It is disappointing that the TU side whilst collectively agreeing that any unconsolidated increase is not worth accepting have not made any progress on this issue so far. There is, however, a further meeting arranged on May 28th and given that we have yet to hear the words full and final offer we may yet be surprised.
There are a couple of issues going on in the background not the least being the continual efforts of Unite to put forward the case for low paid staff. This whilst we have yet to agree on the size of the biscuit let alone the proportion of the crumbs we get.
For info the original offer worked out as roughly £35 pa for our low paid staff but this could be pushed to a flat £65 if everyone accepted. UCU and EIS have both indicated that they are not willing to look at that kind of breakdown.
On the separate issue of the seats at JNCHES we have made no further progress on resolving the reduction from 18 to 16 but UCU have raised the stakes by indicating that they want it resolved by going to the TUC. Alienating the TU side when we are working towards some kind of joint action seems to me to be perverse but UCU sometimes don’t seem to operate on the same wavelength as other staff. The current JNCHES delegates are Mike Robinson, Dave Jones , Sandra Robinson, Diane Massie, Jo Westerman, Dave Crowe and Tony Britton. Following a ruling of a previous NEICC it is accepted that one of the delegates will be from the old T&G section and as Dave Crowe has been ill then Mike Baxter has been drafted in as a replacement.
There will be another NEICC meeting in June and I suspect that the official Unite line will be circulated in time for that meeting
After the first three meetings with JNCHES the TU side have managed to shift the UCEA position by a mammoth 0.15 %.
Although statistically this represents a whopping 60 % increase in the original offer this is somewhat akin to Manchester United claiming to win the premiership on the grounds that they have more seats than Chelsea . (Fill in your own election coalition here)
It is disappointing that the TU side whilst collectively agreeing that any unconsolidated increase is not worth accepting have not made any progress on this issue so far. There is, however, a further meeting arranged on May 28th and given that we have yet to hear the words full and final offer we may yet be surprised.
There are a couple of issues going on in the background not the least being the continual efforts of Unite to put forward the case for low paid staff. This whilst we have yet to agree on the size of the biscuit let alone the proportion of the crumbs we get.
For info the original offer worked out as roughly £35 pa for our low paid staff but this could be pushed to a flat £65 if everyone accepted. UCU and EIS have both indicated that they are not willing to look at that kind of breakdown.
On the separate issue of the seats at JNCHES we have made no further progress on resolving the reduction from 18 to 16 but UCU have raised the stakes by indicating that they want it resolved by going to the TUC. Alienating the TU side when we are working towards some kind of joint action seems to me to be perverse but UCU sometimes don’t seem to operate on the same wavelength as other staff. The current JNCHES delegates are Mike Robinson, Dave Jones , Sandra Robinson, Diane Massie, Jo Westerman, Dave Crowe and Tony Britton. Following a ruling of a previous NEICC it is accepted that one of the delegates will be from the old T&G section and as Dave Crowe has been ill then Mike Baxter has been drafted in as a replacement.
There will be another NEICC meeting in June and I suspect that the official Unite line will be circulated in time for that meeting
Intelligent People in Union Shock
Times Higher Link
Out today: Times Higher Ed Supp, 20-26 May, p.10 - Professor Steve Chapman, Vice-Chancellor of Heriot-Watt is quoted as noticing that higher education had (surely means has) "many intelligent people working in it - many of those are in the unions..."
Well, there’s a surprise.
Out today: Times Higher Ed Supp, 20-26 May, p.10 - Professor Steve Chapman, Vice-Chancellor of Heriot-Watt is quoted as noticing that higher education had (surely means has) "many intelligent people working in it - many of those are in the unions..."
Well, there’s a surprise.
Friday, December 04, 2009
Thespian dreams of Susan Price
So. Farewell then
Susan Price
Acting Vice-Chancellor.
It would seem that
You have left
But were you acting?
We have had
Drama before
So why not now?
But then. Does
Anyone really act?
This is the enigma.
with apologies to EJ Thribb (17)
Monday, November 30, 2009
Christmas has not come early for workers in Higher Education
Unite union has branded University Vice Chancellors as Scrooges as low paid workers in higher education are offered almost no pay increase for this year.
Mike Robinson, national officer for Unite's education sector said:
"The final offer of 0.5% from the UCEA (Universities and Colleges Employers Association) on pay will be a bitter disappointment to many low paid workers in Higher Education. Higher education institutions are failing to protect lower paid staff in this recession. Both on pay and job security, poorer families will suffer. Christmas has not come early and Scrooge is a University Vice Chancellor. Unite will begin to ramp up the case for the low paid staff in higher education in 2010".
