Support our Facilities Management strikers!

Outsourced staff working across government have been taking part in strike action in a dispute over pay, sick pay and annual leave.

Members at the Foregin Office, Cabinet Office, Department for Business & Trade and the Department for Science, Innovation & Skills have joined DWP G4S staff in dispute over pay. Adding in-sourcing and sick pay to their demands.

These strikes, which have seen lively and well-attended pickets, are taking place alongside the longer pay dispute waged by G4S guards working in the DWP. PCS has recruited substantially from that campaign, especially since GMB packed in their action in exchange of a derisory pay rise that leaves guards’ pay only 32p over the minimum wage.

All these disputes are incredibly important for our union, for all kinds of reasons.

Firstly, it is crucial that our movement takes on the task of fighting for workers who are paid awful wages in exchange for difficult and often dangerous work.

Secondly, it makes no sense that there should be a division in civil service buildings between in-house staff on civil service pay and conditions, and out-sourced staff working on much worse terms for private contractors. Those staff should be brought back in-house, with the levelling up of terms and conditions that would involve.

Finally, we will all be in a stronger position if guards, cleaners and other outsourced staff are organised into our union. The potential industrial power that these workers have is substantial. Without enough security guards, civil service buildings can be forced to close, and in many places during these disputes this has been happening. The leverage that these workers can help our union bring to bear on the employer is obvious.

PCS Independent Left has been pushing the need for the union to take this seriously for some time. In London, IL reps were organising meetings and pushing for action over G4S pay over a year before the current dispute in DWP began. However, Group leadership had been reluctant to ballot guards. Multiple approaches to the National Dispute Committee were made, but nothing came of it.

In the end, it was GMB organising their own dispute that shifted the Group leadership into action. If calls from their own members hadn’t spurred them into action, the fear of losing members to another union did the trick.

It shouldn’t have taken so long to push the union into action for these workers. But now the campaigns are up and running, it’s important they are well supported to win. That includes by financially backing out-sourced staff with strike pay for as long as necessary.

Before winning its landslide victory, the Labour Party declared it would carry out ‘the biggest wave of insourcing of public services in a generation’. Now they’re in power, we need to hold them to their commitments.

 

Why a Special Delegate Conference?

Left Unity (LU) – the dominant grouping within PCS for the last 20 years – has moved to the right, not only in terms of further bureaucratising the union but also in attacking reps, activists and democratic norms.

Jobs for the boys, on your dime

The General Secretary, without seeking permission from the NEC, reorganised Full Time Officer (FTO) structures. She created more senior management positions at the cost of at least an extra £169K a year, all from your subs. The aim of this new bureaucracy being to insulate them against the non-LU NEC majority. It also created senior positions for the failed candidates in the last 2 AGS elections.

An additional bulwark against democracy is the National President. Acting as an LU partisan, he has misused his powers to rule out of order most motions put forward by the NEC majority. He has paralysed PCS as a result.

Not that LU are worried, because they actually don’t want to do anything, a prime example being the 5% pay remit figure for the UK civil service.

The minority continue to block a campaign on pay

In response to the remit, the NEC majority put forward a motion saying that the 5% was not enough and that we should go back to Ministers asking for more.

Predictably, the President ruled that motion out of order, which meant that the union has not challenged the national remit figure. When the majority challenged the President’s ruling (which requires 2/3rds of NEC members to overturn), all the LU NEC members voted against overturning the ruling. That means they were against challenging the 5% remit figure.

If it is argued that they found other parts of the motion objectionable, why not move amendments to take those out? In any case, why didn’t the General Secretary in the paper to the NEC, just say we reject the 5% and we will ask for more?

She didn’t and the LU don’t, as they are content with the 5%, following as it does off last’s years pay ‘victory’ (as least according to LU).

Hypocrisy in DWP

So we see the deep hypocrisy whereby LU in DWP (who control the unions DWP Group Executive Committee) denounce the pay offer there, saying 5% is not enough, yet on the NEC didn’t challenge the remit!

