Drop post office privatisation, Labour warned
Dave Prentis has joined with the leaders of the affiliated trade unions to warn, in a letter to the Guardian, that the government must honour its pledges and keep the post office public.The letter says: At Warwick University, in the summer of 2008, the affiliated trade unions collectively participated in a series of policy discussions with representatives of the Labour party and Downing Street. The purpose and outcome of those discussions was to reach a policy agreement that was satisfactory to all participants.Within that Warwick agreement was a clear commitment to maintaining Royal Mail in the public sector: "We have set out a vision of a wholly publicly owned, integrated Royal Mail group in good health providing customers with an excellent service and its employees with rewarding employment."This commitment was agreed by all affiliated trade unions in the belief that it guaranteed the future of Royal Mail as "wholly publicly owned". This was our belief in the summer, and it was the belief of the 2008 Labour party conference, which voted to support this policy.We are deeply concerned that the Labour party now appears to be willing to break that commitment by adopting the recommendations of the Hooper report. Its proposals to bring in a "strategic partner", via an exchange of equity, clearly constitutes the part privatisation of Royal Mail.The affiliated trade unions believe that the part-privatisation of Royal Mail is electorally unpopular, politically unwise and damaging to the concept of universal service provision. Furthermore, to break a pledge so recently made undermines the legitimacy of our policy process and raises questions about the validity of other agreements reached.We are unanimous in our opposition to the proposed privatisation of Royal Mail, and ask that the government reconsiders its response before it becomes a dividing line within our movement.Billy Hayes general secretary, CWU Tony Woodley Tulo chair and joint general secretary, Unite the Union Paul Kenny Tulo vice-chair and general secretary, GMB Derek Simpson joint general secretary, Unite the Union Dave Prentis general secretary, UNISON John Hannett general secretary, Usdaw Michael Leahy general secretary, Community Alan Ritchie general secretary, Ucatt Gerry Doherty general secretary, TSSA
Friday, February 27, 2009
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Hello,A quick question -
who wants to take away the legal guarantee protecting your rights - threatening your holidays and even your parental leave?It may be difficult to believe but it's actually "family friendly" Dave Cameron.The Tories have spent a lot of money telling us that they've changed. Millionaire Dave has gone to great lengths - cycling around town, waiting for his photo to be taken in Woolies and posing with a few Huskies in Norway. He's even shunned Waitrose and headed for Tesco at least once.But Dave's plans to pull Britain out of the Social Chapter - the part of the law which guarantees fair treatment at work - reveals the truth behind all the slick marketing. He wants to roll your rights back by twenty years.But we can stop him - sign our petition to protect your rights. www.unionstogether.org.uk/hiddentruth He may pretend to have our interests at heart, but the facts are clear. He wants to scrap the legal guarantee that gives us four weeks paid holiday, the right to be consulted about changes at work and our entitlement to parental leave - denying the legal right for parents to spend time with their newborn babies in the critical first few weeks. That's just three examples - but Cameron's threatening dozens more of your rights.In fact, he's said that axing these legal guarantees is his "top priority."It's something that he'll never say on TV or write in a leaflet but he's threatening all of these rights and more.Sign our petition and send Cameron a message that your rights matter. Dave may pretend to be everyone's new best friend but it's clear that he's faking it. It's not surprising really. After all, Millionaire Dave actively campaigned against the National Minimum Wage - when some people were earning just £1.20 an hour.We need to send him a message and I want you to be one of the first to do it. Sign up to say that your rights matter - No matter what the marketing says, it's clear that he's only interested in protecting big business rather than ordinary working people. Sign the petition and then invite your friends to do the same. Thank you. Our rights are precious - we need your help to protect them.