Mike Robinson, national officer for Unite's education sector said:
"The final offer of 0.5% from the UCEA (Universities and Colleges Employers Association) on pay will be a bitter disappointment to many low paid workers in Higher Education. Higher education institutions are failing to protect lower paid staff in this recession. Both on pay and job security, poorer families will suffer. Christmas has not come early and Scrooge is a University Vice Chancellor. Unite will begin to ramp up the case for the low paid staff in higher education in 2010".
2009 Pay Recommendation
Pay, related items negotiations and Unite Education Sector emergency motion.
Several important matters have been going on over the last few days that now make it imperative for our members to reconsider where we are going on the 2009 pay claim and the redundancy avoidance and job security process for the sector.
Over the last few weeks there have been several meetings with UCEA and New JNCHES trade unions on the two issues mentioned above.
Job Security
Through the work of ACAS a joint document on job security and redundancy avoidance have been considered. In fact there have been at least 5 drafts, each attempting to breach the gap between UCEA's position and that of the NEW JNCHES unions.
The latest attempt has resulted in a document entitled "Digest on job security: a reference document for Higher Education institutions with input from UCEA and the HE trade unions".
The important factor for Unite is that the Digest is an ACAS badged document and carries the weight and support of ACAS in its content and eventual application. For UCEA their important factor is that the document is not a full agreement.
Unite believe that it is a useful starting point but that it does not prevent local groups from expanding on the Digest or from reaching local agreement around the original draft agreement on job security and redundancy avoidance sent to representatives in recent weeks.
I also attach for your information a copy of the Digest and the agreed Communication with UCEA following the ACAS talks as well as a copy of the Press Notice that Unite issued at the time that the ACAS negotiations concluded.
2009 Pay
On pay despite your negotiators hardest and best attempts we have been unable to move the figure on offer beyond 0.5%. This is despite many ways we have approached the low offer including seeking a lump sum for low paid members of staff or reopeners should inflation increase over coming months.
It is the view of your New JNCHES negotiators that the latest position is the best we are likely to achieve by across the negotiating table without a strong and severe dispute.
Emergency motion
These points were discussed at the Unite Education Sector conference which took place this week in Brighton on the 26th November.
An emergency motion on the issues was considered and voted on by Unite delegates from over 30 higher education institutions present in Brighton.
The emergency motion is attached with this Circular. The most important part in my view is that the conference reluctantly recommended acceptance of the offer of 0.5% "as the best that can be achieved by negotiation". Those attending the conference were all seasoned union representatives who know we either have to be prepared to take strike action to move the matter forward or to regroup for 2010.
Local vote
Local groups are now asked to consider the matter. I would be grateful if you can call a meeting of Unite members preferably as joint meetings of all Unite members ask them to consider the content of this Circular and the attached emergency motion from the sector conference and decide the following question.
Do you wish to accept or reject the offer from UCEA of a 0.5% increase in pay for 2009 (now backdated to August 2009) and the proposed document from ACAS on job security.
Accept…… Reject…..
Please note any vote for rejection of the offer should be made on the basis that such a rejection nationally could be followed by a formal ballot for strike action.
Emergency Conference Motion
Education Sector Emergency Motion
This conference recognises
• That extensive negotiations facilitated by ACAS between UCEA and the HE trade unions concluded on Tuesday 24th November;
• and that many issues put forward by the trade unions remain unresolved; including an agreement on redundancy avoidance in the sector.
This conference
• Reluctantly recommends acceptance of the offer of 0.5% (the lowest pay deal in the public sector) as the best that can be achieved by negotiation.
• Calls on our negotiators to work towards pay deal in 2010 which ensures that low pay is replaced by realistic pay.
• Instructs our national committee to build a campaign to achieve these aims.
This conference recognises
• That extensive negotiations facilitated by ACAS between UCEA and the HE trade unions concluded on Tuesday 24th November;
• and that many issues put forward by the trade unions remain unresolved; including an agreement on redundancy avoidance in the sector.
This conference
• Reluctantly recommends acceptance of the offer of 0.5% (the lowest pay deal in the public sector) as the best that can be achieved by negotiation.
• Calls on our negotiators to work towards pay deal in 2010 which ensures that low pay is replaced by realistic pay.
• Instructs our national committee to build a campaign to achieve these aims.
2009 Pay Negotiations
WITHOUT PREJUDICE
ACAS
Digest on job security: a reference document for Higher Education institutions with input from UCEA and the HE trade unions
INTRODUCTION
Acas has facilitated a series of meetings between UCEA and the trade unions. At these meetings the trade unions have expressed their concerns and their desire for a national approach on the handling of job security. UCEA has explained the constraints upon its mandate, which is to seek to negotiate a national pay agreement to apply to staff covered by the single pay spine; it has no mandate on behalf of the HE employers to enter into a national agreement in the area of job security and the handling of potential redundancies in HEIs. The management of staffing matters, be it in recruitment, promotion or in the handling of any staff reductions is a matter for each HEI as an independent employer.