Put control and power back in the hands of members

To break the deadlock we are in, the NEC majority is urging branches to ask for a Special Delegate Conference (SDC). The aim of the SDC is to pass motions which allow the NEC majority to actually make policy and to restrict the General Secretary to only using such powers as allowed by the constitution.

In response, in the last few days, a joint Branch Bulletin from the GS and President has been issued to branches telling them the ‘true facts’ of what is happening, which is nothing more than LU propaganda. Along with the bulletin, members have been emailed with the ‘truth’ (Pravda), as defined by LU, and members in branches that have passed SDC motions have also been emailed querying the legitimacy of their branches SDC motion.

This shows that LU are panicking but also that they now will use the union machinery to campaign for LU in next year’s NEC election.

We will continue to tell members that their money is being misspent, that LU’s actions mean that the union cannot respond to imposition of pay but also to the staff cuts soon to be announced in the Autumn statement.

Even if an SDC is stopped, we still have our annual conference next year where hopefully there will be a day of reckoning, most importantly LU have to be decisively defeated in the NEC elections, in particular we have to win the President’s position.

A response to the General Secretary and President

In an unprecedented move, the General Secretary and President have today by-passed branch committees to email all members in branches that have passed motions calling for a special delegate conference.

The leaders of the minority faction on the NEC are now openly utilising the unions machinery, paid by members subs, to wage an internal political war against members who seek a different direction in terms of union strategy and priorities.

In response today, many branch committees have rightfully written to their members countering the inaccuracies sent unsolicited to members’ personal email addresses.

We will write more direct responses soon. In the meantime, below is an example of the responses lay reps, who do not have the wealth of the union machinery and full-time officers behind them, have provided to their members today. We encourage reps to use this to respond to their members if they feel it useful.

Dear Member,

You will have received an email to your personal email address today from the President and General Secretary of the union titled, ‘CALL FOR A SPECIAL DELEGATE CONFERENCE BY YOUR BRANCH – THE FACTS’ (not our caps) asking you to mistrust your reps.

Unfortunately, they have made the decision to go over the heads of your locally elected reps and use the unions communications infrastructure, paid by your subs, to wage an internal political war against members who seek a different direction in terms of union strategy and priorities.

Whilst we would rather spend our time as reps, representing and supporting you as members, unfortunately as the email was sent to all of you without right of reply and contained some significant inaccuracies, we only felt it right to respond.

Our branch did pass a motion (attached) at a branch meeting in September. This was done following many other branches of our union across other employer groups and regions passing similar motions.

We passed the motion because we have 3 main concerns which we set out below. The email sent to members claims to refute the facts of the motion. We’d like to briefly set-out why it doesn’t:

1) Pay: The General Secretary and President are content with not challenging the 5% cabinet office pay remit – once again the worse pay offer in the public sector and one which comes with strings attached – job cuts.

Proposals to change this position have the support of the majority of the NEC which you elected last year. Proposals to reject the remit, request negotiations are broadened out to include pay progression, flexible working etc and to begin a national campaign to achieve such objectives have been ruled-out-of-order by the National President.

This much is admitted in the email you will have received. We don’t accept these proposals ‘contravene the rules of the union’ and are happy to supply them to members on request.

2) More union staff on much higher salaries: The General Secretary has made the executive decision, without NEC oversight, to create a new super-grade in the union and more senior roles.

The successful candidates for the 2 new super-grade vacancies are coincidentally current, or recent members of the General Secretaries grouping in the union. These 2 individuals were also, again coincidently, the 2 failed candidates from the last 2 elections for Assistant General Secretary.

The additional vacancies below the new super grade also went to current or recent members of the General Secretary and President’s group in the union.

Disregarding the political connections for the moment. Increasing the number and salaries of paid employees of the union, who’s salaries are paid for by members subscriptions constitutes ‘major financial changes’ and liabilities in any language. And represents a much larger percentage of members subs – including many on the poverty line – spent on staff rather than waging effective campaigns to improve the interests of our members.

All of this done without the consent of the elected NEC or the elected National Treasurer, the Assistant General Secretary.

3) Union Democracy: With no way forward on either question, the only way the deadlock can be broken is for the union to hold an extraordinary conference – conducted online to save the £250k quoted in the email – to put the power and control of the union back in the hands of members and local reps.

