My dismissal and the Fujitsu strikes

On Friday 12 January Fujitsu dismissed me under the guise of redundancy. They had given me the news by letter earlier in the week, when I was on compassionate leave for a family funeral. They didn't even allow me to work my notice despite the fact that I had an outstanding job application they hadn't responded to - for a job they had encouraged me to apply for. My redundancy was a fix to victimise me for my union activity - I was in a tiny fake selection pool where Fujitsu claimed all the jobs were to go, avoiding any scoring.

My last day was brightened by a moving show of support as I left:

I was the fourth member to be dismissed while fighting their redundancy, two more haven't yet been dismissed. Of the six, the majority are black or ethnic minority, the majority are disabled, two are union reps, and one was dismissed without Fujitsu hearing her grievance which included a complaint of sexual harassment linked to her selection.

The fight goes on, including for my reinstatement. I've been protesting outside the site:

Fujitsu Manchester are on strike 24-26 January, 30 January and 8-14 February over compulsory redundancies, victimisation of reps and breaches of redundancy agreements. There's a particular push to get people to protest in support of the pickets on Wednesday 24th January. On Friday 26th January there will be a joint strike rally in Manchester city centre with the First Bus and Mears strikers.

There's lots more information, including how you can support our campaign, on the Unite @ Fujitsu web site.

Tweet

Strikes continue at Fujitsu

We had our third strike day today at Fujitsu Manchester, and two more have now been called for Wednesday and Thursday next week.

Check out our Unite @ Fujitsu web site for the latest news - and an "appeal for support" leaflet which includes how you can contribute to our strike fund.

Tweet

Strikes called at Fujitsu Manchester

Unite has now issued the call for industrial action - action short of strike and the first three strike days, as part of our dispute over pay, pensions and job security. The first action starts on Monday, with the first strike on Tuesday 1st November.

More details are here. You can also follow and support our campaign via Facebook and Twitter.

Tweet

Unite ballots Fujitsu Manchester over Pay, Pensions and Job Security

Unite's industrial action ballot of members in my own workplace has now opened.

There's an appeal for support leaflet, and you can also follow us on Facebook or Twitter.

Tweet

Unite Policy Conference 2016 - Wednesday's business

I've already posted videos of Jeremy Corbyn's speech and Sharon Graham's presentation on the Unite Industrial Strategy - Work, Voice, Pay.

The liveliest debate of the day was around the aftermath of the EU referendum and what UNITE's position on freedom of movement should be. Conference agreed the EC statement which didn't take a clear position on freedom of movement, but called for a debate across the union on it. As a result the emergency motions defending freedom of movement fell. The passing of Composite 19 partially remedies this, but still leaves our policy unclear.

I've shared the conference agenda (the original motions) and a booklet with many of the composites. Further information on conference business can be found at www.uniteconferences.org.

Composite 31 (Motions 148 + Amendment, 150, 151, 184): Pensions and Retirement: Carried
Motion 128: Sports Direct: Carried

#SportsDirectShame:

 Composite 28 (Motions 129, 146): Collective Bargaining and National Agreements: Carried
Motion 130: Campaigning Against the Mythology of Redundancy: Carried
Motion 131: Organising Agency Workers: Carried
Motion 132: Decent Work Campaign: Carried
Motion 135: Management Techniques & Employee Participation: Carried
Composite 29 (Motions 136, 137): Challenge of the Digital Economy: Carried
Motion 141: Income Tax: Carried
Motion 142: Income Tax: Carried
Motion 144: Outsourcing: Remitted
Motion 145 + Amendment: BBC: Carried
Executive Statement 3: European Union: Carried
Emergency Motion 2: No to racism, yes to human rights: Fell
Emergency Motion 4: Brexit and the rise of racism: Remitted
Emergency Motion 6: EU Referendum: Fell
Motion 71: Women at Work: Carried
Motion 73: Ensuring Equal Pay Implementation: Carried
Motion 72: Childcare and Work: Carried
Motion 74: Childcare - Impact on Women's Activism: Carried
Motion 75: Stand up to Racism Campaign: Carried
Composite 19 (Motions 76, 77, 78): Immigration Act 2016: Carried
Motions 79 + Amendment: LGBT Rights: Carried
Motion 80: LGBT Survivor Pensions Equality: Carried
Motion 81: Trans Rights: Carried

Tweet

UNITE GPM&IT National Industrial Sector Committee, January 2016

The committee, which covers the Graphical, Paper, Media & IT industries, met on Thursday and Friday. This is a summary of some key points. I’ve not included most of the industrial detail in my report because it isn’t appropriate to post publicly. For jargon, see here.

