Lambeth UNISON News

LGPS BRANCH BRIEFING – 19 DECEMBER 2011

2011-12-19T16:09:00.002Z

This is the text of a circular received from UNISON HQ this afternoon;

Since 30 November the Local Government Association (LGA - the local authority employers' organisation) has moved quickly to establish some consensus over the direction of travel within the LGPS and establish some joint principles and a timetable for negotiation, starting in January.

The government and the LGA have accepted that the LGPS is different from the other public sector pension schemes because it is a funded scheme and has assets of around £140 billion at current prices.

There are some key points of agreement between the LGPS unions and the LGA:

 No change until 2014 - avoiding any change before the 2013 valuation

 Prevention of opt outs and maximising of membership to keep the scheme sustainable

 Independent and robust equality proofing at every stage

 Adequate time for unions and employers to consult at key stages of the process

There have been NO negotiations on the detail of future contributions or the design of the new scheme, though they will start in earnest in January, with a view to Regulations being laid in time for the 2013 valuation.

We have had to have Chatham House negotiations between ourselves and the LGA, while trying to get the Government on board, although Chairs of relevant UNISON Committees have been consulted over developments.

We will not know for sure that we can proceed until Eric Pickles as SOS gives the all-clear, which we may not be until Tuesday. We are optimistic that he will say yes and also that CLG will agree to suspend the statutory consultation underway on contribution increases.

As soon as we have agreement and a public announcement is made, the principles and timetable will be sent to you.

There will be a briefing for SGEs covered by the LGPS on 10 January, alongside the Pension Summit, when SGE members within the LGPS will be able to respond to the principles and timetable and agree the next steps.

Our responsibility as UNISON members is to seek the views of as many members as possible and communicate these to our SGE members so that they can take an informed decision on our behalf. Further information will be circulated about this in the near future.

Lambeth Council backs pensions fight

2011-11-14T23:23:00.002Z

Lambeth Councillors last week voted by a majority of more than two to one that the Council "supports local government employees in defending their pension scheme" and voted down by a similar margin an amendment that asked the trade unions not to take strike action.

This reinforces the message from the Council management on the intranet that; "On 30 November many people across the public sector are likely to be on strike and this is likely to apply to many colleagues across Lambeth. Staff who support industrial action will lose pay, but the council will take no other action against staff who strike as part of this national dispute."

Whilst it is never an easy decision to strike, and none of us can afford to lose money, the reality is that we stand to lose far more if we do not strike. As Lambeth Council employees you can be certain that you will face no adverse consequences, other than the loss of pay, if you strike on 30 November. The Council supports our campaign in defence of our pensions.

The branch urges every UNISON member not only to strike, but to prepare to come in and help us on the day with picket lines and demonstrations. The more active and effective we are on 30 November the sooner we can bring this dispute to a satisfactory conclusion and protect our pensions.

It's YES - and we are not alone!

2011-11-03T15:15:00.000Z

UNISON members have now voted to take strike action, beginning on 30 November, to protect our pensions from the attacks of the Coalition Government. Our ballot involved 1.1 Million members, a strong force in our own right. The overall YES vote is 78%!

However, we stand alongside more than twenty other trade unions

General unions

The GMB are balloting members in health and local government – their ballot closes on 16 November.

UNITE the Union are also balloting their public service members – their ballot closes on 17 November.

Civil Service unions

Civil Service trade union, PCS, having already balloted their members, are proposing to call strike action on 30 November.

The smaller civil service union Prospect are balloting now with a closing date of 14 November.

The senior civil service union, the First Division Association (FDA) are also balloting for action on 30 November.

The Northern Irish trade union NIPSA are also balloting for action on 30 November.

Teaching and education unions

Two teaching trade unions, the NUT and the ATL also took action on 30 June and do not need to ballot for the 30 November.

A third teaching union, the NASUWT are balloting now. Their ballot closes on 17 November.

The National Association of Head Teachers are staging their first ever industrial action ballot, which closes on 9 November.

The University and Colleges Union (UCU) have already balloted their members and are continuing to prepare for action on 30 November.

The ballot result from the Scottish teachers’ union – the Educational Institute of Scotland (EIS) is due on 3 November.

Welsh teacher’s union (UCAC) took strike action last month and are very much part of this campaign, as are the Ulster Teachers Union (UTU) who are also balloting now.

Health service unions

In the health service, the Chartered Society of Physiotherapy (CSP) are balloting their members to strike on 30 November – their ballot closes on 14 November, as does the ballot for the Society of Chiropodists and Podiatrists (SCP).

Crime and justice unions

The National Association of Probation Officers (NAPO) are balloting for action on 30 November with a closing date of 17 November.

The Prison Officers Association (POA) are prohibited by law from taking strike action but fully support our campaign – and have been known to ignore that law in the past.

Local Government unions

Constructions union, UCATT, are balloting their public sector members for action on 30 November.

Amongst smaller unions balloting for action on 30 November are ASPECT (a union for managers in Children’s Services) and the AEP (the Association of Educational Psychologists).

Members of the National Union of Journalists (NUJ) who work in the public sector and have joint membership arrangements with either UNISON or UNITE will be taking action on 30 November.

Lambeth Council to debate pensions dispute

2011-11-01T20:22:00.001Z

Following constructive discussions with the trade unions, Lambeth’s Labour Deputy Leader, Councillor Jackie Meldrum, has proposed Motion 13 to the Council Meeting next Wednesday evening, 9 November. The motions to the Council meeting are available online here.

This motion supports the trade union position in the current dispute with the Government over public service pensions – and in particular the trade dispute with the Secretary of State over the Local Government Pension Scheme which is set to lead to strike action on 30 November.

Councillor Meldrum’s motion states that the Council is disappointed that the Government has continually failed to negotiate fully and openly with Local Authorities and Trade Unions and regret that this has therefore made industrial action more likely. Council supports the Trade Unions in raising awareness of this issue and local government employees in defending their pension scheme. The motion then asks the Council to resolve to ask the Leader to write to the Chief Secretary to the Treasury to express Council’s concerns and urge the Government to rethink their proposals.

Unfortunately, Liberal Democrat Opposition Leader, Councillor Ashley Lumsden has proposed an ill-advised and ill-informed amendment to the motion which supports the Government rather than the trade unions, citing “demographic circumstances” which have nothing whatsoever to do with the Government’s deliberate cash grab on the LGPS. UNISON has offered to attend a meeting with Liberal Democrat Councillors to explain why they are going wrong!

UNISON and the other trade unions will be lobbying Councillors next Wednesday evening to support Motion 13 – and oppose Councillor Lumsden’s foolish amendment.

UNISON publishes LGPS pensions calculator

2011-10-22T19:20:00.000Z

UNISON has now published pensions calculators on the national union website. There are two calculators for those of us in the Local Government Pension Scheme, one which shows how much more we will be asked to pay up front if the Government get there way – and another which shows how much our pension will be reduced by and how we will have to work longer to get that pension.

There are two different options proposed by the Government, and two options put forward by the Local Government Employers, and for the long term future of the scheme there are a range of proposed “accrual rates” so the calculators offer you choices about these things so that you can see the full range of possible changes to your pension contributions and your pensions.

The calculators also ask you how many hours a week you work because that is relevant to the accrual of your pension. Because this is a national dispute the calculators are based upon the national standard of a 37 hour working week, whereas the London standard is 36 and – in Lambeth – we have had 35 hour working since the 1980s, now harmonised across the whole Council workforce. The branch has already raised this with the Union nationally and Regionally and suggested that variants of the calculator based on 36 and 35 hour weeks should be published.

However, an enormous amount of work has gone into producing these accurate calculators for this vital national dispute so we need to use these calculators now to understand in broad terms the scale of the Government’s attack on our pensions.