Even if you were to accept the arguments in the email, that is surely something everyone who believes in a member led union can support.

Lastly, the email refers to ‘certain organisations operating in the union’. We can assure you that the only organisation which discussed and passed the motion on your behalf was the Branch Executive – elected by you every year. And we did so with the interests of members at the forefront of our minds.

We sincerely hope that this doesn’t dissuade you from continued union membership. This doesn’t change the dedication of reps on the ground to ensure you are represented and supported.

If you have any concerns, please get in touch,


DWP Pay Award: Another kick in the teeth

The long-awaited delegated pay award for DWP staff was published today, weeks after most other departments.

The worst many of our lowest paid members were expecting was for the 5% to be applied evenly across the grades. Across the rest of the civil service the union has largely managed to ensure that the award is either spread evenly, or that our lowest paid members are given a greater increase, such as in HMRC.

Not in DWP.

Unequal, unfair and top-heavy

The headline figure is that the lowest paid AA grade will see an increase of only 4%. Most AA’s to HEO’s on legacy contracts will only receive 4.5% increases, while SEO’s and Grade 7’s will receive a 6% increase to their minimum.

From the Depoartment’s perspective they have at least resolved one issue. Screwing over the most junior grade fixes the problem with the overlap with the AO pay scale… by making AA colleagues even poorer relatively. We’re not convinced this race to the bottom is going to improve staff morale as we are asked to implement the new governments welfare agenda.

A humiliating bonus

Most staff will receive a £90 non-consolidated ‘bonus’. Which for many will be wiped out by tax, student loan repayments and Universal Credit deductions.

It appears you can put a price on all the hard work we are told we are performing, and it can be counted in 2 figures.

Further pain for members

If this insult wasn’t enough, a further kick in the teeth for the lowest paid comes on payday and next April.

Due to the length of time it’s taken to conclude ‘negotiations’, the backdated award will be paid in a lump-sum in November. As with the ‘cost of living’ lump sum of 2023, this will screw with the UC payments that thousands of DWP employees are disgracefully forced to claim to keep up with the poverty line. An issue remarkably left completely out of the union’s members bulletin, much as it was an after thought in 2023.

In April, the National Living Wage is likely to rise. If it does so by the same as last year the DWP will be forced to increase the pay of AA’s and AO’s. And once again, the workers on the front-line of delivering social security will be paid the lowest their employer is legally allowed to get away with.

The role of PCS DWP Group negotiators

This bizarre trickle-down approach to the pay structure is unfortunately not new behaviour from DWP, but it does raise the question what did PCS negotiators argue for?

Showing DWP our hand

When the 5% Cabinet Office remit was announced back in July, the majority of the union’s NEC were clear that it should be rejected and plans drawn up for a national fightback on pay, pensions, flexible working and staffing amongst other issues.

We have continued to argue that we couldn’t accept the lowest pay offer in the public sector, and that rejecting a remit which demanded ‘efficiencies’ (job cuts) in exchange for the money should be a trade union red line.

There was and is the need for continued industrial leverage across employer groups on pay and the other priorities of the membership.

The National President, who is concurrently a DWP Group Vice-President, has ruled out of order each and every motion or amendment supporting this position from the majority.

As a result, union negotiators across the civil service in general and in DWP specifically, went into these negotiations having one hand tied behind their backs by the National President and DWP Group President.

With a tacit acceptance of the 5% remit, and no intention to campaign for anything better, we had lost all leverage and it’s now painfully clear that the DWP smelt blood.

But why is it worse in DWP?

There is no way of sugarcoating this award. Despite the national picture, it is an obvious bargaining failure.

The Group have stated that it could have been ‘much worse’, but that’s little succour to the thousands of members faced with the reality of the final award.

The bulletin put out to members does not criticise the cabinet office pay remit – the direct cause of this pay award, because the Group leadership accepts the remit.

It rightfully rejects the award but offers absolutely no strategy for how we can improve it, because the Group leadership have consistently opposed and undermined any attempt by the NEC majority to devise a strategy to do so.