NISC members were very unhappy that there was still no representation from Wales. The original Welsh RISC meeting had been inquorate because the Welsh Regional Secretary had decided that two delegates were not allowed to be elected to the RISC from the same company even if this meant leaving places vacant, despite this being contrary to the Executive Council (EC) guidelines. The Wales Region had attempted to reconvene the conference, but this time that wasn’t quorate so no elections were possible. The situation is to be discussed at the Wales Regional Committee in the next few weeks. NISC members were keen for this to be resolved without further delay, seeing it as unacceptable for the members in a country to be unrepresented. The issue will be raised at the next EC meeting.

Funding for trade union education via the Skills Funding Agency, including reps training, faces a massive reduction in September 2016 as part of the government’s wider assault on Further Education. A report on how UNITE will respond to this will be discussed at the next Executive Council meeting.

Delegates were disappointed that Sharon Graham from the organising department was again unable to attend, after having been unable to attend conference for our sector in November, though she had led great sessions at the plenary and for many other sectors. At the GPM&IT conference delegates had agreed motions on organising, one of which set tasks for our Organising Strategy Subcommittee. This held an initial meeting on the Thursday evening and agreed some initial actions. A report will be circulated to all RISCs. The subcommittee plans to arrange its second meeting around Sharon’s availability to ensure that our sector’s plans complement what the organising department is doing rather than conflicting or duplicating it.

Under the EC report there was a wide ranging discussion including support for Jeremy Corbyn and Momentum; how to deal with bad Labour MPs; support for the student nurses and junior doctors’ disputes; Cameron’s racist nonsense about Muslims, learning English and terrorism; and our international work.

Raffiq Moosa was elected as our delegate to the Labour Party conference.

Bud Hudspith was unable to attend in person but provided a detailed written Health & Safety report which will be circulated electronically. In discussion it was clarified that though it is not a legal requirement for the HSE to contact union safety reps when they visit a workplace, it is their policy to do so.

The discussion on the report from the National Officer, Ian Tonks, included a lot of information about specific companies and workplaces which I have not included in this report for confidentiality reasons. An interesting point raised was how we turn increases to the National Minimum Wage (as it becomes Cameron’s National Living Wage) and the actual Living Wage, into wider rises to maintain differentials. Officers dealing with the GPM&IT sector will be meeting on 1-2 February. There was an interesting discussion about the benefits and dangers of national agreements and how they combined with uneven organisation and local bargaining. Sharing information between reps in competitor companies is a vital step.

On the Thursday evening NISC members attended an event to mark the 30^th anniversary of the bitter News International Wapping dispute with Rupert Murdoch, backed by Thatcher, the police and the leadership of the EETPU. This included a showing of the film Banging Out about Fleet Street and the Wapping dispute. The event had been funded by six branches in the sector.

Louisa Bull, one of the officers covering GPM&IT in London & Eastern, gave a wide ranging report which included new recognition agreements at Ambitions Personnel Limited and Pearson Education Limited. The agreement with Ambitions is particularly significant because it is an employment agency. With the support of the Printing Charity there is now a facility in England and Wales for UNITE officers to refer individual redundant members in the GPM&IT sector to Renovo who can provide outplacement services (CV writing, interview skills etc). Officers will also be able to access support from Renovo for larger redundancies where the employer is unable to fund outplacement support itself. The equivalent arrangement for Scotland is via Pace. Louisa will be speaking on equality and diversity at the London Book Fayre. A new toolkit for GPM&IT reps is finished and is currently being printed. It will also be available to reps and branch officers in the sector via on the sector pages on the Unite web site.

