Doesn’t The DWP Ballot Mean That Left Unity Isn’t As Bad As You Claim? No.
We’re tempted to leave it at that, but no doubt a Left Unity loyalist will demand proof positive of the No. So here goes.
Firstly, we must recognise the very narrow focus of the demands set out in the ballot: use available funds to temporally move staff off the min wage and introduce some pay differential between AAs and AOs etc. We say temporary as LU admit that with the monies available it means that in 2027 we will probably be back in the same mess as we are now; that is staff will be caught up by the min wage again.
Then there is the timing; right before AGMs and the GEC elections. This is standard procedure for LU, begin a dispute/ballot/campaign before/during elections. So the ballot is partly an election ploy.
All the leading LU leaders in DWP, as far as we can see, are on 100% facility time. That materially cuts them off from the shop floor. Despite this insulation though they are susceptible to membership pressure. So they recognise that year after year, more and more people in the department are clustering at the legal minimum wage. This is felt by them. The ballot is part reaction to this.
Probably equally important however is that they are personally affronted by the disrespect that senior managers in DWP show in dismissing the arguments put forward by them – after all they are important people! So the ballot is part about reasserting that the leadership should be respected.
We would do things differently if we were in charge – we would aim for a different type of a dispute – one that would tackle head on the systematic problems we face in DWP:
• end the multi-tier work force
• no Saturday working or late night working unless overtime is offered
• guaranteed progression for HEOs and above;
• arrangements put in place so that AAs are always above the min wage – on a real living wage – and that there are real pay differentials between AAs, AOs and EOs.
We need a leadership that looks beyond the next few months and fights for a long-term settlement that respects the work we do.
If you want a union that fights for that rather than a temporary fix, vote for the Independent Left and others in the 2026 DWP GEC elections.
Tag Archives: PCS
Confronting Left Unity’s Fake Optimism
In PCS’s most recent update, ‘News from the NEC – December 2025’, you will read Left Unity negotiators express “cautious optimism over [PCS’] core demand to end delegated pay bargaining and to introduce more coherence through national pay bargaining.” However, they also quietly admit there is “nothing concrete” at this stage.
As the Independent Left (IL), we look past “warm words” and analyse the material reality of these talks. Therefore we are extremely sceptical that any genuine progress is being made toward national bargaining; our scepticism is based on two realities: money and a total lack of union pressure.
The Economic Reality: The Cost of Equalisation
If the Cabinet Office is actually signalling a move toward national bargaining, that promise is only meaningful if it leads to the equalisation of pay across the Civil Service. Currently, the system is a mess of delegated authority where different departments pay vastly different rates of pay to staff in the same grades. Levelling everyone up to the highest pay point per grade would cost hundreds of millions of pounds. This is money that has not been budgeted for in the current Spending Review. So ask yourself: is it likely that this government, which is actively seeking to reduce the cost of the Civil Service, will spontaneously agree to a massive, unforced increase in the wage bill?
The Power Gap: Lessons from the BMA
Left Unity is asking you to believe that the Cabinet Office might possibly overthrow 40 years of established industrial practice simply because our negotiators have put forward good arguments!
Compare our situation to the BMA Resident Doctors. They have taken extensive industrial action and have won significant pay rises. Even then, they are still forced to fight on for full pay restoration and for more training places. The government only moved because they faced a genuine crisis in the NHS and a union willing to exert maximum pressure.
If the government moves this slowly when faced with a high-profile crisis and massive strikes, why would they give PCS anything when we aren’t applying any pressure at all? There is currently no threat of industrial action, no legal challenge, and no political leverage being applied. In that vacuum, Ministers have no incentive to concede anything.
Pre-Election Spin vs. Real Solutions
We believe Left Unity is spinning these “discussions” because the NEC elections are on the horizon. Senior Managers may well acknowledge the “concertina effect”—where the rising minimum wage is crushing pay differentials for AA, AO, and EO grades—but acknowledging a problem is not the same as actually solving one.