HEIs are operating in a difficult and uncertain economic environment. There is guidance available to employers in relation to handling workforce change in such circumstances through bodies such as Acas. This paper presents some of the statutory requirements and also outlines additional points for employers and employee representatives to consider as appropriate. These points have been raised in discussions; they are not all shared.
Key publications are the Acas booklet on Handling Redundancy and How to manage your workforce in a recession (the latter published with CIPD). Some relevant material from these two publications is presented here, along with comment from UCEA, the trade unions, and Acas.
The growth of British industry requires constant review of products and methods of work, and the successful application of new technology. Our ability to maintain competitiveness in world markets depends on this. It is inevitable, however, that redeployment of labour and redundancies will sometimes be necessary. A poorly thought out approach to change can result in a level of uncertainty which damages company performance and, should redundancies be unavoidable, may lead to financial and emotional costs to the individuals affected.
Acas aims to provide guidance for employers, trade unions and employee representatives on how best to handle redundancies. Acas emphasises the importance of planning labour requirements to avoid or to minimise the need for redundancies; the benefits of establishing an agreed procedure for handling redundancies; and the need for fairness and objectivity when selecting members of the workforce for redundancy. Acas material considers the practicability of offering redundant employees alternative work, counselling or other assistance. Acas hopes that its material will act as an aid to improved employment relations practice by ensuring that the need for redundancies is minimised, and that where they are unavoidable, decisions are made in a fair and consistent manner.[1]
A joint Acas and CIPD guidance note[2] is drawn on here to highlight three key points, following which particular perspectives are added from either UCEA or the trade unions which are the specific view points of those parties.
KEY POINT 1 – CONSULT WITH YOUR WORKFORCE AND THEIR REPRESENTATIVES
UCEA notes the following from the Acas / CIPD guidance note as relevant for HEIs’ consideration when dealing with collective redundancies:
· Consult with your trade union where one is recognised. (NB – this will be the case for the majority of UCEA subscribers)
· If there is no trade union, set up a special employee forum or consultative body long enough before the redundancies occur to provide information and to consult.
· Ensure that representatives have paid time off and appropriate facilities in order to meet and communicate with their constituents.
· Provide training for representatives (the trade unions will provide this for their representatives) – legally this has to be done, but it will also help the smooth running of the whole process.
· Consult representatives about ways to avoid redundancies, reducing the number to be dismissed and mitigating the consequences of any redundancies. The consultation must take place with a view to reaching an agreement.
· Recognise the difficult but key role that representatives have to play.
In addition, UCEA suggests consideration is given to:
· Informing wider stakeholders, including student representatives
· Engaging in dialogue with local TU representatives to discuss long-term financial sustainability, organisational change and workforce planning
· Ensuring that there is a good understanding of a particular institution’s context and challenges.
The legal requirements of a collective redundancy consultation are that the employer provides certain information, including:
· Reasons for the proposals
· Numbers and descriptions of employees whom it is proposed to dismiss as redundant
· Total number of employees of that description employed by the employer at the establishment in question
· Proposed method of selecting the employees who are at risk of dismissal
· Proposed method of carrying out the dismissals, with due regard to any procedure, including the period over which the dismissals are to take effect.[3]
In addition, the TUs suggest HEIs consider the following points:
· Conduct equality impact assessments and consult unions to ensure prior consideration on whether the proposals have a disproportionate effect on either gender, black and ethnic minority staff, disabled staff, and staff of different ages
· Carry out individual consultations with those staff affected (ensuring staff are aware they are entitled to be accompanied by a trade union representative)
· Advise on the proposed method of calculating the amount of any redundancy payments to be made to employees who may be dismissed.
The TUs also suggest that information beyond the statutory requirements may be helpful, such as:
· Statistics on staff turnover for previous years
· Lists of vacancies on a regular basis
· Details of the institution’s current financial position
· Details of the redundancy appeals procedure
KEY POINT 2 – THINK LONG TERM
UCEA notes the following from the Acas / CIPD guidance note as relevant for HEIs’ consideration when dealing with collective redundancies:
· Think creatively about how to reduce employment costs, such as new ways of working and work reorganisation.
· Remember that making people redundant and recruiting again later when the market picks up is expensive.
· Protect and make the most of the training budget – focus resources on key areas such as improving line management capability and customer service.
· Bear in mind your long-term reputation.
In addition, the TUs suggest HEIs consider the following points:
· Inform and consult with the trade unions at the earliest opportunity
· Seek all possible opportunities for redeployment (including, where necessary, retraining) to other parts of the organisation
· Provide careers advice and training in transferrable skills, where practicable
· Seek alternative funding, e.g. where funding for a particular project has expired.