Rick Graham from the research department reported on his work. This included a survey of GPM&IT reps on the use of agency labour which he will be analysing shortly.

Morag Livingstone updated the NISC on a documentary she is making about the Grangemouth, Post Office (2007-9) and Wapping disputes. It is called “Belonging: the truth behind the headlines” and a short clip is available on the film’s web site. It is a feature length (90 minute) documentary which a number of union branches and regions have already contributed to funding. If a further £45K can be raised it will be possible to make it available free on YouTube for a period as part of its promotion. Further financial contributions are needed and Morag is happy to travel to speak at meetings.

I gave a short report from the IT & Comms Advisory Committee which had met on Wednesday. It had a first look at a survey of reps gathering information about workplaces, employers and issues. More work is required to go through it in detail to produce specific proposals for organising targets and opportunities to re-use materials when campaigning on issues affecting many employers. Discussion also included the more systematic recruitment of in-house or outsourced IT workers within unionised GPM workplaces, as a pilot that could be extended into other sectors.

The NISC was entitled to submit one motion to Policy Conference. I proposed the following motion:

Trident Replacement This conference welcomes the desire by Jeremy Corbyn not to spend replace the Trident nuclear weapons of mass destruction system, and to spend the money on more socially useful priorities. Conference welcomes Jeremy Corbyn’s commitment to setting up a Defence Diversification Agency (DDA) to ensure those whose jobs and communities currently rely on Trident have good, well paid jobs in future. We welcome the commitment of the Aerospace and Shipbuilding sector to engage with the DDA.The question of the UK’s nuclear weapons is not primarily about employment. It is first of all a moral issue, then a strategic one concerning the UK’s place in the world and the international environment we wish to see, then one about spending priorities. Such weapons would, if used, constitute a mortal threat to humanity’s survival; they are massively expensive; senior military figures have described them as ‘militarily useless’ and said that they should be scrapped; and our possession of them encourages other countries to seek a similar arsenal. Conference does not accept the argument that the only alternative to the priorities of right wing governments is unemployment for our members. The threat of job losses has been used to oppose everything from health and safety, decent wages and conditions, sanctions against apartheid South Africa, ending the slave trade, or bans on the sale of weapons or torture equipment to brutal dictatorships. The election of Jeremy Corbyn presents an opportunity to fight for different priorities and a better society. As a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, the UK should give a lead in discharging its obligations by not replacing Trident. Crispin Blunt, the chairman of the Commons Foreign Affairs Select Committee has estimated the cost of Trident replacement at £167 billion, based on official figures. Money saved by ending the UK’s nuclear arsenal could generate far more jobs and be used for decommissioning, to sustain the process of defence diversification, vital to our manufacturing future, as well as other socially-useful forms of public spending. Conference resolves: 1.            That UNITE will support and participate in the Defence Diversification Agency 2.            To campaign to ensure there are good, socially useful, jobs for our members who might be affected by not replacing Trident 3.            To continue to support all members, including those currently working in Trident-related jobs, and to fight for continuity of employment 4.            To campaign against Trident replacement and for an end to UK weapons of mass destruction 5.            To support the work of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament

Another motion won the vote for submission instead:

Workers Uniting Conference recognises that our global union with the United Steel Workers, Workers Uniting, has been in existence since 2008. In that time the benefits of two similar Unions working in similar industries and for global corporations, have proved to be extremely beneficial, notably in papermaking and packaging, steel, oil and chemicals, transport, glass and other important sectors. This Conference believes that Unite members should be aware of the work of Workers Uniting and the support given to members of both Unite and the USW by the partner Unions. Therefore Conference calls upon the Executive Council to include news items and reports on Workers Uniting on both the Unite website, Unitelive and in the Unite printed magazine in order that the global solidarity work carried out can be understood by members.

The next NISC meeting will consider the motions agreed at the sector conference and how to progress them.