A real solution would require an agreement that as the minimum wage rises, the wages of AAs, AOs, and EOs would also rise to maintain pay differentials. This would effectively mean automatic pay increases and there is no evidence that the government is prepared to agree to such a radical shift.
We suspect that once the NEC elections are over, and if LU wins, we will discover that these claims of progress had no substance.
For us, the only way to win national bargaining and equal pay is through a serious strategy of industrial, legal, and political action. But Left Unity, as they have proved in their decades of being in control of the union, are incapable of such action.
If you believe that such action is needed then vote for us in the upcoming elections and consider joining us: https://pcsindependentleft.com/join-us/
The Budget and the DWP Employee Deal: Why it still matters and why members should vote ‘Yes’ to action in January!
The chancellor has announced a rise in the statutory Living (minimum) wage for workers over 21 years old of 4.1%, to £12.77 an hour. For Civil Servants in the DWP who are contracted for 42 hours a week, this translates into an annual salary of £27890
This rise will take place in April.
Below is this year’s pay settlement for the 3 most junior grades in DWP. We have included the number of staff in each grade from the Government’s published figures.
Note that the London Living Wage as calculated by the Mayor of London stands at £14.80. This would translate into an annual salary of £31,168 for DWP staff contracted for 40.5 hours in London.
The figures include those who opted out of the Employee Deal, some of whose salaries are even less.
| AA | Opt-out | Spot Rate | Staff in Post |
| National | £27,774 | £27,774 | 140 |
| SLPZ | £27,774 | £27,774 | |
| Outer London | £27,774 | £27,774 | 10 |
| Inner London | £27,774 | £27,774 |
| AO | Opt-out | Spot Rate | Staff in Post |
| National | £27,799 | £27,844 | 19515 |
| SLPZ | £27,799 | £27,844 | |
| Outer London | £27,799 | £29,722 | 955 |
| Inner London | £27,799 | £29,722 |
| EO | Opt-out | Min | Max | Staff in Post |
| National | £27,849 | £32,137 | £32,137 | 39825 |
| SLPZ | £27,891 | £32,137 | £34,429 | |
| Outer London | £27,992 | £35,615 | £37,016 | 5290 |
| Inner London | £29,688 | £37,016 | £37,016 |
Our members know what this disgraceful situation means for them. But here are the headline figures:
- 19,655 DWP staff (or around 22% of the workforce) are currently paid below the announced minimum wage.
- All London based AA’s and AO’s are paid between £1,446 and £3,394 less a year than the London Living Wage.
- All London based staff in all 3 grades who opted out of the Employee Deal are paid less than the London Living Wage.
- Nationally employed AO’s who have to work weekends and earlier and later in the day as part of the Employee Deal, are only paid £45 more a year for the privilege.
- The employer will be forced to increase the pay of 22% of it’s workforce in April because it won’t be paying them the statutory minimum.
The woeful spectacle of the largest government department being a poverty pay employer lies at the feat of the DWP management team and the Permanent Secretary. Who continually refuses to put a business case to the Cabinet Office to address structural low pay.
It’s nothing short of a scandal that the workers on the ground delivering social security aren’t even paid the minimum the government themselves believes is enough to live on! That the management of the department continue to refuse to address it is beyond contempt.
But PCS and specifically the leadership of the DWP Group have questions to answer here too.
In 2016, the current leadership negotiated and cheer-led for the DWP employee deal. They claimed that 4 years of above inflation pay rises for those who agreed to sell their weekends and evenings to the employer would address low pay in the department for the most junior grades.
PCS independent Left were the only group in the union that opposed the deal at the time. Among other criticisms, we made the point that the pay settlement was not future-proof and being handed over for the high-price of *permanently* selling off weekends to the employer wasn’t even ‘jam today’. The danger was that pay deals beyond the 4 years were not inflation proof, and the employer would return to bargain basement offers without a fight.
The Employee Deal was agreed (narrowly) and there has been no meaningful fight.
We have been criticised for bringing this up again, but it’s important in understanding the current situation.