KEY POINT 3 – THINK ABOUT WAYS TO MINIMISE REDUNDANCIES
UCEA notes the following drawn from the Acas / CIPD guidance note as relevant for HEIs’ consideration when dealing with collective redundancies:
· Take advantage of natural wastage and/or offer voluntary redundancy terms – redundancies can have a serious negative impact on morale and performance.
· Cut back recruitment and review your use of temporary staff.
· Retrain employees whose skills are no longer in demand and redeploy employees to other parts of the organisation where possible.
· Reduce or eliminate overtime working.
· Consider short-time working, temporary lay-offs or sabbaticals.
· Plan reward strategies carefully – especially if the scope for pay awards is restricted.
· Encourage staff to suggest how jobs can be done more efficiently and costs saved.
In addition, the TUs suggest HEIs consider the following points:
· Try to make savings in non-staff budgets and to achieve any unavoidable reduction of staff levels by natural wastage
· Review the use of external contractors, where practicable
· Consider volunteers for part-time working or job-sharing
· Consider volunteers for redundancy including, where practicable, from areas of work where other potentially redundant staff possess transferable experience and skills to enable possible redeployment
· Consider ring-fencing vacancies, where this is practicable, to internal applicants otherwise likely to be made redundant
· Establish a redeployment procedure that ensures staff at risk of redundancy are aware of and can be considered for suitable posts
· Minimise potential redundancies by such means as utilising transferable skills and maximising redeployment options, including the potential for retraining
OTHER SOURCES OF INFORMATION
· It is noted that UCEA has produced a Briefing on handling job losses which is available to UCEA members on its website. The briefing sets out the legal framework in which employers operate.
· It is noted that the trade unions have produced model procedures which they would wish to see considered by HEIs. These can be seen at (insert web link).
· Other sources of information:
Redundancy Handling booklet, Advisory Conciliation and Arbitration Service, April 2009
Employee communications and consultation, Advisory Conciliation and Arbitration Service, July 2008
How to manage your workforce in a recession, www.cipd.co.uk/subjects/emplaw/redundancy/_hwmngwrfrcs.htm, 2009
[1] Redundancy Handling booklet, Advisory Conciliation and Arbitration Service, April 2009
[2] How to manage your workforce in a recession: a joint Acas and CIPD guidance note, www.cipd.co.uk/subjects/emplaw/redundancy/_hwmngwrfrcs.htm, 2009
[3] Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, s188
Monday, November 16, 2009
John Bevan
I'm sorry to report that John Bevan passed away last Saturday 7th November
John’s association with UEL began in April 1979. He provided technical support for the Department of Estate Management at the Waltham Forest precinct of the North East London Polytechnic - one of the precursor institutions of the University.
NELP withdrew from Waltham-Forest and the department was relocated to Duncan House. John became Chief Technician within Audio Visual Technical Services. At this time the Polytechnic changed its name to the Polytechnic of East London.
After the formation of the University in 1992 a further relocation saw John work at the main Stratford Campus within Audio Visual Services. As if this wasn’t enough John also found time to work at Maryland House within Library Services where he finished in July 2003. John’s positive attitude was a source of motivation to those around him and his work would have had a big impact on students and staff.
It was here when John made an impact within the University branch of what was then MSF as a long standing member he was interested in Health & Safety issues sufficiently to become a Union Safety Representative. He then developed into a position on the Branch Committee before progressing as a delegate to the London Area Universities Advisory Committee and a delegate to the National Conference. His final position was as Branch Chair, a position he initially took after some arm twisting but grew into and colleagues will have fond memories of him before he retired.
As an active member of the union, John always made time for others. John will be remembered for his genuine, thoughtful and caring nature. His positive attitude, and willingness to help others, John will be remembered warmly by his friends and colleagues at UEL.
Thursday, October 15, 2009
GMB, UCU, EIS and Unite all reject pay offer
2009 pay and associated items
I reported to you in my last Circular 7th October 2009 that Unite had entered into discussions with UCEA via ACAS following our members rejection of the offer on 0.5% on pay and the refusal by UCEA to enter into a national agreement on job security and redundancy avoidance.
I also reported that Unison appeared to be willing to accept the offer but remained deeply disturbed by the low offer and warned that they would not accept a repeat in next years pay round.
Since then others unions have reported back their positions. EIS one of the Scottish education unions has written to UCEA and rejected the offer. So has UCU, again rejecting the offer and seeking a firm commitment by UCEA on job security and redundancy avoidance within the sector. The last union to report back was GMB who have also rejected the employers offer.
The latest letter sent today is from all unions to UCEA seeking a reopening of the New JNCHES negotiations. This has been timed to arrive for the UCEA Board meeting taking place today, 15th October.