You therefore need to take Lambeth’s 35 hour week into account when using the pension calculators on the national union website as follows;

If you work full time – leave the figure of 37 hours (which is the default setting when you open the calculator).

If you work part time – instead of entering the number of hours you actually work each week you need to divide that figure by 35 and then multiply it by 37 (or, which is easier, multiply by 1.057). So if you work 17.5 hours then enter 17.5 x 1.057 = 18.5, or if you work 25 hours then enter 25 x 1.057 = 26.43.

If you work term time only – contact the Pensions Penguin at askthelambethpenguin@yahoo.co.uk

Here are the links to the national calculators again;

How much more you will pay

How much less you will get

All members should take the time to look at these pension calculators, and shop stewards should familiarise yourself with the calculator so that you can help members. Give yourself a bit of time and make a note of all the various ways in which the Government’s different proposals will hit you.

Examples of the impact of proposed changes to our pensions

2011-10-13T18:51:00.002Z

PENSION CASE STUDIES

Whilst the fight to defend our pensions is about much more than just the impact upon each of us as individuals, many members are asking what the individual impact will be.

Here are some worked examples of the impact of the Government's two proposed options for the immediate future of the Local Government Pension Scheme. These come with no particular warranty and are just our best attempt to illustrate what all the percentages and "accrual rates" mean in practice. These examples take no account of the detrimental impact on all our pensions of the change in uprating pensions in payment from the Retail Price Index (RPI) to the Consumer Price Index (CPI), which is estimated to have reduced the lifetime value of pensions for those who have not yet retired by between 15% and 20%. These calculations also do not take account of any of the possible changes that may be proposed in the negotiations which have not yet begun about implementing the recommendations of Lord Hutton (except that they do anticipate that the pension age in the LGPS will rise in line with the state pension age as the Government clearly intend). Otherwise, what follows is based simply upon a comparison of the Government's options one and two with the current (2008) Local Government Pension Scheme.

Because these examples are for Lambeth they are based upon the Inner London Pay Spine.

CASE STUDY ONE – THE FORTYSOMETHING SPECIALIST

Ed is 47 years old with 28 years service and is at the top of PO2. Under the current scheme he could expect to retire on an unreduced pension in eighteen years at the age of 65. Based on today’s salary for that grade his pension at the age of 65 would be around £23,200 on the basis of the current scheme. He currently pays 6.8% of salary in employee pension contributions (£198.65 a month before tax).

In Option One, his pension contributions will rise to £219.09 in 2012/13; £242.46 in 2013/14 and £254.15 from 2014/15 onwards, leaving him more than £55 a month worse off before tax.

His retirement age will move to 66, and after working for one additional year to get an unreduced pension that pension would be around £23,050. If he chose to leave at 65 his pension of £22,510 would be actuarially reduced to an estimated £21,160 – a cut in pension of over £2,000 a year for life.

In Option Two, his pension contributions will rise to £207.41 in 2012/13; £227.86 in 2013/14 and £239.54 from 2014/15 onwards, leaving him more than £40 a month worse off before tax.

His retirement age will move to 66, and after working for one additional year to get an unreduced pension that pension would be around £22,750. If he chose to leave at 65 his pension of £22,230 would be actuarially reduced to an estimated £20,900 – a cut in pension of more than £2,300 a year for life.

CASE STUDY TWO – THE TWENTYSOMETHING ADMINISTRATOR

Rachel is 26 years old with 2 years service and is at the top of Scale 5. Under the current scheme she could expect to retire on an unreduced pension in 39 years at the age of 65. Based on today’s salary for that grade her pension at the age of 65 would be around £17,000. She currently pays 6.5% of salary in employee pension contributions (£134.44 a month before tax).

In Option One, her pension contributions will rise to £148.91 in 2012/13; £165.46 in 2013/14 and £171.66 from 2014/15 onwards, leaving her £37 a month worse off before tax.

Her retirement age will move to 68, and after working three additional years to get an unreduced pension that pension would be around £15,790. If she chose to leave at 65 her pension of £14,640 would be actuarially reduced to an estimated £12,450 – a cut in pension of more than £4,500 a year for life.

In Option Two, her pension contributions will rise to £140.64 in 2012/13; £148.91 in 2013/14 and £155.12 from 2014/15 onwards, leaving her more than £20 a month worse off before tax.

Her retirement age will move to 68, and after working three additional years to get an unreduced pension that pension would be around £15,400. If she chose to leave at 65 her pension of £14,290 would be actuarially reduced to an estimated £12,150 – a cut in pension of more than £4,800 a year for life.

CASE STUDY THREE – THE FIFTYSOMETHING PROFESSIONAL

Jane is 55 years old with 33 years service and is at the top of PO1. Under the current scheme she could expect to retire on an unreduced pension in ten years time at the age of 65. Based on today’s salary for that grade her pension at the age of 65 would be £19,700. She currently pays 6.8% of salary in employee pension contributions (£188.73 a month before tax).

In Option One, her pension contributions will rise to £208.16 in 2012/13; £230.37 in 2013/14 and £241.47 from 2014/15 onwards, leaving her £52 a month worse off before tax.

Her pension age will remain at 65. Her pension will be around £19,330 – a pension cut of £370 a year for life.

In Option Two, her pension contributions will rise to £197.06 in 2012/13; £216.49 in 2013/14 and £227.59 from 2014/15 onwards, leaving her £39 a month worse off before tax.

Her pension age will remain at 65. Her pension will be around £19,250 – a pension cut of £450 a year for life.

CASE STUDY FOUR – THE THIRTYSOMETHING MANAGER

Dave is 35 years old with ten years service and is at the top of PO3. Under the current scheme he could expect to retire on an unreduced pension in thirty years time at the age of 65. Based on today’s salary for that grade his pension at the age of 65 would be around £24,130. He currently pays 6.8% of salary in employee pension contributions (£214.49 a month before tax).

In Option One, his pension contributions will rise to £236.57 in 2012/13; £261.80 in 2013/14 and £274.42 from 2014/15 onwards, leaving him almost £60 a month worse off before tax.

His retirement age will move to 67, and after working two additional years to get an unreduced pension that pension would be around £22,730. If he chose to leave at 65 his pension of £21,570 would be actuarially reduced to an estimated £19,190 – a cut in pension of more than £4,900 a year for life.

In Option Two, his pension contributions will rise to £223.95 in 2012/13; £246.03 in 2013/14 and £258.65 from 2014/15 onwards, leaving him £44 a month worse off before tax.

His retirement age will move to 67, and after working two additional years to get an unreduced pension that pension would be around £22,280. If he chose to leave at 65 his pension of £21,150 would be actuarially reduced to an estimated £18,830 – a cut in pension of more than £5,300 a year for life.

CASE STUDY FIVE – THE FIFTY YEAR OLD CUSTOMER SERVICES ASSISTANT

Sarah is 50 years old with thirty years service and is on the top of Scale 3. Under the current scheme she could expect to retire on an unreduced pension in fifteen years time at the age of 65. Based on today’s salary for that grade her pension at the age of 65 would be around £12,830. She currently pays 6.5% of salary in employee pension contributions (£109.02 a month before tax).

In Option One, her pension contributions will rise to £112.38 in 2012/13; £120.76 in 2013/14 and £129.15 from 2014/15 onwards, leaving her £20 a month worse off before tax.

Her retirement age will move to 66, and after working one additional year to get an unreduced pension that pension would be around £12,780. If she chose to leave at 65 her pension of £12,470 would be actuarially reduced to an estimated £11,850 – a cut in pension of £980 a year for life.

In Option Two her pension contributions will rise to £114.05 from 2013/14 onwards, leaving her £5 a month worse off before tax.

Her retirement age will move to 66, and after working one additional year to get an unreduced pension that pension would be around £12,680. If she chose to leave at 65 her pension of £12,370 would be actuarially reduced to an estimated £11,750 – a cut in pension of £1,080 a year for life.