Finally, the Group use a union bulletin to wage a factional war, wrongly implying that an NEC majority decision would have prevented them from pushing back against an earlier offer.

If DWP management can continue to be such an outlier in the civil service and propose such ludicrous top-down pay offers, it is due to the bargaining and organisational weakness of the union in DWP caused – in part – by decades of poor leadership, not the NEC majority who have no responsibility for these failed negotiations.

No communication with members

The leadership of the DWP Group Executive have long been proponents of secretive negotiations and embargoed communications with members. But this pay round has been excruciatingly bad. There hasn’t been a single meeting since the commencement of pay negotiations with members and not a single branch bulletin providing an update, not even a holding message.

Secret negotiations and embargo agreements only benefit the employer, proven again by this years’ experience.

We need a union and a DWP group executive who will consult members throughout negotiations and communicate openly about their progress. Ensuring members could be mobilised to exert pressure on the employer rather than being treated by the employer and union alike as a passive observers to their fate.

Hybrid Working, Saturday opening, pay progression…

As the NEC majority has attempted with negotiations around the initial Cabinet Office remit. Other than tradition, there is no reason why these discussions have to be kept to pay.

If the employer claims their hands are tied on the remit, we should be demanding that negotiations are widened to include things like commitments on allowing hybrid working for all staff, phasing out Saturday opening, and re-introducing pay progression up the scales. Things we know the Department can change and all things that are currently deprioritised on the union’s bargaining agenda.

The current unimaginative and conservative approach to bargaining, done entirely on the employers’ terms is not good enough.

We need a Group leadership who understand this.

Where are the Labour ministers?

The Labour Party promised to ‘Make work pay’.

Does the Secretary of State and DWP ministers support what is being done in their name? The largest department, with the greatest amount of operational staff in the lowest grades being paid the minimum wage? Continuing to rely on Universal Credit to make ends meet?

We’d hope not and would hope the Group Executive Committee are targeting Labour ministers about this both directly and through the PCS Parliamentary group. We also hope Labour Party members and constituents are making this hypocrisy well known. There appears to be a desperate need for some goodwill towards the government at the moment.

The problem is bigger than DWP

This ultimate responsibility for this pay award and the pay awards across the civil service, the vast majority being the lowest in the entire public sector lies with the employer.

But at every step of the way the union has been lacking.

Because the General Secretary wanted to tacitly accept the pay remit, run-out live ballots and refuse to re-ballot, and because the National President has undemocratically blocked any attempt by the NEC majority to put forward an alternative strategy, our members have to put-up with the lowest pay-rise in the public sector and the government, and employers across the civil service have had a free-ride to implement the remit as they see fit.

Because the Group Executive has failed to stop the unions organisational rot in the DWP, leverage with the employer has waned.

Because the unions negotiators in DWP refused to open-up negotiations to the membership and prevented them from being involved, we were neutered from the very start.

What can we do?

We desperately need a new leadership and a new strategy. But in the immediate term we need to stop the NEC minority from blocking such a strategy.

That’s why we are calling on all branches to pass motions calling for a Special Delegate Conference, so members and reps start calling the shots, not a minority of the NEC.

For a democratic union, stop Fran Heathcote and Left Unity stealing your union

Under Mark Serwotka, the union markedly became less dynamic and in a real sense, less democratic. Mr Serwotka was the arch spinner claiming things that weren’t trueNot only in 2023 but in the past as well. He did nothing to address fundamental issues such as falling union density. By any objective standards, he was a terrible General Secretary, but things have actually gotten worse with Fran Heathcote.     

President Blocks Democracy

Left Unity (LU) lost the NEC elections and hence is a minority on that committee along with their erstwhile allies the Democrats (in the past we would have described them as Labour leaning but now they are just a friendship club).

They did win the President’s position though, and through him any attempt by the majority to actually try and put in place the programme it was elected on has been smothered.

The President, Martin Cavanaugh, grossly disregarding the rules he is meant to uphold, rules the bulk of motions from the NEC majority out of order. When challenged, the majority cannot get two thirds of the NEC votes needed, to overturn his ruling and this cycle of rule out of order, challenge, not get two thirds, occurs again and again at each NEC.