Unite has continued with a series of meeting with UCEA under ACAS auspices. The content of these discussions were reported in my last Circular. For the time being the discussions are paused awaiting other developments reported above. The ACAS discussions may be reopened but other attempts are being made to reopen New JNCHES and Unite will be a party to those talks if they materialise.
In a way I can appreciate UCEA's dilemma. Their university subscribers refuse to give them any leeway on negotiations. The subscribers appear to be acting like Ostriches with their heads firmly stuck in the sand hoping the legitimate issues the trade unions are raising on pay, especially for the low paid in the sector and job security will simply go away. They will not.
Until UCEA have the power to negotiate then the employers will be faced with a rising level of dissatisfaction and discontent from ordinary members. It does mean at the moment UCEA have little to offer and there is a danger to national negotiations if UCEA do not have the ability to negotiate. On the other hand the employers won’t want full blown negotiations locally because as institutions will find the pressure from trade unions can be more concentrated and intense.
Unite continues to receive announcements from universities on proposed job losses, yet the same universities refuse to agree a process for redundancy avoidance before we even get to an announcement on job losses. In other sectors deals have been done in exchange for settlements on low pay that also limit redundancies. In higher education the employer wants the "penny and the bun"; to offer the lowest increase in the public sector this year but also to retain the ability to apply compulsory job losses and not even sign up to a modest agreement on redundancy avoidance.
The joint trade unions are now waiting to see if UCEA are prepared to engage in further dialogue. If not I will be seeking a clear mandate from members on where they wish to go next and it will be debated at the new Unite national education industry committee (NIEC) meeting being held next week.
I will keep you advised after next weeks meeting.
Yours sincerely
Mike Robinson
National Officer
Higher Education
I reported to you in my last Circular 7th October 2009 that Unite had entered into discussions with UCEA via ACAS following our members rejection of the offer on 0.5% on pay and the refusal by UCEA to enter into a national agreement on job security and redundancy avoidance.
I also reported that Unison appeared to be willing to accept the offer but remained deeply disturbed by the low offer and warned that they would not accept a repeat in next years pay round.
Since then others unions have reported back their positions. EIS one of the Scottish education unions has written to UCEA and rejected the offer. So has UCU, again rejecting the offer and seeking a firm commitment by UCEA on job security and redundancy avoidance within the sector. The last union to report back was GMB who have also rejected the employers offer.
The latest letter sent today is from all unions to UCEA seeking a reopening of the New JNCHES negotiations. This has been timed to arrive for the UCEA Board meeting taking place today, 15th October.
Unite has continued with a series of meeting with UCEA under ACAS auspices. The content of these discussions were reported in my last Circular. For the time being the discussions are paused awaiting other developments reported above. The ACAS discussions may be reopened but other attempts are being made to reopen New JNCHES and Unite will be a party to those talks if they materialise.
In a way I can appreciate UCEA's dilemma. Their university subscribers refuse to give them any leeway on negotiations. The subscribers appear to be acting like Ostriches with their heads firmly stuck in the sand hoping the legitimate issues the trade unions are raising on pay, especially for the low paid in the sector and job security will simply go away. They will not.
Until UCEA have the power to negotiate then the employers will be faced with a rising level of dissatisfaction and discontent from ordinary members. It does mean at the moment UCEA have little to offer and there is a danger to national negotiations if UCEA do not have the ability to negotiate. On the other hand the employers won’t want full blown negotiations locally because as institutions will find the pressure from trade unions can be more concentrated and intense.
Unite continues to receive announcements from universities on proposed job losses, yet the same universities refuse to agree a process for redundancy avoidance before we even get to an announcement on job losses. In other sectors deals have been done in exchange for settlements on low pay that also limit redundancies. In higher education the employer wants the "penny and the bun"; to offer the lowest increase in the public sector this year but also to retain the ability to apply compulsory job losses and not even sign up to a modest agreement on redundancy avoidance.
The joint trade unions are now waiting to see if UCEA are prepared to engage in further dialogue. If not I will be seeking a clear mandate from members on where they wish to go next and it will be debated at the new Unite national education industry committee (NIEC) meeting being held next week.
I will keep you advised after next weeks meeting.
Yours sincerely
Mike Robinson
National Officer
Higher Education
Monday, October 12, 2009
unison vote to accept pay
Unison have now announced the result of their consultation ballot. The text of their note to members is a s follows
UNISON 6th October 2009
"Overwhelming vote to accept the 2009/10 pay offer
The pay consultation results for this year reveal that 81.5% of members voted in favour of accepting the offer.
Accompanying feedback suggested that whilst members saw the offer as very poor, they took into account recent pay awards and were mainly focussed on protection of their jobs. Nonetheless there appears to be a significant feeling that whilst members are prepared to put up with a low offer this year, that should the national employers seek to make a similar offer next year there would be a different reaction.