If you have suggestions for further case studies please comment - or contact the pensions penguin at askthelambethpenguin@yahoo.co.uk.

And don't forget to vote "YES"!

Branch Consultation on 2012 pay claim

2011-08-17T08:40:00.002Z

Date: 17 August 2012

To Lambeth UNISON members covered by the NJC national pay negotiations

Dear Colleagues,

Consultation on the pay claim for next year

Monday was pay day for those of us employed by Lambeth Council and Lambeth Living. It’s the day on which I realise that we haven’t had a pay rise since 1 April 2009. At that time the Retail Price Index stood at 211.5, in June this year it stood at 235.2. This means that prices have increased by 11.2% since our pay last increased – they will have increased further before our next pay claim date of 1 April 2012.

The national union is asking branches to consult members on next year’s pay claim, based upon the decision of the national negotiators to recommend that we submit a claim for a “substantial increase” and for “an end to attacks on conditions of service.” The national negotiators thought that it would not be “realistic” to ask for the 11% which would be needed to put our spending power back to where it was in April 2009.

To get back to where we were then, the increase which would be required would be;
£2,290 at the bottom of Scale 4
£3,025 at the top of Scale 6
£3,730 at the top of PO1
£4,240 at the top of PO3
If you have been on any of those points in the pay spine since 1 April 2009, that is how much worse of you are as a result of the pay freeze imposed upon us by the employers and the Government.

These are hard times, with many jobs at risk and an attack upon our pensions – but for how many more years can we go on letting our standard of living fall as prices go up (currently at 5% a year) while our pay is stuck?

Whilst the national union is only asking us to consult you as to whether or not you agree with what the negotiators have already decided, the Branch proposes to seek members’ views on various options for the pay claim.

Because we have to respond to the national pay consultation by 9 September, over the holiday period, we are asking for responses from members by email to an address set up for this purpose - lambethunisonpay2012@gmail.com. Please reply by 8 September at the latest.

The full national circular has been circulated. The options on which the branch is seeking your views are as follows;

Option One The recommendation from the national negotiators – a claim for a substantial increase on all pay points which recognises the hardship being suffered by local government workers - in particular the lowest-paid.

Option Two The claim which would be necessary to restore the spending power of our pay, on all points, to the level we were at on 1 April 2009 – a claim for an increase of an 11% increase on all pay points.

Option Three A claim to restore the spending power of anyone earning the top of Scale 6 (£27,000), to address low pay by levelling up for those below that level and to offer some increase on all points – a claim for a flat rate increase of £3,000 on all pay points. I

n addition to considering these three options, the national negotiators recommend that we support the inclusion in the national pay claim of a demand for an end to attacks on terms and conditions.

Please bear in mind that the employers are unlikely to make any pay offer next year, just as they made no pay offer this year. To break the Government’s pay freeze policy and secure any increase in pay for any local government workers is likely to require national strike action, whether our initial claim is for a “substantial” increase, a percentage increase or a flat rate increase.

If you do not believe that we should consider industrial action to improve the living standards of local government workers you should support Option Four.

Option Four Not to submit a claim for a pay increase but to accept a further decline in our living standards until at least 2013.

Shop stewards are encouraged to organise meetings so that members can discuss this consultation exercise before responding.

Alternatively if you have any comments or questions, you can make them by posting a reply to this message online.

Please do take the time to respond to this message.

Many thanks,

Jon Rogers BRANCH SECRETARY

Lambeth UNISON public statement in defence of our communities

2011-08-09T13:49:00.001Z

Lambeth UNISON statement in defence of our communities

From last weekend there has been rioting and looting spreading across London. People in working class communities have looked on with fear as riots destroyed local shops and left some people homeless. Clearly we don’t support opportunistic looting or for acts of random violence. However, if we are to avoid a return to the social unrest and public disorder seen in the 1980s, this demands a response from our community and its leaders which goes beyond mere condemnation.

We must ask why are our young people so angry and how can we unite our community?

The police

The police killing Mark Duggan, acted as a spark for the recent riots.
This was not an isolated incident
Since 1990 320 people have died in police custody (or following other forms of contact with the police)[1]
Stop and search is used as a daily form of humiliation, especially of young black men.
In the student protests we saw violence used routinely against political protestors, including school students

Tory cuts destroying our communities

The deliberately savage reductions in public spending imposed upon our communities by the Coalition Government weaken our communities and create anger and despair.

In March Haringey Council approved cuts of £84 million from a total budget of £273 million. There was a savage 75% cut to the Youth Service budget, including: closing the youth centres; Connexions careers advice service for young people reduced by 75%; and the children’s centre service reduced. Haringey has one of the highest numbers of children living in severe poverty, and unemployment in the borough is among the highest in the UK. In London as a whole, youth unemployment is at 23%.

Lambeth Council have announced their intention to cut £76million from their budget in the next 3 years. This includes reducing adventure playground opening hours to weekends and holidays only; £1.45 million cut from Youth Centres and Holiday activities; Children’s social care cut but by £3.5million, deep cuts in the Connexions service with opening hours halved, and cuts in Buildings Schools for the Future; alternative education provision (Closing OLIVE School and cutting back Park Campus), and cutting the Young & Safe project which aims to reduce youth crime.

At the same time last year alone, the combined fortunes of the 1,000 richest people in Britain rose by 30 per cent to £333.5 billion. The wealthy bankers whose conduct caused the economic crisis continue to be rewarded with multi-million pound bonuses, while the jobs and pensions of public sector workers – the people dealing with the aftermath of the riots today - are under threat.

What needs to be done?

In order to avoid further riots two things are necessary. First, our police service must become transparently accountable to the communities it serves. There is legitimate and longstanding community concern about deaths arising from police action, and action to address this concern must not get lost in the cacophony of condemnation following the riots.

Secondly, the Government must reverse the disproportionate reductions in local government spending imposed upon Inner London so that we can maintain the social infrastructure which gives our young people a stake - and a voice - in our society. If the Government will not do this, then the responsibility falls upon Labour-led local authorities in London to represent the interests of their electors by fighting, with all means at their disposal, for the resources necessary to provide the vital services which sustain the cohesion of our communities.

The answer does not lie in David Cameron's "Big Society" or Lambeth's own "Co-operative Council" but in the defence of public services from a reckless attack by a Government which is indifferent to the social damage being wrought by their economic policies, some of the consequences of which have now been played out on the streets of London.

Lambeth Council needs urgently to review cuts already agreed and being made in services to young people in particular if we are to avoid further disorder and damage to our diverse, vibrant and tolerant community.

UNISON calls for an organised defence of public services and our communities, led by trade unions and community organisations and pledges to support a public meeting in Brixton in the next few days to discuss how to build this campaign.