Tweet

Checking for discrimination in selection

There are many situations, from recruitment to promotion to redundancies, where employers make selections between people. You often hear people talking about the importance of doing "Equality Impact Assessments" and checking for discrimination, but I've always struggled to get guidance on how to actually do this.

Professional statistician Nancy Carpenter has worked with me to produce a guide to checking for discrimination in selection. It covers everything from how to get hold of data through to how to present it to your employer. I'm aware of several cases where analysis similar to what we describe has worried employers enough that jobs have been saved. I'd be interested to hear experiences from other activists.

Tweet

The government onslaught on TUPE rights - a threat to us all

Workers in IT Services often face being transferred from one employer to another as customer contracts are lost and won.  This process is covered by the EU "Acquired Rights Directive", which became UK law through the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employees) Regulations, commonly known as TUPE.

TUPE was meant to protect workers against having their terms and conditions worsened as a result of the change.  It only ever provided partial protection, with major gaps (for example in relation to pension rights).  There's a UNITE guide to the 2006 regulations here.

Now the government proposes to worsen the limited legal protection we have.  The outcome of the government's "consultation" is here.  Below is an extract from a union commentary on the proposed changes, which are expected to come into effect in January 2014.

The proposals, if implemented, will be very bad news for workers in many industries, but IT Services will be particularly badly hit.  They would make it easier for employers to dismiss workers, short-circuit redundancy consultation, make it easier for employers to change terms and conditions, and open the door to more arguments about whether or not TUPE applies when services switch between suppliers.

It has always been the case that strong union organisation is a better protection for employee rights than just relying on the law.  The changes will make this even more true.  And of course even though the law will still ban some activities by rogue employers, other government changes mean workers not in a union who need to make a tribunal claim will face the prospect of either stumping up sizeable tribunal fees or seeing "no win no fee" solicitors taking a large chunk of their compensation.

This is a government of millionaires helping their mates get richer by slashing the rights of working people.  This week I've been at a UNITE training course on TUPE where reps from different IT & Communications companies came together to learn how best to protect employees during and after TUPE transfers.  It may be possible for union members to challenge the legality of some of the changes as cases come up, but the danger is that workers lose their jobs, terms and conditions while such challenges grind through the courts.  Workers need to get better organised now to defend ourselves when TUPE rears its head.

Unite commentary on proposed changes to TUPE Regulations (5 September 2013)

The government has announced proposed major changes to the TUPE Regulations, including:

·         Restricting the service provision change rules
·         Permitting employers to seek to change terms and conditions derived from a collective agreement after 1 year.
·         Weakening unfair dismissal rights
·         Permitting consultation on possible redundancies before a transfer to count towards the transferees obligations to consult under section 188.

The TUC is concerned that several of the proposed changes do not appear to be consistent with EU law including the Acquired Rights Directive and the Collective Redundancies Directive.

TUPE protects employees' terms and conditions of work when a business is transferred from one owner to another. Staff automatically become employees of the new employer on the same terms and conditions as they were on before, and their continuity of service is also protected.

However, under the government's plans TUPE will not always apply when services are outsourced.

These changes will lead to the erosion of the pay and conditions for low-paid staff in sectors such as cleaning, social care and catering where outsourcing is common, says the TUC. It argues this will have an adverse impact on women, who are more likely to be employed in contracted-out services than men.

In addition, employers will now be able to re-negotiate changes to collective agreements one year after transfer. This will give them extra flexibility to cut pay and conditions after a transfer takes place.

The summary of the government’s proposals with TU side comments are as follows:

·         The Service Provision Changes rules (SPC) will be amended so that they only apply if the service is fundamentally or essentially the same following the transfer. The government argues this is simply codifying case law.

However this change could significantly limit the SPC provisions, with the risk that tens of thousands of service sector workers will lose out on TUPE rights. It will also cause huge uncertainty for employers and lead to increased litigation.

·         The government is proposing two major changes relating to TUPE protected pay and conditions negotiated through collective agreements. The government plan to allow employers to renegotiate collective agreements one year after a transfer. Any changes must be agreed and any changes must not be overall less favourable to employees affected.