who wants to take away the legal guarantee protecting your rights - threatening your holidays and even your parental leave?It may be difficult to believe but it's actually "family friendly" Dave Cameron.The Tories have spent a lot of money telling us that they've changed. Millionaire Dave has gone to great lengths - cycling around town, waiting for his photo to be taken in Woolies and posing with a few Huskies in Norway. He's even shunned Waitrose and headed for Tesco at least once.But Dave's plans to pull Britain out of the Social Chapter - the part of the law which guarantees fair treatment at work - reveals the truth behind all the slick marketing. He wants to roll your rights back by twenty years.But we can stop him - sign our petition to protect your rights. www.unionstogether.org.uk/hiddentruth He may pretend to have our interests at heart, but the facts are clear. He wants to scrap the legal guarantee that gives us four weeks paid holiday, the right to be consulted about changes at work and our entitlement to parental leave - denying the legal right for parents to spend time with their newborn babies in the critical first few weeks. That's just three examples - but Cameron's threatening dozens more of your rights.In fact, he's said that axing these legal guarantees is his "top priority."It's something that he'll never say on TV or write in a leaflet but he's threatening all of these rights and more.Sign our petition and send Cameron a message that your rights matter. Dave may pretend to be everyone's new best friend but it's clear that he's faking it. It's not surprising really. After all, Millionaire Dave actively campaigned against the National Minimum Wage - when some people were earning just £1.20 an hour.We need to send him a message and I want you to be one of the first to do it. Sign up to say that your rights matter - No matter what the marketing says, it's clear that he's only interested in protecting big business rather than ordinary working people. Sign the petition and then invite your friends to do the same. Thank you. Our rights are precious - we need your help to protect them.
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
One in four went to work
when too ill in January
One in four (24 per cent) of the workforce went to work despite thinking they were too ill to do so in January, according to a YouGov poll commissioned by the TUC and published today (Friday). And the big majority of those struggled in because they did not want to let others down.
The TUC says the poll paints a very different picture of sickness absence to the caricature that British workers are always taking bogus sickies and stay home at the first sign of a sniffle.
Workplace absence statistics collected by the CBI support these findings and show that sickness absence has in fact been steadily falling over the past decade. Ten years ago the average worker took an average of 8.5 days off sick a year. Last year it was 6.7 days. This is a fall of over 20 per cent, and the second lowest figure since records began in 1987.
According to the YouGov poll more than half the workforce (57 per cent) say they have gone to work when too ill during the last year. Only one in eight (12 per cent) say they have never gone to work when too ill.
This trend is on the increase. The TUC asked similar questions in a poll - using a very slightly different base, but at the same time of year - in 2004, when one in five (19 per cent) said that they had been to work in the last month when too ill to do so. Twice as many, one in four (25 per cent), said they had never been to work when too ill.
People say they go to work when ill because they don't want to let people down, more than because of pressure from above to do so. More than one in four (28 per cent) in the 2009 poll say they went to work because colleagues 'depend on the job I do, and I didn't want to let them down', followed by one in five (21 per cent) who say they 'did not want to give their colleagues extra work'.
Slightly fewer (18 per cent) said they 'did not want to let their employer down.' In total, two in three (67 per cent) went to work when ill because they didn't want to let clients, workmates or their bosses down.
But, while still a minority of the workforce, there are substantial numbers of people who say they are pressured into going into work. More than three million (13 per cent) say they cannot afford to lose pay and nearly 1.5 million (six per cent) say they are worried that their boss would take action against them.
More than one in four (29 per cent) say that the recession will make them more likely to go to work when ill.
TUC General Secretary Brendan Barber said: 'Too often we are told that British workers are always taking bogus sickies or taking time off at the first sign of a sniffle.
'But the truth is that we are a nation of mucus-troopers who struggle into work even when we are too ill because we do not want to let colleagues, clients or our employer down.
'While this is admirable, it is not always the best thing to do. Coughs and sneezes still spread diseases, and the worst thing you can do to your workmates is pass on your illness.'
when too ill in January
One in four (24 per cent) of the workforce went to work despite thinking they were too ill to do so in January, according to a YouGov poll commissioned by the TUC and published today (Friday). And the big majority of those struggled in because they did not want to let others down.