[1] Inquest Statistics, http://www.inquest.org.uk/

UNISON response on Finance and Resources

2011-04-11T14:14:00.002Z

UNISON is being consulted on redundancies in Lambeth's Finance and Resources Directorate. These (below) were the comments submitted by UNISON to the Executive Director of Finance accompanying detailed counter proposals for several of the divisions within the Directorate; UNISON has now submitted comments on those areas of the Directorate where we have definite or provisional proposals to reduce the number of compulsory redundancies which are threatened. These proposals have been made in the context of your duty to consult “with a view to reaching agreement” about ways to avoid or reduce redundancies. Their combined effect is to save 33 filled posts, removing 52 staff from risk of redundancy and saving, in total £125,000 more than the management proposals. Reducing redundancies The UNISON proposals are made in order to reduce the number of threatened redundancies, and for the reasons set out in each of the divisional responses. Given the requirements of s188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 to consult “with a view to reaching agreement” on ways of avoiding or reducing redundancies, UNISON expects serious engagement with our comments and counter proposals and looks forward to further urgent discussion during the management review period. A failure to give serious consideration to the UNISON proposals would not be consistent with s188 of the Act and could lead to action by the trade union in accordance with s189, as well as making it more likely that any redundancy dismissals might be found to be unfair, having regard to s98(4) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. Gender Equality Duty The UNISON proposals also have the impact of reducing the disproportionate risk of redundancy to women workers as the net reduction in women workers at risk of redundancy is 38 and the net reduction in male workers at risk of redundancy is 14. Adoption of the UNISON counter proposals would therefore go some way to mitigate the discriminatory impact of the current management proposals and would be consistent with the Council’s duty under s76A(1) of the Sex Discrimination Act 1975. (This has now been replaced by the general duty in the new Equality Act since last week) A failure to give serious consideration to the UNISON proposals would not be consistent with the Council’s gender equality duty, and could increase the likelihood that redundancy dismissals of women employees in Finance and Resources could be found to amount to unlawful indirect discrimination contrary to s39(2)(c) of the Equality Act 2010 read with s19 of that Act.

Lambeth's offer on single status

2011-03-31T13:24:00.001Z

LONDON BOROUGH OF LAMBETH SINGLE STATUS AGREEMENT PROPOSED OFFER AND COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT DECEMBER 2010 1. Preamble The National Joint Councils original agreement on single status was reached in 1997. It required local authorities to carry out pay and grading reviews, but set no deadline for this. By 2004 it was recognised that progress across the country in carrying out pay and grading reviews had been slow. The NJC agreement in 2004 therefore set a deadline of April 2007 for the implementation of new grading structures. The Council is committed to reaching a negotiated agreement with the recognised Trade Unions on Single Status implementation. Should this be achieved, then the resultant changes to terms and conditions of employment will be incorporated into Individual contracts of employment through this agreement. The proposals contained in this document have been arrived at following an extended period of consultation and negotiation between the Council and the Trade Unions. They remain conditional upon the ability to reach agreement on all matters under discussion as part of single status implementation. 2. Employees covered by the Agreement This document has been jointly drawn up by Lambeth Strategic Human Resources and the Trade Unions to forward the Council’s approach to the harmonisation of the Terms and Conditions for all its employees in accordance with the 1997 and 2004 national Single Status agreements. All future variations to this document shall be agreed in advance by both parties Within this Agreement are the detailed benefit and payment arrangements applicable to all employees of the council whose contract of employment falls under the remit of the National Joint Negotiating Committee for Local Government Services (known as the Green Book). This incorporates employees who were previously employed under the national negotiating arrangements for former APT&C staff and Manual and Craft Workers. This Agreement however excludes those employees who are outside the scope of the National Joint Negotiating Committee for Local Government services which includes Youth & Community Workers, employees on Soulbury T&C, Teachers and Chief Officers. It also excludes agency workers and temporary consultants commissioned by the Council to undertake duties on its behalf. This Agreement acknowledges the relevant national agreement as the National Joint Council for Local Government Services as amended by this local Agreement, or as varied, altered or amended from time to time by local collective agreements made in conjunction with the London Borough of Lambeth and/or the Council’s Departments and recognised Trade Unions. 3. Parties to the Agreement The parties to this agreement are the London Borough of Lambeth (hereafter referred to as the Council) and the recognised trade unions GMB and UNISON (hereafter referred to as the Trade Unions). 4. Job Evaluation Scheme The Greater London Provincial Council (GLPC) Job Evaluation Scheme was formally adopted for the grading of any posts covered by the National Joint Council for Local Government Services (the ‘Green Book’) with effect from 1st April 2007 (and subsequently the use of the Greater London Whitley Council (GLWC) Job Evaluation Scheme ceased from that date). All employee job roles under the remit of this Agreement will continue to be evaluated under the new Greater London Provincial Council Job Evaluation Scheme (GLPC). This scheme has been recognised by both the Council and the Trade Unions as being able to provide a common basis for the grading of jobs in accordance with prevailing equal pay legislation. 5. GLPC Evaluators & Training All parties subject to this Agreement will ensure as far as possible that there are sufficient resources available to undertake job evaluations. All evaluators will be trained in the use of the GLPC Scheme and will assist with the re-evaluation of any post identified as requiring evaluation under this scheme since April 2007 that has not already been evaluated as a consequence of departmental restructuring. All parties subject to this agreement may also nominate additional candidates for training both in applying the scheme and in equality awareness in connection with the scheme. This training will be arranged by Strategic Human Resources as and when the need for additional evaluators is identified with reasonable paid time off granted (in advance) for the purpose of both training and job evaluations. 6. Job Evaluation Process All council wide posts subject to this agreement will be supported by a job description and evaluated in accordance with the Councils existing job evaluation procedures with the exception that there will be a single stage appeal process. 7. Former Manual Worker Job Evaluations All former ‘Manual Worker’ roles have already been evaluated under this scheme and will be re-graded to the new appropriate salary scale with effect from the agreed implementation date. These evaluations have, in every case, resulted in a proposed improvement to the existing basic grade (including the consolidation of bonus scheme allowances) and would be back dated to 1 April 2007. This is subject to the condition that the amount of any bonus scheme payments made for the period from 1 April 2007 up to the date of the implementation of re-grading payments shall be deducted from any compensation payments. The Council has confirmed that, in the light of serious concerns about their potential defensibility in equal pay terms, bonus schemes currently applicable to Manual Workers will be removed as part of this Agreement Compensation will be paid at a level that is the equivalent of up to 2 years further pay from 1 April 2005. . 8. APT&C Job Evaluations The Council is also committed to endeavouring that all APT&C recognised posts identified for re-evaluation under the GLPC scheme will be evaluated as part of a rolling programme of evaluations by April 2010 where they have not already been evaluated as a consequence of departmental restructuring. It is also agreed to compensate all other APT&C workers whose post’s grades have increased as a result of re-evaluation under the new GLPC scheme with the relevant back pay backdated to 1st April 2007 or any later date in circumstances where post-holders changed their roles and responsibilities since 1 April 2007. Appointment will commence at the bottom spinal point of the new grade whilst allowing for annual incremental progression. An evaluation has been carried out under the GLPC Job Evaluation Scheme of a benchmark sample of APT&C posts, which has confirmed that most existing grades are likely to be maintained, with just a small number of grades increasing and even less decreasing. The Trade Unions accepts the impracticalities of a joint job evaluation process for all posts council wide and agree to jointly moderate a sample of 10% of posts which maintain their current grading. The Trade Unions will however agree to jointly moderate all posts which either increase or decrease in grade as a result of evaluation under the GLPC job evaluation scheme. Any APT&C posts which result in a decrease to grade as a result of re-evaluation, may, have additional duties and responsibilities incorporated into the existing job description at the discretion of the Divisional Director as a means of enhancing the job in order to protect the current grading wherever this can be justified. (Please note that this paragraph is not agreed and further discussion is underway.) Both the Council and the Trade Unions appreciate that the purpose of the Pay & Grade review of all APT&C non manual workers is not to increase or decrease existing grades assigned to potholders as APT&C workers already have ongoing opportunity to request job evaluations via the Council’s established Job Evaluation policy. Any obvious disparities however will be dealt with through the joint moderation process. 9. Grading and Salary Structure The existing pay scale will remain the same but may be subject to review at a later date. 10. Allowances Allowances (including temporary) which can be objectively justified and continue to address local business requirements will continue to be paid in appropriate circumstances. These include: Acting Up allowances First Aid allowances Emergency or call out allowances Honorariums Residential allowances Sleeping in allowances All such allowances will be regularly monitored and reviewed. 11. Assimilation arrangements The Council’s proposes that those employees on former manual grades will be assimilated onto the minimum spinal point of the new grade. If the minimum point of the new grade is less than the employees existing basic pay plus allowances (but excluding overtime or other weekend enhancements) the assimilation point will be to the next nearest spinal column point on the pay scale. 12. Increases to pay and allowances Increases to pay and allowances will be in line with those determined nationally: by the National Joint Council for Local Government Services, regionally by the Greater London Provincial Council or as agreed locally by the Council. 13. Overtime and other Plus Rates An alternative inclusive rate of pay based for example upon additional pay increments or a percentage enhancement may be proposed by the Council where regular service delivery requirements suggest this may be a more appropriate option for the Council and the employees concerned. Such an alternative shall be negotiated locally in accordance with the arrangements for modifying Part Three of the Green Book. 14. Pay Protection Former Manual Workers - There is not a need to protect the base pay of former Manual Workers as part of Single Status implementation, as based on the evaluations for these posts under the GLPC Scheme, these will increase in every case (including the consolidation of bonus scheme allowances). APT&C Employees – As already indicated, the Council and the Trade Unions would aim to moderate any decrease to grade and seek to enhance roles, where this can be objectively justified, rather than the employee incurring any decrease to their grade. There will be no pay protection in circumstances where roles cannot be enhanced. 15. Working Week The Council has implemented a standard 35 hour working week for ‘Green Book” employees as part of single status implementation. Any employee working more than a standard working week of 35 hours will be transferred to this standard working week with immediate effect and any monies (for hours proven to have been worked in excess of 35 per week) owing to them will be backdated to 1 April 2007. 16. Parts 2 and 3 of the Single Status Agreement Part 2 – Nationally Applied provisions Part 3 – National Conditions that can be modified locally All allowances covered under Part 3 of the Green Book will be reviewed and revised arrangements for either removing them, changing them or incorporating them into basic pay will be consulted on. This could include, although not an exhaustive list the following: Consolidated pay Overtime Car allowances Working arrangements i.e. shift, weekend etc Agreed: ______________________________________ Date: Nana Amoa-Buahin Director of Human Resources _______________________________________ Date: Jon Rogers Branch Secretary Unison ________________________________________ Date: Bill Modlock Branch Secretary GMB ________________________________________ Date: Susan N Matthews Branch Secretary Unite the Union