Members will rightfully ask, why a unionised workforce, which are told repeatedly that PCS is a fighting union, are paid below the minimum wage and why we have negotiated and supported deals in the past that have ultimately resulted in this situation?
Why aren’t members who wish to take action over hybrid working and staffing, been armed with the opportunity by their leadership?
Unfortunately, union density in the DWP is waning as members answer these questions themselves.
We don’t think leaving is the right thing to do, in fact the only way to turn the tide on defending and extending our conditions and pay is having as many members in the union as possible.
We have the opportunity in the upcoming statutory ballot to demonstrate the strength of feeling of the rank-and-file on pay.
Members should vote in the ballot, encourage their colleagues to join and get involved in turning out members.
Branches should continue to agitate and organise members on the basis of their concerns, be it pay, hybrid working or jobs and staffing. And use that mobilisation to put pressure on the Group leadership to act.
And ultimately, when it comes to next years Group elections, branches and members should consider the long-term record of those in charge an whether the strategy has worked.
PCS’ Social Media and Persona Non Grata
Those with a keen eye will have noticed a conspicuous absence in PCS’ recent social media postings during the recent TUC Congress that expose an unacceptable and ongoing abuse of the union’s media channels. Whilst PCS officials found time during conference to interview a former Deputy President of PCS, long gone from the civil service, seeking his views on the Employment Rights Bill, the actual Deputy President, Bev Laidlaw, who was also in attendance, was not featured in a single post during conference. The reason for this is not hard to identify; Bev is Independent Left, not Left Unity. This fact alone seems to make her persona non grata in the eyes of those who control PCS’ publicity and media platforms.
This is not just an oversight. It is a repeated, calculated practice. To date, Bev has never once been interviewed or even properly acknowledged on union social media in her role as Deputy President. At the same time, LU-aligned officers and NEC members feature regularly, boosting their profile and boasting of their activities within the union. This amounts to nothing less than factional censorship, using the union’s own media resources to build up one group while erasing the existence of others.
Such behaviour is a betrayal of the membership. Every PCS member pays their subs; every elected officer is chosen by a democratic vote. PCS media is not the private property of one political grouping. It belongs to the whole union. Yet by manipulating coverage LU is treating official channels as a propaganda arm for their slate. This grossly undermines the principles of democracy and transparency on which trade unionism depends.
The consequences of LU’s actions are not minor. When members can see plainly that communications are skewed, trust in PCS leadership is eroded. When the second most senior elected lay officer in the union is deliberately excluded because of her affiliation, it sends a signal: your vote only counts if you support the ruling faction. This is not representation; it is control by omission.
As Orwell warned in 1984, the tactic of making opponents into “unpersons” is a tool of authoritarianism. For PCS to engage in such behaviour is shameful. Our union should be leading by example, modelling fairness, inclusivity, and respect for democracy. Instead, it mirrors the very injustices we are supposed to oppose in the workplace.
This practice must end immediately. PCS communications should serve the whole membership, not the narrow factional interests of those who presently dominate the NEC. To continue down this path is to hollow out democracy itself.
For active, not passive pay meetings
Pay meetings are a powerful opportunity for PCS branches to put union democracy and organising into practice. These sessions should be more than an exercise in top-down, passive reporting—they are a space for real dialogue, decision-making, and mobilisation for winning a fair deal for our members.
Branches do best starting by distributing background information and campaign materials in advance, so the meeting time is focused on open discussion and action. For the best results, avoid spending too long recounting what’s already happened or why the meeting is being held; let members bring their own ideas and priorities to the table.
Meetings work best when everyone feels able to contribute. Borrowing from American union best practice, adopt the norm: “Challenge ideas, not people.” PCS, rightly, is asking branches to invite non-members to the meetings. So encourage not only PCS members, but also non-members and new joiners to speak—this helps ensure meetings are welcoming, and aids recruitment. Certainly at the meeting, any non-members should be asked to join.