Building A Wall

Of course LU realise (as there is no democracy or life in LU, Left Unity is just a label for Fran Heathcote, Paul O’Connor – more of him later and Martin Cavanaugh) that with yearly elections they can lose the presidential position so they are building up the bureaucracy of the union to ensure future NECs and conferences can be ignored.

Therefore the General Secretary, without informing the NEC and certainly not seeking its permission, has created a new extra top heavy layer of Full Time Officials (FTOs) to surround herself.

For most of its existence the union has had seven pay bands, with pay band 1 the lowest and pay band 7 (GS and Assistant General Secretary (AGS) are in this band) the highest.

Fran Heathcoat has created two 6A posts, whose pay range straddles those of PB 6 and 7.

She has ensured that Paul O’Connor, her key full time official ally has been given one of those posts and Lynn Henderson the other 6A job.

Lynn Henderson was beaten in the 2019 AGS election by John Moloney, and Paul O’Connor lost the 2023 AGS election, when he was a running mate to Fran Heathcote, again to John Moloney. So the two failed AGS candidates, both rejected by the members have the most senior FTO posts under the GS, whilst John Moloney, the person who decisively beat Paul O’Connor has in effect been made supernumerary in the new structure.

Fran Heathcote has also created eight new band 6 posts as well and is busily filling other posts at band 5.

Your Money being Used

After great delay in producing the figures, the GS now admits that the new structure will cost members at least £169K a year.

This is an underestimate. She is seeking to fill more posts, so costs will rise and the £169K figure does not include the guaranteed progression that FTOs are entitled to, nor does it take into account future pay rises. So we believe that in a few years the cost will be closer to £200K a year. This figure does not include union pension costs either.

Motion A9

Motion A9 passed at ADC 2021, mandated that staff costs be kept at 33% of members subscriptions – which of course is your money.

The GS bloated new structure directly breaches A9.

You will have all heard of the adage of repairing the roof when the sun is shining. What Fran Heathcoate has done is punch holes in a serviceable roof and she hopes, if she thought about the future at all, that bad weather will not come our way. Yet dark clouds are on the horizon.

Cuts Are On Their Way

The Chancellor to partly fund the average 5% pay award for the UK civil service (UKCS) has cut administrative budgets by 2%. The admin budgets include a number of items, but staffing makes up the biggest part of this budget. The government has made clear it will continue to squeeze admin budgets in the future and this must lead to a squeeze on jobs.

Everyone knows that the spending review underway will recommend further cuts in departmental budgets (at least in real terms) and this will also mean staff cuts.

Last, and certainly no means least, Darren Jones, the chief secretary to the Treasury, has written to cabinet ministers ordering them to find reforms and deploy technology that can save cash.

‘Deploy technology’ not only includes the increasing use of AI but also pushing digital transformation, that is getting the public to increasingly use web based services. This will lead to more job losses.

Ignoring The Past

UKCS headcount stands at about 542,000 at the moment. In 2019, it was 445,000, so in five years, numbers have increased by just under 100,000, yet our membership has not kept pace. Over those five years our union density has actually decreased.

If staff numbers decrease then the union’s membership will, taking every other staff rundown as a guide, also decrease. Yet the GS is forcing bureaucracy costs up, just when we could see a down turn in membership. This will mean us moving further from the 33% ratio that we are supposed to stick to.

The whole point of the 33% ratio is to keep staff costs manageable. The union at 2021 ADC had learnt the lessons of the continuing financial crises the union had weathered since 2010 – don’t allow staff costs to get out of sync with membership levels. Fran Heathcoat has ignored that hard won wisdom because all she can see out of the holes in the roof is the sun still shining.

Act First, Count Later

This financial irresponsibility has been compounded by the GS implementing the new structure and then costing it, rather than the rational process of designing the new structure and then costing it before making any decisions as to implementation.