UNISON’s national Higher Education Service Group Executive (HESGE) met on the 2nd October to discuss the results of the consultation and decided that the clear result meant that the offer should be accepted and to inform the employers accordingly. The HESGE also noted that whilst UNISON members have indicated that they are ready to settle that other unions are still involved in their internal consultations and we will aim to work together and avoid potential divisions over the coming period.
The HESGE made it clear during the consultation that they will continue to press for a national intervention around job cuts and did not see the issue solely linked to the pay offer. As noted in HE/30/09 we continue to discuss a potential letter from the employers to their members that would outline our concerns.
Finally noting the feeling of members the HESGE has begun to plan a campaign for next years pay round. We will be seeking to work closely with the other unions under the “5 unions 1 demand Defend Higher Education” banner.
Unite negotiators have had two dispute level meetings with UCEA on the 20th August and 18th September. Aside from putting each others point of view nothing else of substance came out of the meetings except UCEA's claim that they have been given clear instructions from subscribing universities that they cannot move on either pay or an agreement on redundancy avoidance.
This means that as far as the disputes procedure is concerned Unite has exhausted all internal level discussions. There is an external level to ACAS.
UCEA Chief Executive Jocelyn Prudence wrote to me to formally offer talks at ACAS to try and resolve the disputed items. The matter was put to a special action committee formed from some members from the old T&G and Amicus national committees. That action committee meeting was held on the 24th September. The meeting agreed that the Unite negotiators should attend ACAS for further talks.
The meeting was held with ACAS facilitation on 5th October. Due to a number of absences from the Unite side some deputising was necessary. Tony Aldridge from University of Swansea, John Hannigan from Strathclyde, Sandra Robinson from University of Liverpool and myself attended on behalf of Unite. Michael McNeill from UCU attended as observer as did Jon Richards from Unison. The meeting was hosted by John Woods for ACAS and UCEA was represented by Chief Executive Jocelyn Prudence, Deputy Chief Executive Helen Fairfoul and Head of Employee Relations & Reward Damian Docherty.
The pay issues were set aside for the present to see if other areas could be progressed. Unite concentrated on trying to get UCEA to move on the redundancy avoidance agreement but because of the limitations on UCEA's remit it was clear there was little negotiating room. A possible avenue for potential progress could be through a New JNCHES working group on financial sustainability of HEIs, including looking at workforce planning, with partnership work proposed on increasing understanding of technical aspects of HEI finance. Discussions are continuing on this.
I will advise on any progression on these items in a later Circular.
Finally UCU are due to announce the results of its consultation process on 9th October. I will advise you about this when I hear what UCU is announcing to members in due course.
I know that behind the scenes everyone has been working hard ensuring our membership records are correct. Thank you for undertaking this task, it is appreciated.
Yours sincerely
Mike Robinson
National Officer
Higher Education
UNISON 6th October 2009
"Overwhelming vote to accept the 2009/10 pay offer
The pay consultation results for this year reveal that 81.5% of members voted in favour of accepting the offer.
Accompanying feedback suggested that whilst members saw the offer as very poor, they took into account recent pay awards and were mainly focussed on protection of their jobs. Nonetheless there appears to be a significant feeling that whilst members are prepared to put up with a low offer this year, that should the national employers seek to make a similar offer next year there would be a different reaction.
UNISON’s national Higher Education Service Group Executive (HESGE) met on the 2nd October to discuss the results of the consultation and decided that the clear result meant that the offer should be accepted and to inform the employers accordingly. The HESGE also noted that whilst UNISON members have indicated that they are ready to settle that other unions are still involved in their internal consultations and we will aim to work together and avoid potential divisions over the coming period.
The HESGE made it clear during the consultation that they will continue to press for a national intervention around job cuts and did not see the issue solely linked to the pay offer. As noted in HE/30/09 we continue to discuss a potential letter from the employers to their members that would outline our concerns.
Finally noting the feeling of members the HESGE has begun to plan a campaign for next years pay round. We will be seeking to work closely with the other unions under the “5 unions 1 demand Defend Higher Education” banner.
Unite negotiators have had two dispute level meetings with UCEA on the 20th August and 18th September. Aside from putting each others point of view nothing else of substance came out of the meetings except UCEA's claim that they have been given clear instructions from subscribing universities that they cannot move on either pay or an agreement on redundancy avoidance.
This means that as far as the disputes procedure is concerned Unite has exhausted all internal level discussions. There is an external level to ACAS.
UCEA Chief Executive Jocelyn Prudence wrote to me to formally offer talks at ACAS to try and resolve the disputed items. The matter was put to a special action committee formed from some members from the old T&G and Amicus national committees. That action committee meeting was held on the 24th September. The meeting agreed that the Unite negotiators should attend ACAS for further talks.