Amendment for Branch Meeting

2011-03-24T13:12:00.002Z

The following amendment has been submitted to what will be a composite motion at tomorrow's branch meeting - the text of the composite motion will be available later this afternoon.

SAVE CHILDREN’S SERVICES IN LAMBETH
This Branch notes that;
CYPS Division faces the biggest cuts in jobs and services in the latest “reshaping” (260 jobs) including the deletion of the Connexions Service, the Targeted Youth Support Workers and workers in One O’Clock Clubs and Adventure Playgrounds and many vital administrative and support colleagues.
These cuts will have a devastating impact on the children, young people and families of Lambeth and the staff who lose their jobs and those who are left behind. The Council themselves acknowledge that children and young people in the borough experience high levels of need and child poverty.
This branch notes that these cuts are frontloaded and the cuts CYPS are supposed to deliver are much higher in the coming financial year than in later years (£11.8 million in 2011/12, £8.1 million in 2012/13 and £2.1 million in £2.1 million).
That in the last round of cuts the One O’Clock Clubs were successful in mobilising service users and their families and supporters alongside staff in a defence of jobs and services.
CYPS activists applaud the support we have already received from branch officers and stewards in other directorates in campaigning to defend jobs and services:
This branch therefore proposes that;
§ Building UNISON organisation/membership in CYPS and recruiting shop stewards in the division needs to be a priority for the Branch.
§ We resolve to arrange further ‘walkabouts’ in all CYPS workplaces with joining forms and Steward nomination forms and convene ‘surgeries’ for members to attend requesting the support of colleagues from other directorates where possible.
§ We will mobilise the service users and families of CYPS services in a mass, community and UNISON based campaign.
§ We campaign publically to defend of jobs and services in CYPS - This branch supports the public meeting “Save Children’s Services in Lambeth, Save Adventure Play & Youth Services” 12th April, Lambeth ACCORD, 6.00 PM
§ We should seek to organise a lobby of the Council/public protest against cuts in Children’s Services in Lambeth.
§ We will circulate a petition against cuts in CYPS
§ We should support the proposal consultative ballot for industrial action.
Proposed; Rebecca Townesend, Connexions Personal Adviser CYPS
Seconded: Andrew Tullis, UNISON Convenor CYPS

Branch Meeting 25 March

2011-03-20T11:15:00.002Z

As notified to branch members over the past couple of weeks, there will be a Branch Meeting of Lambeth UNISON at 12.30pm on Friday 25 March at Brixton Recreation Centre. We will be discussing job cuts and attacks on pensions and our guest speaker will be Heather Wakefield, UNISON National Head of Local Government.

What follows is the text of a circular to members setting out the motions received for debate. The deadline for amendments (to be sent to j.rogers@unison.co.uk) is 5pm on Wednesday 23 March;

Motions received for debate at Lambeth UNISON Branch Meeting on Friday 25 March at 12.30pm at Brixton Recreation Centre

Please submit any amendment to either motion to j.rogers@unison.co.uk by 5pm on Wednesday 23 March 2011. These will then be published at www.lambethunison.blogspot.com before noon on Thursday 24 March.

The movers of the motions will consider whether to “composite” the motions ahead of the meeting.

Motion One - Opposing Cuts, Job Losses and attacks on pensions

This Branch meeting condemns the Council’s “cuts” budget set on 23 February. We condemn the consequent threat to up to 637 jobs across the Council. We note that these cuts will include deep and devastating cuts in front line services, including;
The loss of school crossing patrols;
The dismissal of all parks rangers;
The deletion of all jobs in the One O’Clock Clubs;
Deep cuts in adventure play and libraries.

We also note that in many cases these cuts proposals contradict the Council’s equalities duties. In CYPS redundancy threats are hitting black workers hardest, in Finance and Resources, the jobs of women workers are particularly targeted for cuts, and in Cultural Services (ACS) job cuts target disabled workers.

These cuts come on top of many redundancies made already in the current financial year, including compulsory redundancies in CYPS and OCE, and the reduction by more than 300 of the number of agency workers in the Council over the past year. The cuts threaten hundreds of jobs, the devastation of valuable services and an intolerable burden of additional work on those who remain.

We endorse the action of branch officers in challenging the basis of the Council’s budget, questioning the adequacy of the Council’s redundancy notice and demanding a guarantee of “no compulsory redundancies.” We note that the Chief Executive has said that no redundancies will be made until at least 90 days after we receive detailed notification of reorganisation proposals in any particular area.

We also endorse the decision of the Branch Committee on 15 March to declare a trade dispute with the Council as a result of their refusing to give the guarantee, and to support requests from our members in libraries and the parks rangers for ballots for strike action against cuts and job losses.

We believe that these cuts come from the economic policies of the Tory Coalition Government and that we must therefore be part of a national campaign against those policies. We must therefore also support national action against the Government where, as in relation to public service pensions, this is possible and can defeat the Government.

We condemn the fact that the Government plan to reduce the value of our pensions by 20%, increase our pension contributions by an average of almost 50% and to increase the age at which we can retire. We reject this unjustified attack upon all public service workers and pensioners and believe that the TUC should coordinate national industrial action across the public sector in order to deliver a knockout blow to the Government and its plans for savage attacks upon our pensions.

We also believe that Labour Councils should resist rather than implement Tory cuts and that we must therefore be part of a local campaign against cuts, in our workplaces and the local community. We further believe that we must strengthen union organisation at every level in order protect jobs and services to the maximum possible.