Now, as we actually believe in a member’s lead union, the NEC should have been the body to make any decisions as to implementation of the new structure, whether we really needed 6A posts etc. After all PCS’s constitution says:

PR 8. The management and control of the Union, and the handling of its whole affairs, shall be vested in the National Executive Committee (“NEC”). The NEC shall conduct its affairs in accordance with: (a) the Rules of the Union; and (b) the policies determined by Delegate Conference or by membership ballot.

The Imperial General Secretary

The GS’s response is to create a new theory of the relationship between her and the NEC and of course by extension between her and conference and members.

She states that she is in sole control of staffing and staff costs and that the NEC has no say on these vital matters. The NEC’s role is to set polices and then she will solely determine how FTO staff are deployed to achieve the polices.

No Evidence, Just Assertion

So how does Fran Heathcote reach that conclusion despite rule PR8. Well she just asserts it. She claims that Mark Serwotka proved this was the case and all she is doing is following in his saintly steps. The GS doesn’t quote any of the rules in the constitution or show how her contract allows her this control. It just is.

The GS buttresses this stance by claiming she has legal advice that shows the separation of powers is, as she asserts them to be.

Will she show this advice to the NEC, no. Nor the advice she apparently has in relation to motion A9 that says she can freely ignore the 33% ratio.

How does she get away with this. Enter Martin Cavanaugh. He has made another of his rulings, this time to say that Fran Heathcote’s position is correct despite no proof it is. Again he challenges the NEC to overturn that decision. He also backs her position that she won’t actually show the NEC the legal advice.

So the GS uses union money to get the advice, she then uses that advice to deny the NEC any say over staffing and then says I won’t show you that advice!!

Democrats Refuse To Play Their Part

The Democrats used to have a bit part on NECs where they would say ‘remember it’s the member’s money and we can’t waste it’. This time they have not played their assigned role and are keeping silent on the £169K to nearly £200K a year being squandered. Apparently it isn’t the members money when Fran Heathcote uses it to reward her acolytes.

More Than Anger, Action

We are angry at this blatant misuse of your money and the undemocratic way that Martin Cavanagh is shielding the GS from scrutiny or control. Anger is good but only if it motivates us to take action to defend the union’s democracy and member’s money.

Firstly we must tell as many branches and activists as possible what is happening to our union.

Using union machinery, Fran Heathcote has issued a branch bulletin and an email to members setting out LU’s version of what happened at the NEC meeting of 12 August.

The majority did put an alternative to the GS’ paper. Now her paper, to paraphrase, said, everything we achieved last year (£1,500 prorated lump sum) was wonderful and this year we should take the money and then sometime in the future decide what to do next. It said nothing of substance on staffing cuts, on pay bargaining structures, on unequal pay, DDAT pay or progression.

The majority’s position (we think you know the drill by now) was ruled out of order. So the majority had no choice but to vote the GS’ paper down.

We must now start a branch based campaign to fight Fran Heathcote and Martin Cavanaugh. They have to be put under pressure.

Special Delegate Conference

Part of that pressure must be a serious consideration of holding a special delegates conference. The rules say:

A Special Delegate Conference may be called by the NEC, or on receipt by the General Secretary of a written application by Branches together representing one quarter or more of the membership.

We would need branches representing 47,000 members to write in. That can be done. Of course such a conference must cover more than union democracy and safeguarding your money but also the 2024 pay round and our anti-racist, anti-fascist (ARAF) work.

We Must Win The 2025 Election

This work amongst the branches will serve us well for the 2025 NEC election which we have to win, in particular win the President’s position. Without Martin Cavanaugh to shield her, the GS will only have the bureaucratic wall she has built, the army of Pay Band 6s and her 6As, to protect her.

She will no doubt take the position of an early President of the USA, Andrew Jackson, who supposedly on hearing an adverse decision of the Supreme Court supposedly said “John Marshall (the Chief Justice of the court) has made his decision; now let him enforce it’.

Fran Heathcote will say of NEC and ADC decisions “They have made their decision; now let them enforce it, but they won’t be using my FTOs’.

Members Must Control The Union

So we have to win more than the election, we have to ensure that the GS actually obeys and complies with democratic decisions. That means changes in the union’s constitution and passing legally cast iron motions at ADC 2025.