The meeting was held with ACAS facilitation on 5th October. Due to a number of absences from the Unite side some deputising was necessary. Tony Aldridge from University of Swansea, John Hannigan from Strathclyde, Sandra Robinson from University of Liverpool and myself attended on behalf of Unite. Michael McNeill from UCU attended as observer as did Jon Richards from Unison. The meeting was hosted by John Woods for ACAS and UCEA was represented by Chief Executive Jocelyn Prudence, Deputy Chief Executive Helen Fairfoul and Head of Employee Relations & Reward Damian Docherty.
The pay issues were set aside for the present to see if other areas could be progressed. Unite concentrated on trying to get UCEA to move on the redundancy avoidance agreement but because of the limitations on UCEA's remit it was clear there was little negotiating room. A possible avenue for potential progress could be through a New JNCHES working group on financial sustainability of HEIs, including looking at workforce planning, with partnership work proposed on increasing understanding of technical aspects of HEI finance. Discussions are continuing on this.
I will advise on any progression on these items in a later Circular.
Finally UCU are due to announce the results of its consultation process on 9th October. I will advise you about this when I hear what UCU is announcing to members in due course.
I know that behind the scenes everyone has been working hard ensuring our membership records are correct. Thank you for undertaking this task, it is appreciated.
Yours sincerely
Mike Robinson
National Officer
Higher Education
Pay Latest
Re JNCHES Pay and other items
Following on from my last Circular on JNCHES negotiations in July which you will recall reported that over 83% of Unite members in Universities who had responded rejected the 0.5% pay offer and the refusal by UCEA to sign up to a redundancy avoidance and job security agreement I wrote to Jocelyn Prudence Chief Executive of UCEA to record the Unite rejection and the fact that Unite is in dispute on the pay and the refusal to sign up to redundancy avoidance/job security issue.
Under the JNCHES procedures parties in dispute should have at least two meeting to seek to resolve outstanding matters. To this end both Unite and UCEA agreed the 20th August and 18th September dates to address the matters in dispute.
At the 18th August meeting Unite outlined the reasons why a 0.5% offer was not attractive or acceptable to Unite members. Various inflation indices were expected to rise and Unite members particularly those on low pay had suffered considerable increases in food and fuel costs due to inflationary pressures. Unite was also concerned about a further increase in inflation over the period 2009/2010 to which the 0.5% offer was intended to cover as well as explaining that many financial sources were anticipating a worsening of the inflation indexes over 2009-2010.
Unite presented various potential ways forward on the current impasse. These included the possibility of re-opening pay discussion later in the salary cycle if inflation did indeed worsen. It was also tentatively raised the possibility of special recognition for low paid staff to avoid on cost issues for the employer of a one off or re-jigged payment that would go some way towards the higher food and fuel inflationary pressures.
Unite was also concerned that UCEA seemed to have no mandate to enter into agreement with the JNCHES unions on a redundancy avoidance or job security agreement despite the fact UCEA had introduced the subject into negotiations.
UCEA responded to these points but also agreed to take the issues away to consider them in more detail. There was also a Universities UK meeting on the 8th September in Edinburgh where the UCEA response would be raised and perhaps fine tuned.
At the return meeting on the 18th September UCEA disappointingly were unable to improve their abysmally low 0.5% offer, nor to offer any agreement on a redundancy avoidance/job security agreement. It appears that once again UCEA negotiators do not have the ability to move away from their subscribers limited mandate or to agree a national process.
At the meeting Unite negotiators time and time again returned to the effects of applying such a low rate of 0.5% on low paid salaries and of those higher education institutions who rather than seek to avoid job losses seemed to relish pushing ahead with redundancies as a means of resolving financial pressures. Unite also reminded UCEA that at some HEI's there were remuneration increases beyond 0.5% but not for those in the low paid groups.
The meeting broke up with Unite negotiators advising they were still in dispute and would take the response back to a special meeting of Unite meeting on the 24th September.
On the 21st September Jocelyn Prudence for UCEA wrote to me asking would Unite be willing to attend an ACAS brokered meeting to explore ways out of the latest impasse.
At the Unite special reps meeting held on 24th September with selected reps from the old HENIC and T&G committee present it was agreed to accept the offer of a meeting at ACAS. It was further agreed to ask to extend the meeting to observers from other unions as had previously happened in other disputes.
This meeting is due to take place on the 5th October at ACAS meetings London with a delegation of Unite representatives and myself as National Officer with UCEA and observers from the other unions UCU, Unison. EIS are not able to attend and I think we are still waiting for GMB to respond to the invitation.
I will issue a further circular after the 5th October to advise what took place.