This proposal blatantly attacks trade unions’ ability to represent working people. It victimises individuals covered by collective agreement. This approach is not consistent with the Directive. It’s also unclear how they could make this change in EU law.

·         The government is also planning to legislate following the CJEU decision in the Alemo-Herron to provide for a static approach to transferred terms and conditions.

The decision of the CJEU is very problematic and effectively means that the Acquired Rights Directive can be interpreted as providing a ceiling of rights rather than a floor of rights. The TUC plans to raise concerns via the ETUC.

·         Other variations to terms and conditions post transfer. The government also plans to amend regulation 4 to allow for unilateral variation of terms pursuant to a contractual provision if such changes could otherwise have been made.

It’s not clear what this means. We suspect the government plans to say that if employers were able to vary terms and conditions if a transfer had not taken place they should be able to do so after a transfer. The TUC will investigate further to check whether this change will drive a coach and horses through the Regulations.

·         A change of location will become an ETO reason justifying dismissal.

This will mean it will be easier for employers to sack staff after a transfer where work is undertaken in a different location.

·         Wider unfair dismissal rights: The government plan to amend Regulation 7 to ‘more closely to reflect the wording of the Directive’.

These changes will weaken unfair dismissal rights

·         Consultation on redundancies undertaken before the transfer will count towards the new employer’s obligations to consult under section 188 of TULR(C)A 1992.

This will substantially weaken protection for transferring staff. The proposal is also not consistent with the requirements of the Collective Redundancies Directive.

·         Micro firms (with 10 of fewer employees) who do not recognise a union will no longer be obliged consult with employee representatives on TUPE Transfers. They can inform and consult employees directly.

The Directive does not allow for a small firm exemption on this or other TUPE rights. It is essential that consultation continues with recognised unions.

·         The transferor will not be able to rely on the transferee’s ETO to dismiss an individual before the transfer.

This is welcome, although if the government had proceeded to make the proposed change it would have been in breach of the Directive.

·         Disclosure of Employee liability information: The current provisions are to be retained. The notification period will be extended to 28 days before the transfer takes place.

This is welcome, but is mainly a response by government to the business lobby.

Tweet

PCS members in HP to strike over pay and jobs

Solidarity to the PCS members in HP who are planning to start action short of strike over pay and jobs this Friday (26 April) and to strike on 29 April.  More information is on the PCS web site.

Tweet

Protest to defend Labour Councillor Kevin Bennett from disciplinary action for opposing cuts

I posted yesterday about the threat Kevin Bennett was facing of disciplinary action by Labour for voting against the cuts.  Today was his hearing - and the protest outside it at Warrington town hall.

I was very pleased to see a highly visible presence on the protest from UNITE, including officers and organisers, Executive Council members and members of the Regional Political Committee.  UNITE has long standing policy of supporting councillors who vote against cuts, but this is the first public sign I've seen of beginning to implement it.

 Kevin was among a number of speakers who addressed the crowd:

If we're serious about opposing the cuts to services and jobs, I think UNITE needs to move from a relatively passive policy of supporting councillors whether they vote for or against cuts, to actively asking councillors to vote against them, which would help increase the numbers and make it harder for them to be picked off.  UNITE should also make clear that we will continue to support councillors expelled from Labour for opposing cuts - including if they stand for re-election.

Tweet

Defend Warrington Councillor Kevin Bennett - facing disciplinary action for opposing cuts

Another councillor faces disciplinary action by the Labour Party this week - for opposing the cuts.

Kevin Bennett is a councillor in Fairfield and Howley in Warrington, and is a former member of UNITE's Executive Council.  He defied the Labour whip and voted against the cuts at a meeting in early March.

Kevin has explained his views clearly:

"We need to send a strong message of defiance to this idealistic, uncaring Tory led coalition government and show the people of Warrington that we have got the guts to stand up to them.

"I expressed my views on what I believe to be the views of many people, on having to implement cuts which are not of our making.  It is wrong that we should be in the firing line when all of this is a result of vicious funding cuts by this Tory led coalition government.