The TUC says the poll paints a very different picture of sickness absence to the caricature that British workers are always taking bogus sickies and stay home at the first sign of a sniffle.
Workplace absence statistics collected by the CBI support these findings and show that sickness absence has in fact been steadily falling over the past decade. Ten years ago the average worker took an average of 8.5 days off sick a year. Last year it was 6.7 days. This is a fall of over 20 per cent, and the second lowest figure since records began in 1987.
According to the YouGov poll more than half the workforce (57 per cent) say they have gone to work when too ill during the last year. Only one in eight (12 per cent) say they have never gone to work when too ill.
This trend is on the increase. The TUC asked similar questions in a poll - using a very slightly different base, but at the same time of year - in 2004, when one in five (19 per cent) said that they had been to work in the last month when too ill to do so. Twice as many, one in four (25 per cent), said they had never been to work when too ill.
People say they go to work when ill because they don't want to let people down, more than because of pressure from above to do so. More than one in four (28 per cent) in the 2009 poll say they went to work because colleagues 'depend on the job I do, and I didn't want to let them down', followed by one in five (21 per cent) who say they 'did not want to give their colleagues extra work'.
Slightly fewer (18 per cent) said they 'did not want to let their employer down.' In total, two in three (67 per cent) went to work when ill because they didn't want to let clients, workmates or their bosses down.
But, while still a minority of the workforce, there are substantial numbers of people who say they are pressured into going into work. More than three million (13 per cent) say they cannot afford to lose pay and nearly 1.5 million (six per cent) say they are worried that their boss would take action against them.
More than one in four (29 per cent) say that the recession will make them more likely to go to work when ill.
TUC General Secretary Brendan Barber said: 'Too often we are told that British workers are always taking bogus sickies or taking time off at the first sign of a sniffle.
'But the truth is that we are a nation of mucus-troopers who struggle into work even when we are too ill because we do not want to let colleagues, clients or our employer down.
'While this is admirable, it is not always the best thing to do. Coughs and sneezes still spread diseases, and the worst thing you can do to your workmates is pass on your illness.'
Monday, February 16, 2009
Local government pay goes to ACAS
UNISON and other council unions put their case for a larger 2008-9 pay award in England, Wales and Northern Ireland to ACAS today.The joint unions, and the employers, had both already submitted written evidence on the pay deal, which both sides referred to arbitration late last year.The trade union presented their submission and supporting evidence in an oral hearing today, followed by the employers.The unions argued that local government has treated workers on National Joint Council terms and condit6ions as “poor relations” for a long time.Employers have failed to invest in pay, training and good conditions, while making over-the-odds efficiency savings and putting ever-larger off sums of money into reserves. UNISON and other unions also pointed out that the money available to local authorities from central government for the next three years will far exceed inflation if economic predictions are correct. The employers argued that pay offers had been constrained by government pay policy, the cost of the local government pension scheme and Single Status.Each side asked the other questions and the arbitration panel asked questions too. They were particularly interested in unallocated reserves - which have increased significantly in the last few years, and whether they can be used for pay purposes. The joint unions agreed to provide them with further information on unallocated reserves as a proportion of revenue for 2007/8 and 2008/9. That information has been obtained and he unions are now waiting for the employers to agree it so that it can be sent to the ACAS panel.There is no indication yet of when the ACAS panel will respond to the submissions.