We therefore resolve;
To call upon all members to attend the TUC March for an Alternative on 26 March;
To instruct branch officers, Convenors and shop stewards to organise regular UNISON meetings in every part of the Council, to aim to recruit as many non-union members to UNISON as possible, and to recruit shop stewards where we don’t already have stewards;
To ensure UNISON representation at every “start of consultation” meeting and to support UNISON members to prepare and campaign for counter proposals to management proposals designed to save jobs and services;
To call upon the Council to use some of the up to £30 Million in unallocated reserves to reduce the impact of cuts and to fund UNISON counter proposals which will save jobs and services;
To continue to monitor weekly the number and expense of agency workers and consultants across the Council and keep pressure on the Council to continue to reduce these in order to put more money into avoiding cuts;
To support any shop or section of membership who wish to be balloted for industrial action as part of our campaign against cuts and job losses, and to request the fullest support of UNISON Regional Office with any ballots;
To organise a consultative ballot of our members employed by Lambeth Council, to commence on Monday 4 April and conclude on Thursday 21 April to test support for industrial action across the Council;
To instruct branch officers to prioritise work to ensure the accuracy of our membership records in order to enable an official ballot for industrial action across the Council as a whole, in opposition to cuts and job losses;
To instruct all branch officers, Convenors and shop stewards to campaign amongst all UNISON members for a “yes” vote in the consultative ballot and in any subsequent official industrial action ballot;
To continue to support Lambeth Save Our Services, and to work with other organisations in and beyond the borough, to campaign against further cuts in jobs and services and against other aspects of the Government’s economic and social policies;
To publicise to all our members the scale and injustice of the Government’s attack upon public service pensions, and to campaign for support for industrial action to reverse these attacks and defeat the Government;
To campaign within UNISON and the wider labour movement for the widest co-ordinated national strike action to defend public service pensions, on the earliest practicable date.

Proposed – Jon Rogers, Branch Secretary

Motion Two - Strike motion

This branch deplores Lambeth Council’s savaging of 637 full-time equivalent jobs at a time of mass and rising unemployment, and the devastation of public services this would give rise to. Those keeping their jobs will inevitably be made to work harder to provide a worse service. Those who lose their jobs will face a labour market where five workers are chasing each vacancy. On top of this, there job seekers allowance is falling in value and housing benefit has been capped.

We note that this comes at a time when VAT has risen by 2.5%, inflation is running at 5.1%, we are being made to pay 3% more of our income in pensions contributions and our pay is being frozen for three years running. We also note that women and black workers are disproportionately affected by the council and government cuts.

This branch applauds the decision of Lambeth Living employees in Unison to strike against job cuts on 30 March. We also applaud the 100% support shown by librarians and park rangers in Unison for a strike ballot against cuts in their departments.

This branch also applauds the decision of Camden and Tower Hamlets Unison branches to ballot for strike action against the budget cuts, including school budget cuts. We also applaud the national strike action by UCU college and university lecturers against cuts, and the 93% vote for strike action against the pay freeze by Crown post Office workers in CWU. We note that the NUT and PCS have both taken decisions in principle to ballot for national strikes against the attacks on pensions and are actively seeking to coordinate action across the unions.

This branch agrees to:

1. Launch a campaign for strike action, involving lunchtime and after core hours meetings, weekly newsletters, workplace and departmental members meetings, solidarity visits to other union picket lines, a membership drive, press releases, lobbies and other protests.
2. Conduct a secret, secure consultative strike ballot from Monday 28th March through to Friday 8th April. The ballot will ask members if they are willing to take strike action or action short of a strike to defend all jobs and services and against compulsory redundancies. Ballot forms will be distributed at union meetings or by post and will be accompanied by literature or speakers outlining the reasons for a “Yes” vote.
3. If a “Yes” vote is returned, the branch committee will immediately reconvene this meeting to:a) ask the NDC/NEC to launch an official ballot from 18 April to 3rd Mayb) elect a strike committee, including as many representatives from different workplaces and departments as possiblec) organise a demo in Brixton with as many other unions as possible and Lambeth SOS.
4. Contact all other public sector unions, including GMB, NUT and UCU with a view to coordinating our campaign with theirs and, especially, taking industrial action on the same days.
5. Write to the NEC demanding that Unison launches national strike ballots in defence of jobs and services destroyed as a result of the national squeeze on local government finances, in defence of the LGPS pension scheme and in support of a real pay rise this year.

Proposed - Jeremy Drinkall, CYPS

Message to Branch Members 24 February 2011

2011-02-24T19:08:00.000Z

Yesterday's lobby of the Council

UNISON members yesterday participated in a peaceful and orderly occupation of the Council chamber which made an effective statement of the level of local opposition to the cuts being imposed upon the borough by the Tory-led Coalition Government. Here are some links to media reports about the event;

Coverage in Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/feb/23/protesters-occupy-lambeth-hall-cuts

BBC Coverage http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-12564264

Standard Coverage http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23926171-angry-clashes-force-lambeth-to-pass-budget-cuts-in-private.do

And from the Save Our Services website http://lambethsaveourservices.org/2011/02/24/hundreds-protest-council-budget-and-storm-the-council-chamber/

Today's announcement of proposed job losses

Today the Council has written to UNISON in purported compliance with Section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 to notify us of job losses arising from the budget set last night by the Council (in closed session). At this stage we have been notified of the likely loss of 637 full time equivalent jobs (approximately one fifth of the Council workforce) and that 84 staff who were offered severance or early retirement following the recent "trawl" have accepted their offers and will be leaving shortly. (The 84 leaving will reduce by 84 the number of redundancies which are being threatened).

The provisional distribution of these (full time equivalent) job losses by Council Directorate is as follows;
ACS 104
CYPS 260
F&R 64
HRE 149
OCE 60

These figures should be taken with a pinch of salt. They are approximate figures and neither these figures nor the letter to which they are attached meet, in UNISON's opinion, the statutory requirements for the provision of information to trade unions in a redundancy situation.

What next?

UNISON will be calling a Branch Meeting for all our members in the near future. Watch for details (which I hope to be in a position to confirm before the weekend). At the Branch Meeting we will have the most up to date information about what is happening in the Council.

UNISON will respond to the Council tomorrow challenging the adequacy of the redundancy notification which we have received. We will point out that the 90 day consultation period cannot commence until adequate information is provided.

UNISON will demand a guarantee of "no compulsory redundancies". Although the Government is responsible for savage cuts to Council funding - and must remain the main focus of our campaign against these cuts - we believe that the Council could utilise unallocated reserves to mitigate the impact of the cuts and could reschedule repayments into the pension fund to release additional funds in the current year. I attach, as a reminder, the detailed proposals which we put to the Council Leader making these arguments, which we will continue to make as we argue to defend jobs and services.

I hope that you will make every effort to attend the important Branch Meeting when it is convened, at which we will discuss every aspect of our campaign to save jobs and services.

I will recommend that we fight to defend jobs and services, job by job. We must be prepared to negotiate, to take legal action as we can, to lobby politicians and campaign in public and to make the sacrifice of industrial action. If the Council do not provide the guarantee which we will request tomorrow, I will recommend to the Branch Meeting that we declare a dispute and consider balloting for industrial action if necessary.

Two things you can do tomorrow to help strengthen UNISON's defence of jobs and services are, first, to recruit a non-member to our trade union. Together we are strong and the more workers are in the union the more we can achieve. Secondly, if you do not already have a shop steward in your section consider whether you would be willing to help. Contact myself or our Assistant Branch Secretaries Ruth Cashman (RCashman@lambeth.gov.uk) or Dan Jeffery (DJeffery@lambethliving.org.uk) to find out more.

Please also attend the TUC National Demonstration against the cuts on Saturday 26 March - and put that date in your diary now! (for further details see http://www.tuc.org.uk/theme/index.cfm?theme=alltogetherlanding ).The source of these cuts is the economic policy of the Coalition Government and we need to show massive opposition to force a U-turn from the Government. Come to the demonstration and bring your family, friends, colleagues and neighbours.