"This council could safeguard jobs and services for the next 12 months by using reserves and borrowing.  This would buy time to build a fight-back against this Tory led coalition government.  The Labour council's Executive Members and Portfolio holders are refusing to even consider this option.

"There is a definite correlation between the worst cuts and deprivation and I see it in my ward.  There must be NO compulsory redundancies within the council workforce, and we must fight to keep our services 'in house'.  Once they're gone they're gone and probably won't save us money."

Kevin is part of a small but growing band of councillors standing up against the cuts and who deserve our support.

There's a protest in support of Kevin at Warrington town hall 6-6:30pm, Thursday 4th April.  The town hall is on Sankey Street (WA1 1SR), a few minutes from Warrington Bank Quay station.  Go along and let the Labour group know that disciplinary action against Kevin would be intolerable.

Tweet

DHL-Howdens workers fight for their jobs

54 UNITE members employed in Widnes by DHL as delivery drivers for Howdens (joinery and kitchens) are fighting for their jobs against plans to close their depot.

Early in January they were given just 30 days warning of the intention to close the depot, threatening all their jobs.  They say "consultation" has been a farce and complain of attempted bullying and intimidation.

The workers believe that the work will be shifted to Yorkshire.  Given that the goods come from Runcorn, this would add costs in time, money and the environment.  The workers believe there is no genuine business case for the closure, but see it as an attack on a well unionised workforce.

An industrial action ballot is underway, but the delays required for compliance with the anti-union laws mean that action could barely have begun by the time the site closes.  This should be a warning to all workers given the government's plans to cut the minimum consultation period for large scale redundancies from 90 days to 45 - a step that would force many workers to defy the law if they are serious about fighting for their jobs.

The UNITE members are not sitting back and waiting though.  When not on shift, they have been busy staging protests.  Today they were at the Howdens Joinery in Manchester, right near my own workplace.  A few of us went to show solidarity and join the protest in our dinner break:

There is nothing more depressing than reading news stories about hundreds of jobs being lost without a fight.  This is usually due to workers lacking confidence and organisation.  Any group of workers fighting to save their jobs deserve everyone's support - if they win it can only raise the confidence of others.

You can find out more about the fight to save the Widnes jobs on Facebook (widnes.drivers) or Twitter (@WidnesDrivers) or Flickr.

Tweet

Government attack on redundancy rights

Yesterday the government announced its plans to cut the minimum period for employers consulting their employees before making large scale redundancies from 90 days to 45 days.  It's already easier to cut jobs in the UK than in many other countries, but the Tories and Lib Dems want to make it easier still.

The 90 day period only applies where an employer plans to dismiss 100 or more staff through redundancy in one establishment, so this change only affects bigger employers.

I was pleased to see that UNITE promptly put out a press release attacking the move.  This is an issue we should take into the workplaces too.  Many employees, whether union members or not, know from bitter experience how important the consultation period is for protecting jobs.  We need to mobilise them against this threat.

The consultation period is supposed to allow employees, usually through their unions, to get information from the employer and put forward ideas for avoiding the redundancies, reducing the numbers of redundancies, and mitigating the consequences of the redundancies if they go ahead.  This process often does save jobs.  Cutting the time available means fewer jobs will be saved.

The consultation period is also useful for individuals.  It gives them time to consider their options, to seek redeployment within the company and to look for work outside.  In my own workplace we have negotiated time periods better than the existing legal minimum and this has been a major factor in securing redeployment within the company for many staff.  Shorter consultation periods mean fewer redeployments, more lives wrecked and employers wasting more money making staff redundant and then hiring new ones.

There's another factor in this which unions need to take very seriously indeed.  The change would, when combined with the anti-union laws, make it extremely difficult for members to take lawful industrial action in defence of jobs.  The anti-union laws require the union to provide the employer with an accurate breakdown of the numbers and categories of members to be balloted 7 days before a ballot opens.  Preparing this can take weeks.  Ballots rarely run for less than two weeks, after which the union has to give another 7 days notice to the employer before lawful industrial action can begin.  So even if the union is perfectly prepared and can issue the notice of ballot instantly, without any checking of membership records (pigs might fly) you still need a minimum of about 4 weeks before action can begin.  If the government goes ahead with this I foresee more and more workers feeling that the anti-union laws give them no way of defending their jobs lawfully and deciding to take unofficial action instead.