For your information other unions are now completing their consultation processes and I think by the 9th October when the last result is expected we will have an understanding where other unions wish to go on the matter.
I would like to thank everyone for all the work that has gone in to getting our membership lists ready for any possible ballot. Keep them updated and be prepared to respond to any ballot call.
The new Unite National Education Industrial Committee will be meeting shortly and will be making important decisions about where Unite goes in relation to any dispute. The new Committee will also have the opportunity of electing new JNCHES negotiators from Unite. As soon as the date for this committee has been agreed I will let everyone know.
Finally the new National Education Sector Conference will be held on 26th November in Brighton to consider motions from Regional Committees. I am sure the pay and related redundancy issues will be at the fore of the Conference discussions.
Yours sincerely
Mike Robinson
National Officer
Higher Education
Following on from my last Circular on JNCHES negotiations in July which you will recall reported that over 83% of Unite members in Universities who had responded rejected the 0.5% pay offer and the refusal by UCEA to sign up to a redundancy avoidance and job security agreement I wrote to Jocelyn Prudence Chief Executive of UCEA to record the Unite rejection and the fact that Unite is in dispute on the pay and the refusal to sign up to redundancy avoidance/job security issue.
Under the JNCHES procedures parties in dispute should have at least two meeting to seek to resolve outstanding matters. To this end both Unite and UCEA agreed the 20th August and 18th September dates to address the matters in dispute.
At the 18th August meeting Unite outlined the reasons why a 0.5% offer was not attractive or acceptable to Unite members. Various inflation indices were expected to rise and Unite members particularly those on low pay had suffered considerable increases in food and fuel costs due to inflationary pressures. Unite was also concerned about a further increase in inflation over the period 2009/2010 to which the 0.5% offer was intended to cover as well as explaining that many financial sources were anticipating a worsening of the inflation indexes over 2009-2010.
Unite presented various potential ways forward on the current impasse. These included the possibility of re-opening pay discussion later in the salary cycle if inflation did indeed worsen. It was also tentatively raised the possibility of special recognition for low paid staff to avoid on cost issues for the employer of a one off or re-jigged payment that would go some way towards the higher food and fuel inflationary pressures.
Unite was also concerned that UCEA seemed to have no mandate to enter into agreement with the JNCHES unions on a redundancy avoidance or job security agreement despite the fact UCEA had introduced the subject into negotiations.
UCEA responded to these points but also agreed to take the issues away to consider them in more detail. There was also a Universities UK meeting on the 8th September in Edinburgh where the UCEA response would be raised and perhaps fine tuned.
At the return meeting on the 18th September UCEA disappointingly were unable to improve their abysmally low 0.5% offer, nor to offer any agreement on a redundancy avoidance/job security agreement. It appears that once again UCEA negotiators do not have the ability to move away from their subscribers limited mandate or to agree a national process.
At the meeting Unite negotiators time and time again returned to the effects of applying such a low rate of 0.5% on low paid salaries and of those higher education institutions who rather than seek to avoid job losses seemed to relish pushing ahead with redundancies as a means of resolving financial pressures. Unite also reminded UCEA that at some HEI's there were remuneration increases beyond 0.5% but not for those in the low paid groups.
The meeting broke up with Unite negotiators advising they were still in dispute and would take the response back to a special meeting of Unite meeting on the 24th September.
On the 21st September Jocelyn Prudence for UCEA wrote to me asking would Unite be willing to attend an ACAS brokered meeting to explore ways out of the latest impasse.
At the Unite special reps meeting held on 24th September with selected reps from the old HENIC and T&G committee present it was agreed to accept the offer of a meeting at ACAS. It was further agreed to ask to extend the meeting to observers from other unions as had previously happened in other disputes.
This meeting is due to take place on the 5th October at ACAS meetings London with a delegation of Unite representatives and myself as National Officer with UCEA and observers from the other unions UCU, Unison. EIS are not able to attend and I think we are still waiting for GMB to respond to the invitation.
I will issue a further circular after the 5th October to advise what took place.
For your information other unions are now completing their consultation processes and I think by the 9th October when the last result is expected we will have an understanding where other unions wish to go on the matter.
I would like to thank everyone for all the work that has gone in to getting our membership lists ready for any possible ballot. Keep them updated and be prepared to respond to any ballot call.
The new Unite National Education Industrial Committee will be meeting shortly and will be making important decisions about where Unite goes in relation to any dispute. The new Committee will also have the opportunity of electing new JNCHES negotiators from Unite. As soon as the date for this committee has been agreed I will let everyone know.
Finally the new National Education Sector Conference will be held on 26th November in Brighton to consider motions from Regional Committees. I am sure the pay and related redundancy issues will be at the fore of the Conference discussions.
Yours sincerely
Mike Robinson
National Officer
Higher Education
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)