Locally the Save Our Services meetings will continue on the first and third Thursday of each month at 6.30pm at the Vida Walsh Centre. All UNISON members are very welcome.

Pensions

As well as attacking our jobs, the Government is threatening our pensions and our pension funds - and trying to make us pay more just for working in the public sector. I attach the first edition of UNISON's new Campaign News bulletin which sets out the various attacks which we face upon the value of our pensions. A change in the basis of uprating our pensions from 1 April will reduce the lifetime value of our pensions by a massive 15%. Proposals to increase pension contributions by an average 3% of our salary will mean a 3% pay cut at a time when we face a national pay freeze - and the £900 Million extra which the Government want to raise from members of the Local Government Pension Scheme will not go into our pension scheme but will be siphoned off by the Treasury to reduce the public sector deficit that was created by bailing out the bankers who are once again rewarding themselves with lavish bonuses.

Please take the time to read the attached Campaign News. Our pensions are important because they represent a promise that was made to us when we came to work in public service. Past generations fought for decent pensions for public servants and we owe it to future public service workers to defend what those who came before us fought to establish. Your pension is also a very important asset - it is your deferred pay and your guarantee of some dignity in old age.

Pensions are also important because they are an issue that impact upon many millions of workers - and therefore if we can mobilise effective opposition to what the Tories are doing to our pensions we will stand the best chance of inflicting a defeat upon the Government and turning the tide of attacks upon our jobs and services. Our Branch Committee has agreed to put a proposal to UNISON National Conference that there should be coordinated national action across all public service trade unions to defeat the Government's attack upon our pensions. For further information about UNISON's national campaign to defend our pensions visit http://www.unison.org.uk/pensions/index.asp.

Budget reductions and unallocated reserves - further correspondence

2011-01-30T21:07:00.001Z

UNISON received a response on Friday to our representations to Labour Councillors concerning the Council’s budget from Councillor Paul McGlone, Executive member for Finance. This is UNISON’s further response, incorporating the full text of the Labour Group reply to which UNISON is responding;

Dear Paul,

Budget reductions and unallocated reserves

Thanks very much for your prompt response on Friday to UNISON’s correspondence with the Group concerning unallocated reserves. I appreciate your taking this matter seriously and will respond to what you have had to say paragraph by paragraph. In general you make a persuasive case for the need to hold unallocated reserves but, as you may be prepared to agree, do not make a compelling case for any particular level of unallocated reserves.

You say “Firstly, Labour councillors are as angry about the Tory led Coalition Government’s attack on local government as Unison is, and as I am sure all Lambeth employees are. None of us came into politics to cut services or withdraw from helping the vulnerable in our community. But we can’t ignore the reality of our funding being cut by a third amounting to £79 million over three years. As a responsible administration elected in May with a strong mandate from Lambeth residents, we have a duty to them to deliver a balanced and legal budget to enable the council to continue to serve the most vulnerable and deliver basis services. As Labour politicians we will of course also do everything in our power to fight back against the government cuts agenda (as you say, to make them adopt an alternative economic strategy) or cause a General Election.”

We have a disagreement about the absolute necessity of balancing the budget, particularly if doing so actually prevents you from serving the most vulnerable and delivering basic services (School Crossing Patrols, for example, are a pretty basic service which many of us remember from our own childhood and which clearly serve the vulnerable).

However, from a pragmatic point of view, given the decision of the Labour Group on this point, it is more important for now that we discuss what should be done within the context of your decision to balance the budget.

You go on to deal with “the issue of reserves.” You say that; “The argument you are putting to us is the same as Coalition Government ministers have been making. They are implying it is a ‘choice’ council’s have, namely, the Government has drastically cut funding to councils by a third so we should use reserves to fill the gap created by them. This is rank hypocrisy on their part given they are creating the most risky financial environment for public services since the creation of the welfare state. In this environment financial reserves are needed more than ever.”

The fact that an argument is made (hypocritically) by Tory Government Ministers (including Tories in both the Conservative and Liberal Democrat parties of course) does not necessarily mean that it is automatically wrong. Councils do not have a choice about whether or not to hold reserves, but you do have a choice about the level of the reserves which you hold, and that choice needs to be made on the basis of balancing the risk of holding too low a level of reserves against the consequences of holding too high a level.

You go on to point out that “Lambeth’s ‘General Fund Reserves’ as at 31st March 2010 were as you state £28.1m. You don’t need to be an accountant to understand that the purpose of a ‘general reserve’ is to give some measure of financial cushion to absorb unexpected disasters or funding emergencies. The general professional ‘rule of thumb’ has been a general reserve of +/- 10% of our net budget, which for Lambeth currently means about £30m. Last financial year alone Lambeth has two service areas, Temporary Accommodation and Parking that overspent £10 million – it was only with good overall financial management that other service areas under spent to cover this, needing a £3 million call on reserves. Given Lambeth provides approximately 600 services, you can see how financial risks can arise unexpectedly, and had it not been for our ability to absorb the shock, we might have had to close a service down completely.”

Again you make a persuasive case for the principle of holding reserves, but not necessarily a compelling case for any particular level of reserves.

The 2009/10 statement of accounts states that; “the financial results for the year leave the General Fund (excluding schools) with a balance in excess of £28m, at the upper end of the recommended range (£15m to £30m).” (I have added the emphasis to the last few words).

In the same way the 2007/08 statement of accounts stated that “the financial results for the year leave the General Fund (excluding schools) with a balance in excess of £16.7m. This is at the lower end of the recommended range of £15m – £30m.” (Again, I have added the emphasis).

The officer report to last Thursday’s Finance Scrutiny SubCommittee repeated the following advice from last year’s budget report; “the minimum level of balances that the council needs to maintain to ensure financial stability, and so provide a strong environment within which services can be continuously improved, is £15m and that the council should plan to hold £30m in balances, which is approximately 10% of net revenue expenditure.” (I’ve added the emphasis again).

None of this is quite the same as a “general professional ‘rule of thumb’ (of) a general reserve of +/- 10% of our net budget, which for Lambeth currently means about £30m”. What the officer advice is actually saying is that you must be sure to hold reserves of at least £15 Million (approximately 5%) and that you should aim for £30 Million. As UNISON has already pointed out, it is only over the last couple of years that reserves have reached anywhere near this level.

Additionally, of course, if the Council’s net revenue expenditure is to be reduced by £37 Million then the amount required to be held in order to hold 10% of that figure will be reduced by £3.7 Million, from approximately £30 Million to approximately £26.3 Million (and the amount required to be held to meet the figure of 5%, described by the Chief Finance Officer as the “minimum level of balances that the council needs to maintain to ensure financial stability, and so provide a strong environment within which services can be continuously improved”, will be reduced by £1.85 Million, from approximately £15 Million to approximately £13.15 Million).

The officer advice which you have received, and acted upon over recent years suggests that there is a range for unallocated reserves from a minimum of about 5% of net revenue expenditure up to a desirable figure of about 10%. Within that range it is your responsibility as Councillors to budget for an appropriate figure, taking account of risks to financial management, but also of the consequences of service delivery of the impact on planned expenditure reductions of your decision in relation to the level of unallocated reserves. An initial level of unallocated reserves of £13.15 Million would, for example, comply with the officer advice, as well as exceeding the median level held by London Boroughs as at 31 March last year.

You continue by dealing, rightly, as follows with the “financial risks the council is carrying. The risk assessment around delivering £37 million Government cuts package is estimated at about 20%, which may need a call on reserves; we may be forced to lose over 1,000 jobs with the consequent redundancy costs, which the Government is not paying for; there still could be unexpected disasters or emergencies; there is a risk that the Council may overspend this year by some £4m (although I have been tough with managers that they need to manage within their budgets); and there is also a low probability of any under spends that could be added to reserves. The overall conclusion is we need some ‘reserves’ to enable us to absorb financial shocks and help deliver transformation in the future.”