I heard one government spokes-idiot referring to the proposed change as getting a better balance between employers and workers.  The employer-employee relationship is an inherently unequal one and rarely more so than in a redundancy situation.  Can workers decide to make their bosses redundant?  Yet the Tories and Liberal Democrats obviously think that the feeble employment protection workers currently enjoy gives workers too much power in the relationship and it needs to be reduced!  Is it too much to ask that Labour's front bench vigorously oppose this?

The proposals are fully in tune with the overall government approach, which sees working tax credits and other benefits being cut for the poorest, while corporation tax is cut for their city mates.

Tweet

HP European Alliance

I posted back in August about HP workers terminating their European Works Council (EWC) agreement in response to the failure to consult properly over massive job cuts.

industriALL, a major union federation which covers IT & Communications, and to which UNITE is affiliated, has built on this by announcing an "HP European Alliance" to coordinate the work of unions, works councils and representatives from the European Works Council - to try to give employees a more effective voice.

It will be interesting to see how this initiative develops.  It's common practice for employers to try to play workers in different countries or different unions off against each other, or to try to create conflict between unions and works councils which are each trying to pursue the interests of employees in different ways.  Cultural, political, legal and organisational barriers often get in the way of the unity employees need to have an effective voice and it is good to see an attempt to overcome this.  Will it help deliver real action to challenge job losses or to curb management by dictat?

Tweet

UNITE members at Coventry taxi manufacturing plant occupy

There's an ITV news report here and the local Express & Star covers it here. UNITE press release here.

Tweet

UNITE victory against offshoring at Capita IT Services

Many employers in the IT industry and beyond use the threat of moving work offshore to countries with low wages and few employment rights to try to persuade workers that it would be pointless or counter-productive to defend terms and conditions or fight for decent pay.

UNITE members at Capita IT Services, by voting to strike and calling action, have not only stopped the immediate threat of redundancies and jobs being moved offshore, but also secured a commitment to negotiate a new job security agreement.

This victory contains important lessons for workers in many industries - globalisation does not make workers powerless, if they get organised and are prepared to use the strength they have.

Tweet

Capita IT Services staff vote to strike over jobs

UNITE members at Capita delivered an impressive 4:1 vote for strike and 9:1 for action short of strike as part of their fight against redundancies, including plans to offshore their jobs to India.

Similar issues concern workers at many IT companies (and IT workers in other industries concerned about outsourcing) so many people will be hoping members win a a positive outcome to this dispute.

Tweet

HP workers terminate European Works Council agreement over dodgy job cuts

The failure of HP to consult properly over the latest wave of job cuts has prompted employee reps on HP's European Works Council (EWC) to vote to sue HP, terminate the works council agreement and negotiate a new one under more recent legislation.

The move is reminiscent of the decision in 2009 by reps on Fujitsu's UK Consultative Forum (UKCF) to terminate the UKCF agreement after lack of consultation over jobs, pay and pensions.  This paved the way for the replacement, Fujitsu Voice, whose Charter has far more legal weight.

UNITE's Tony Burke has posted more details of the situation at HP on his own blog.

Tweet

Emergency Motions from UNITE Policy Conference 2012

A few people have been in touch asking for the text of the Emergency Motions discussed last week.

I've scanned Emergency Motions 1-13 and posted them here.