Critically, meetings must address the fundamentals: the need for a ballot, readiness for strike action, and transparent planning for collective campaigns. Even if PCS’ leadership is reluctant to discuss these topics, members should insist they are aired; otherwise what’s the point of hold the meeting?
Finally, end every meeting with clear, agreed next steps: forming ballot committees, planning leafleting, organizing solidarity actions, or even practice picketing. Keeping meetings member-driven and outcome-focused is how PCS branches can build the strength needed to secure decent pay for all.
Whether it’s pay, hybrid working or wider political issues, PCS and other unions usually default to a passive top-down mechanism for engaging with members. This isn’t the way things need to happen and it doesn’t reap the best results. We know many branches are already taking the steps laid out in this article, but we hope more will do so. It’s imperative we change our organising mindset if we are going to win as a union.
If you agree, please consider joining the PCS Independent Left.
Where is the National Campaign?
PCS is at a cross roads. For months, Left Unity (LU) has done nothing to build amongst members for action on pay, jobs and working flexibility, and have only yesterday, belatedly, announced an activists forum (August 19th) to discuss the issue with members.
Motions carried at conference called for a ballot to be held by mid-September, why have they silent on the campaign since conference? There is a real risk we won’t hold a ballot at all, sending all the wrong signals to the Labour government, and to our own members about the strength and seriousness of PCS.
LU’s message of weakness is not simply about 2025/26. PCS has to have a meaningful bargaining agenda for longer term pay reform, addressing all the structural problems in civil service pay: wild variations in pay between the same grades in different departments and agencies; lack of progression pay arrangements; members trapped on the minimum wage; different grades of members being paid at the same rate of pay because they are all on the minimum wage; a lack of meaningful national negotiations over specialist members who are treated as a singleton specialism but within the delegated bargaining structure that breaks the civil service up in to a huge number of different pay systems.
Time for a serious plan
So, despite the LU leadership, what would “getting serious” actually look like?
First, it’s time for an all-hands-on-deck approach. Every full-time organiser and full time official needs to make the ballot their priority, putting aside non-essential work for now. At branch, town, and regional committee level, we should be calling urgent meetings and launching member discussions about the ballot. This can’t be business as usual anymore—everyone in the union needs to shift gears so we’re focused and ready to win.
But mobilisation isn’t just about what happens at the top. Communications need to be powered by activists and rooted in real-life experiences. HQ can’t reach everyone, and—let’s face it—mass emails from the centre are no substitute for a message from someone you actually know and trust. That’s why activists should be encouraged not only to draft their own messages, but to send them out, speaking in the language and style that members respond to. Local voices must take the lead. That’s how we build momentum and trust.
Of course, even the best-organised ballot is hampered by our low union density. We can’t shy away from recruitment—we have to bring more people into the union, quickly. That means inviting all staff—not just existing members—to meetings. Our message, our campaign, and our events should speak to everyone, showing them why joining PCS strengthens all of us. To build the power we need, every new recruit counts.
It’s also time to be honest about our demands. The current set simply isn’t connecting with enough members. We’re hearing that what really matters along with pay is meaningful progression, equal pay, the right to flexible and hybrid working, and a four-day week – let’s not forget: LU originally opposed the four-day week – now it’s clear we need demands that actually resonate with people’s real, everyday concerns. Consulting activists and using relatable, straightforward language will help us build a platform everyone can rally behind.
Above all, the strength of our union comes from the bottom up. Regional and town committees—along with branches—should be taking the reins on local ballot work, empowered with real resource and decision-making capacity. National leadership must support that by channelling power down, not hoarding it. Campaigns fuelled by members and activists at every level are the ones that win.
Yes, the hill we’re climbing is steeper because of past delays, but that doesn’t mean we can’t reach the top. If we keep our focus clear, act collectively, and trust in the power of our activists and members, we can still build a campaign that makes PCS a union everyone wants to join—and a force the government can’t ignore.
Let’s shift gears together and launch the campaign our members need and deserve.
PCS Independent Left 