Please nominate the following candidates at the 2018 AGM for a better PCS DWP Group. Vote IL!
Whilst wanting a Labour Government, the majority in IL is clear that the Labour Party has to be pushed on pay.
While Labour is unequivocally committed to scrapping the Conservatives pay cap – a development we welcome – it has not committed itself to real term pay rises or to unrestricted national collective bargaining with public sector unions.
Instead Labour’s Shadow Health Secretary, Jonathan Ashworth, told UNISON Conference on 26 April 2017: that “a Labour government will scrap the pay cap, put pay decisions back into the hands of the independent pay review body and give our NHS workers the pay they deserve”;
Labour Shadow Cabinet Minister Dawn Butler, appearing on Sky News’ “Sunday with Niall Paterson” programme on 17 September 2017, stated that Labour only planned to remove the cap but not to offer a real-terms pay increase, saying, “we are not talking about an above-inflation pay rise” and adding, “when we’ve got the books in front of us we will then be able to decipher what else we’d be able to deliver for public sector workers but we need to see the figures and the books but at the moment we’re not in government, we’re the government-in-waiting.”
While Jeremy Corbyn has called for a return to national pay bargaining, common national pay terms cannot be achieved with inflation level pay awards only.
The IL believes that as part of the political strategy for our national pay campaign, the NEC must seek immediate talks with the Labour Leadership to develop civil service pay policies and principles that contrast openly and vividly with the pay slashing, divide and rule policies of the current government and ensures vocal Labour support for PCS throughout our campaign and dispute.
The following principles should form the basis of PCS’ talks with the Labour leadership, and with any future Labour Government to the extent that these principles are not agreed before then:
- The restoration of national pay terms as part of an agreement to restore national pay bargaining.
- This agreement to set contractually binding step
In the 2017 indicative pay ballot, 48% of PCS members voted and of those, 98.9% believed the pay cap should be scrapped and 79.2% indicated a willingness to take part in industrial action.
Therefore the union has a clear mandate for a pay strike. That said we soberly note that whilst this vote took place in a much changed and more favourable political environment and even using voting methods not allowed under strike ballot law, we still got less than a 50% turnout.
The IL is therefore arguing that PCS:
- Needs to carefully prepare the industrial action pay ballot and avoid calling a ballot with little notice.
- Identify and target areas where inexperienced or unconfident or too few representatives means that the Union’s campaign messages will not reach members.
- Provide plentiful, varied and creative campaign material and to do so in good time well before, as well as during the legal ballot.
- Ensure that an expertly prepared social media campaign is put in place and starts well before the ballot begins.
- Ensure that membership meetings take place and that members’ voices are heard well before a ballot notice is issued.
- Publish pay data showing members the great difference in pay between staff working in the same grade across the civil service. Equal pay has to be a key demand in any pay campaign.
- Develop and explain a meaningful and convincing independent PCS industrial action strategy to members.
- Be clear to members and employer that action will not stayed for the mere offer of talks.
- Work and campaign with, and strike alongside, other Unions wherever and whenever possible. This should not be in such a manner that the interests of PCS members and the success of our campaign becomes dependent on the leaderships of other unions, so that our campaign can be collapsed by them at any time.
- Ensure that all talks and negotiations, including all correspondence with the employer, are reported in a timely manner to members.
- Boost the Fighting Fund urgently and massively.
- Ensure that rank and file activist committees are set up everywhere, meet at times that activists without large amounts of facility time can actually make, and develop accountability to the activists and branches, calling national meetings throughout the dispute.
- Work with activists, wider society campaign groups, other unions and the Labour Party to develop a vigorous political campaign.
May’s government is weak and unstable, riven with divisions over Brexit. Given this, there is a possibility that the government will fall and there will be a general election before the end of the parliamentary term.
The majority in IL agree that a Corbyn-led Labour government would be the best outcome in any general election, not only for our members but for millions of working class people.
Given this we believe that PCS’ (non-) intervention in the last general election was wrong.
We think that union policy should be to encourage PCS members to join Labour, to campaign and canvass for Labour and to volunteer to help get the vote out on Election Day.
IL doesn’t think that the union’s overt neutrality makes any sense when a Tory victory in any future election would mean many more and sustained attacks on the union (and the wider union movement) and on our members.
In contrast the Labour Party has openly stated that it wants to work with us, that it wants to restore national pay and that it will repeal the last anti-union Act (though we think it must scrap all the anti-union laws).
Wanting Labour to win is not the same as saying we give them a blank cheque, that we will agree with whatever they do and that there will not be disputes between us and a Labour government. We will be a critical friend. That said a Labour government is so obviously better for us that we would be fools not to want it.
If you want a Labour government and for the union to play its part in getting Labour elected, then in the NEC elections vote for us. We are the only people standing in the NEC election who want the union to argue for a Labour victory in the next General election. PCS cannot be, and should not be neutral as to what government we want. Vote Labour, Vote IL.
Whilst having no illusions in employment law, the Independent Left (IL) recognises that members expect the union to legally fight hard. Further the labour movement has fought long and hard to win certain laws. Not to enforce those laws is to undo all that hard work and in fact is to retreat, leaving the employer unchallenged. Given this, it probably won’t surprise you to find that we are critical of the current legal-advice arrangements in the union.
From what we can see, PCS has now adopted a triage system whereby Full Time Officers (FTOs) decide which cases merit going to Thompsons. This system is inherently problematic.
FTOs are not legally trained; many have less experience than the reps putting forward the cases and the whole point of the system to ‘stop’ cases being forwarded to the solicitors. Given that cost is driving the system then any notion of using the law as a weapon, to win test cases, to advance member’s interest is lost (that all costs money). Of course all this is a further example of activists and unions having to act as supplicants to their own union; having to persuade an FTO for help, from a union that the activists and members fund.
We in IL want to change all that. We recognise money is tight. This is no surprise when you pay in total over £160,000 (not including pension costs) to the two most senior union officials. Mark and Chris could ‘give’ up say £60,000 between them, still earn much more than the great bulk of us and still have a very comfortable life. That voluntary contribution would be a form of socialism in action. The £60K would fund many legal cases. Money is tight because we spend much too much of it on FTO pay. We want to change that. Money is there to fight cases, to organise etc, but it is going to the wrong causes.
We want to use the law as a weapon, to win test cases, to advance member’s interest is lost and to protect individual members. Yes, all of that costs money, and we are willing to spend it. If you are as well, then vote IL.