UNISON and other council unions put their case for a larger 2008-9 pay award in England, Wales and Northern Ireland to ACAS today.The joint unions, and the employers, had both already submitted written evidence on the pay deal, which both sides referred to arbitration late last year.The trade union presented their submission and supporting evidence in an oral hearing today, followed by the employers.The unions argued that local government has treated workers on National Joint Council terms and condit6ions as “poor relations” for a long time.Employers have failed to invest in pay, training and good conditions, while making over-the-odds efficiency savings and putting ever-larger off sums of money into reserves. UNISON and other unions also pointed out that the money available to local authorities from central government for the next three years will far exceed inflation if economic predictions are correct. The employers argued that pay offers had been constrained by government pay policy, the cost of the local government pension scheme and Single Status.Each side asked the other questions and the arbitration panel asked questions too. They were particularly interested in unallocated reserves - which have increased significantly in the last few years, and whether they can be used for pay purposes. The joint unions agreed to provide them with further information on unallocated reserves as a proportion of revenue for 2007/8 and 2008/9. That information has been obtained and he unions are now waiting for the employers to agree it so that it can be sent to the ACAS panel.There is no indication yet of when the ACAS panel will respond to the submissions.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Affordable, justified and necessary
(09/02/09) The NJC Trade Union Side has welcomed the opportunity to submit evidence to the panel of ACAS arbitrators appointed to resolve the 2008-09 NJC pay dispute within local government. We hope that we have reinforced the merits and rationale of our 2008-09 claim in the following pages. The claim is available for examination in Appendix 2. It was for:'A one-year increase on all pay points of 6% or 50 pence an hour, whichever is the greater, with a view to making progress to a bottom rate of £6.75 pence'We believe the employers’ offer of 2.45% has not adequately rewarded or met the financial needs of our members during 2008/09. Indeed, it has further increased the financial hardship they have found themselves in as a result of a series of below-inflation pay awards in recent years.Full details of the claim:
TU submission - Word doc Appendix - PDF
(09/02/09) The NJC Trade Union Side has welcomed the opportunity to submit evidence to the panel of ACAS arbitrators appointed to resolve the 2008-09 NJC pay dispute within local government. We hope that we have reinforced the merits and rationale of our 2008-09 claim in the following pages. The claim is available for examination in Appendix 2. It was for:'A one-year increase on all pay points of 6% or 50 pence an hour, whichever is the greater, with a view to making progress to a bottom rate of £6.75 pence'We believe the employers’ offer of 2.45% has not adequately rewarded or met the financial needs of our members during 2008/09. Indeed, it has further increased the financial hardship they have found themselves in as a result of a series of below-inflation pay awards in recent years.Full details of the claim:
TU submission - Word doc Appendix - PDF
Thursday, February 05, 2009
04/02/2009
UNISON CHIEF WARNS COUNCILS NOT TO
MIMIC ESSEX SELL-OFF PLANS
Dave Prentis, General Secretary of UNISON, the UK’s largest public service union, today (4 February), slammed plans by Essex County Council to sell-off all its council services as - “a recipe for disaster and economic chaos”. He warned other councils against going down that route, saying: “This is the first time in the history of Local Government that any council has put all its services out to tender. This is because it is a recipe for economic chaos and service failure. At a time when councils should be doing all they can to support their local communities and economy, the Tories, who run Essex County Council, are washing their hands of their responsibilities and selling off council services and jobs. “Only this week Essex County Council was forced to bring its failing outsourced IT contract back in house, which will no doubt cost local people millions. Instead of learning a salutary lesson from that experiment, Councillors are still recklessly intent on selling off the council. “UNISON will intensify its fight against these plans and the lesson to other councils must be ‘Don’t try this at home’.”
UNISON CHIEF WARNS COUNCILS NOT TO
MIMIC ESSEX SELL-OFF PLANS
Dave Prentis, General Secretary of UNISON, the UK’s largest public service union, today (4 February), slammed plans by Essex County Council to sell-off all its council services as - “a recipe for disaster and economic chaos”. He warned other councils against going down that route, saying: “This is the first time in the history of Local Government that any council has put all its services out to tender. This is because it is a recipe for economic chaos and service failure. At a time when councils should be doing all they can to support their local communities and economy, the Tories, who run Essex County Council, are washing their hands of their responsibilities and selling off council services and jobs. “Only this week Essex County Council was forced to bring its failing outsourced IT contract back in house, which will no doubt cost local people millions. Instead of learning a salutary lesson from that experiment, Councillors are still recklessly intent on selling off the council. “UNISON will intensify its fight against these plans and the lesson to other councils must be ‘Don’t try this at home’.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)