As they were scattered across the days of conference, I've gathered the decisions on them here:

• Emergency Motion 1 Carcinogenic Diesel Engine Exhaust: Carried
• Emergency Motion 2 Coup d'etat in Paraguay: Carried
• Emergency Motion 3 National Collective Bargaining: Carried
• Emergency Motion 4 Withdrawal of Tax Credits for Strikers: Carried
• Emergency Motion 5 London Bus Strike injunctions: Carried
• Emergency Motion 6 Egypt: Carried
• Emergency Motion 8 Legal Aid Bill: Carried
• Emergency Motion 10 A Tax On Young People: Carried
• Emergency Motion 11 Hidden Agenda of the Localism Bill: Carried
• Emergency Motion 14 Failure to Negotiate on NHS Pensions: Carried

The remainder were remitted to the Executive Council for consideration along with other business that had not been dealt with when conference closed:

• Emergency Motion 7 Labour & Immigration
• Emergency Motion 9 Remploy
• Emergency Motion 12 Spanish Miners General Strike
• Emergency Motion 13 Closure of Coryton Oil Refinery

Update: A colleague has kindly sent me the text of Emergency Motion 14 Failure to Negotiate on NHS Pensions:

This conference deplores the action taken by the Secretary of State for Health: he has written to the Chair of the Staff-side for NHS Pensions Schemes effectively imposing the Government proposals on NHS pensions in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. In his letter dated 27th June 2012, he states;

“It is a matter of regret that two unions are still engaging in industrial action. They are also aware that the reason they can take this action without the Government withdrawing this offer is because of the responsible stance taken by the majority of NHS unions in their member’s interests. It is difficult to see how these unions can participate in partnership working implementing the new scheme whilst they are going down the route of confrontation.”

This appears to be misleading and untrue, we condemn this action. We ask the Executive Council to hold immediate talks with the TUC and other Health Sector unions to demand the full negotiation recommences with all recognised Trade Unions.

This Draconian approach will otherwise affect all current Public Sector union negotiations

Tweet

Decisions of UNITE Policy Conference, Thursday 28 June 2012

These were the decisions on Thursday:

• Composite 21 (motions 120, 122+amendment, 123, 124, 125, 126 & 127) Free Trade Unions: Carried
• Emergency Motion 5 London Bus Strike injunctions: Carried
• Composite 22 (motions 131, 132, 133, 134) Agency Labour: Carried
• Composite 22a (motions 129, 130) Swedish Derogation: Remitted
• Motion 128 Casual & Agency Labour: Remitted
• Motion 135 No to Employment Agencies: Remitted (with the amendment which was accepted)
• Composite 23 (motions 136, 137 & 138) Employment Rights - Equalities: Carried
• Composite 24 (motions 139, 140, 141, 142 & 144) Facility Time: Carried
• Motion 143 Active Support for Full Time Lay Representatives within the Public Sector: Fell due to no mover
• Motion 145 Trade Union Reform: Carried
• Composite 25 (motions 149 & 150) Redundancies: Carried
• Composite 26 (motions 152+amendment, 153+amendments) Blacklisting: Carried
• Motion 146 Homeworking: Carried
• Motion 147 The right to collective bargaining: Carried
• Motion 148 Works Councils: Carried
• Motion 151 Employment Law: Carried
• Motion 154 Information & Consultation Regulations - Making the best of an opportunity: Carried
• Motion 155 Time off for Lifelong Learning Courses: Carried
• Emergency Motion 14 Failure to Negotiate on NHS Pensions: Carried
• Motion 156 Protection of Self Employed Workers 2012: Fell due to no mover
• Motion 157 Working Time: Carried with amendment
• Motion 158 Protecting UK Standards and Qualifications: Carried
• Emergency Motion 4 Withdrawal of Tax Credits for Strikers: Carried
• Composite 7 (motions 46, 47 & 48) The Middle East and North Africa: Carried with Composite Amendment 7a
• Emergency Motion 6 Egypt: Carried
• Executive Statement ES4 Severance Payments: Lost
• Composite 27 (motions 159, 160 & 161) Severance Payments: Carried
• Reinstated Motion 1 Union Finances - Officers/Staff Pensions: Remitted
• Executive Council Report and Accounts: one point was referred back for the EC to reconsider, which was the restriction of the published expenses of senior officers under rule 19.5 to taxable expenses
• Motion 53 Workers in Turkey: Carried
• Motion 54 Workers Uniting and European & International Federations
• The rest of the business which had not been dealt with was remitted to the EC

Tweet