Structures Fit For Bad, As Well As Good Times

Because we know that there are rainy and indeed stormy days, we have to reduce our staffing costs to bring them into line with our current membership. ADC passed A9, we have to obey it.

Mark Serwotka Prepared The Ground

In many ways, this crisis has been coming a long time. It was hidden under Mark Serwotka’s reign as for decades he had LU run NECs, who were content to allow him to be an Imperial GS. Further conferences, on the whole, went his way. So he had the same views as Fran Heathcote, but he never had to reveal his hand or power.

As LU have lost the NEC, and ADC 2024, what was hidden has now been forced into the open. The Imperial GS has had to reveal itself.

Our Union Or Fran Heathcote’s     

We are facing a fundamental crisis in the union. 

Down one path lies complete domination by senior Full Time Officials, where we have a managed democracy, where there are the outward trappings of democracy, that is votes, conference etc, but all that counts in the end is the will of the GS. 

Down the other path, where we elect NEC and they are free to implement the programmes they were elected on and conference really does determine the fundamental policies of the union. 

We though want to go further down that path and have a genuine member lead union.

Will you join us?   

PCS Members: A minority want to sell you short. Don’t let them.

Members will have likely seen an email today from the General Secretary and President informing members that the NEC majority decided to vote against balloting the membership over the 5% offer, taking strike action and abolishing the Levy. This account of what happened is completely and utterly dishonest.

As any pretence of civility from the LU minority on the NEC is now clearly over and done with. We will start by saying this – It has become increasingly clear over the past few months that LU are more than happy to completely trash our pay dispute and throw PCS members under the bus in order to secure electoral gains for their faction and ensure they are the only voice in the room. They are a bureaucracy out of control.

The truth of the matter is, we didn’t vote against taking action. The NEC majority was faced with a paper from the General Secretary which was a complete and utter capitulation to the employer and would have our members ‘welcome’ an increasingly less tantalising pay rise alongside a promise of job cuts.

To mitigate this, the NEC majority attempted to move an alternative strategy (both in writing and verbally) that would:

  • Reject the 5%, and demand the re-opening of negotiations over the remit which included the following demands alongside pay:
    • Moved us towards National Pay Bargaining.
    • Removed the threat of “efficiencies” or job losses enshrined in the remit guidance.
    • Ensured the remit was fully-funded and that departments wouldn’t need to use their own money to service the next increase in the minimum wage to raise the salaries of the – already disgracefully paid – AA and AO grades.
    • Agreed the reintroduction of pay-progression through salary bands which was removed as an option under the coalition and subsequent Tory administrations.
    • Laid down an agreement on the implementation of AI where the benefits of its implmentation was shared with staff through, for example, a reduction in the working week.
    • Included a timetable for the resolution of our long-standing pensions over-payment claim.
  • Temporarily pause delegated talks while pursuing further national talks
  • Reduce the levy and immediately review it in consultation with members
  • Ensure we are bargaining nationally on all the national pay frameworks including Digital, Data and Technology (DDAT) which – bizarrely – former NEC’s have refused to engage with.
  • Build towards balloting members

In negotiations with the Cabinet Office, your General Secretary and President failed to raise a single one of these demands. They are asking you to accept a position without even putting your demands to the employer.

The motion raising these positions was ruled out of order (ineligible for debate and/or vote) by the National President because it disagreed with the General Secretary’s paper. This has happened to the vast, vast, vast majority of motions submit by NEC majority members since June; because according to the president’s interpretation of the rules, apparently, disagreeing with the General Secretary is against the NEC standing orders.

There are no two ways around this. The President and General Secretary are refusing to abide by the decisions of the highest body of the union.

We are of course incredibly angry about where we find ourselves when it comes to the pay dispute but we are apoplectic about the way parts of our leadership will nakedly use bureaucratic manoeuvring to undermine the will of the members they are supposed to serve. In that spirit we ask all members to carefully consider what they want their union to look like? Who exactly is supposed to be in charge of a democratic union? And what behaviour you are willing accept from your elected representatives? Because right now our union feels a lot like merely the plaything of the General Secretary.