The 20% “headroom” figure, suggested by the external auditor as identified in paragraph 1.20 of the report to Finance Scrutiny may be little more than informed guesswork, but, accepting it for the moment, it suggests that you should add a figure of around £7.4 Million to a planned level of unallocated reserves.

As far as the costs of redundancy payments are concerned, paragraph 2.4 of the Finance Scrutiny report notes that you decided not to seek approval to capitalise redundancy costs because, given your level of balances you knew you would not receive such approval. You do not indicate that you have in mind a particular sum which you feel should be added to unallocated reserves to take account of redundancy costs – if you have an estimate I would be interested to know what it is.

Furthermore, in relation to possible overspends, I note that projected overspends have been dramatically reduced towards the end of each recent financial year. The £4.2 Million projected overspend as at the end of November, to which you refer, represented a £9.2 Million improvement on the position at the end of October (as noted in another report to Finance Scrutiny last Thursday). A rigorous approach to financial management (which is to the credit of Members and senior officers) can be expected to reduce this overspend much further, if not eliminate it altogether.

You go on to point out correctly that the Council’s “accounts & reserves are subject to rigorous challenge by the District Auditor, External Auditor and we receive professional advice from the Council’s Section 151 officer (Chief Financial Officer) in regard to the level of reserves. The council will now be carrying a significant level of new financial risk and for that reason we need to structurally reduce what we spend to match our funding from government. All using reserves does is buy you a little time, not replace or resolve the structural funding problem.”

Both these points are valid of course, but the first point – that you are subject to scrutiny as to the level of your reserves – applies equally to every other borough and therefore does not explain why you hold the particular level of reserves you choose to hold (higher than many other boroughs).

Secondly, it is self-evident that drawing upon reserves serves only to delay cuts without resolving structural underfunding. However, since the Council has – quite rightly – been particularly critical of the Government’s “front loading” of cuts it is plainly inconsistent not to consider such delay if it is possible.

I particularly appreciate your final, cautionary note, in which you advise me to; “be careful how you interpret the figures you quote – I am told that Wandsworth Council only a few years ago was told off by the District Auditor for having £600 million (yes, £600,000,000 – 200% of their net budget in ‘unallocated reserves’!) and boroughs like K&C had 100’s of millions, both due to their ‘Thatcher endowment’ in the late 1980’s, which has rigged the local government funding formula in their favour for decades. We can only guess how this money has been ‘reclassified’ or spent!”

I completely agree that these questions need to be explored further – but I don’t accept that “we can only guess” about these matters.

There are Labour opposition Members on both those authorities who could provide the Regional Party with answers to the question as to where those sums of money have gone. Since we know that the Tory Coalition Government will, hypocritically, seek to pin the blame exclusively upon Labour Councils for the consequences of spending reductions largely driven by their own irresponsible fiscal policies, it would surely make sense for the Labour Party to do some work on the questions which you raise so that we can go beyond guesswork.

In conclusion, as I said at the outset, your response to UNISON provides a helpful and persuasive case for the principle of holding an adequate level of unallocated reserves. However, you do not make a compelling case for a particular “adequate” level of reserves. Reading your response alongside officer advice and comments set out in recent Statements of Accounts and reports to last week’s Finance Scrutiny, it would be possible to justify a level of unallocated reserves in the range between £15 and £30 Million.

Bearing in mind the Council’s statutory duty, under s188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 to consult “with a view to reaching agreement” about how to avoid or reduce redundancies, I will therefore repeat the request which I have already made to the Executive Director of Finance that, before the 2011/12 budget has been set, we should have further dialogue about the actual level of unallocated reserves. UNISON has also asked for further dialogue about the amount of the Council’s contribution, as an employer, to the pension fund in the coming financial year, in the same context.

Many thanks for your serious and considered response on the question of unallocated reserves, and I look forward to hearing further about this request.

Lambeth’s Budget for 2011/12 - UNISON's appeal to Labour Councillors

2011-01-28T08:05:00.002Z

This is the Executive Summary of a detailed report sent today by UNISON to Labour Councillors in Lambeth, responding to their proposals for the Council budget, which threaten 600 jobs and deep cuts to vital local services;

· UNISON opposes all cuts in public services and does not support a balanced budget at the expense of public services;
· UNISON recognises that Lambeth’s Labour Group has agreed to set a balanced budget;
· The budget will include “reserves” which, in accordance with official guidance, are intended to “cushion the impact of emergencies”;
· The higher the level of reserves which the Council budgets for, the deeper the cuts it needs to plan in order to balance the budget;
· Lambeth has increased its unallocated reserves considerably over the past four years (by £19.5 Million, more than 200%);
· Lambeth’s unallocated reserves are the fourth highest of any London Borough and £15 Million more than the average London Borough;
· If Lambeth planned to reduce its reserves to the London average in 2011/12 it could – for example - avoid all of the cuts which will “reduce” and “stop” services according to the officers’ report;
· UNISON believes that the Coalition Government attack upon public services is precisely the sort of “emergency” which should lead to the Council spending money from its reserves;
UNISON calls upon the Labour Group to rethink its budget proposals and have a dialogue with the workforce and the community about the appropriate level of unallocated reserves in the Council budget.

Lambeth Against the Cuts Rally

2011-01-18T16:38:00.000Z

Lambeth United Rally against the ConDem Cuts – Thursday 3 February 2011, 7 pm arrival & coffee – 7:30 pm – Coin St Neighbourhood Centre, Stamford St SE1.

The rally, which will have speakers and presentations from Lambeth SOS and Lambeth Right to Work – is to show the anti-cuts work happening in Lambeth and build for the TUC national demonstration on 26 March 2011 - the rally speakers are –

John McDonnell MP (Labour Party) LRC Chair
John Millington Morning Star journalist
Cllr Kingsley Abrams Lambeth Labour Councillor
Tom Taylor PCS London & South East Regional Secretary
Jon Rogers Lambeth UNISON Branch Secretary
Callum Williamson Communist Students
Maria Exall (CWU) TUC LGBT Committee Chair
Lee Jasper Black Activists Rising Against the Cuts
Anita Wright Charter for Women
Barry Camfield Liaison Committee for the Defence of Trade Unions
Anton Johnson Lambeth Trade Union Council
Ellen Lebethe Lambeth Pensioners Action Group
Steve Hack Lambeth Defend Council Housing

Union slams devastation of Council jobs and services

2011-01-18T16:24:00.000Z

Public service trade union, UNISON, has condemned threats to 600 jobs and vital public services in the London Borough of Lambeth.

“These 600 job losses over the coming year – one in six of the Council workforce – come on top of hundreds of job losses already made and in the pipeline,” said UNISON Branch Secretary, Jon Rogers.

“UNISON will resist these cuts, because they do not just hit our members’ jobs but also vital local services.”

UNISON predicts that services at risk of cuts and closures when the Council publishes its proposals will include Adventure Playgrounds and Youth Centres, with significant job cuts being proposed in Children’s Social Care. The Union also understands that the Council is planning to end the School Crossing Patrol Service with the loss of all the jobs and to dismiss all the Park Rangers.

“These cuts hit services which are vital to our young people who are the future of the borough,” said Mr Rogers. “The Coalition Government in Westminster have a lot to answer for in imposing these massive cuts on the people of Lambeth.”

UNISON is calling upon Lambeth’s Labour Council not to make these cuts, and is urging local people to support a lobby of Lambeth’s Cabinet meeting on Monday 7 February.

Branch launches consultative ballot

2010-10-02T19:56:00.001Z

The Branch Committee has now agreed a timetable for the consultative ballot on industrial action against job losses as agreed at our Branch Meeting on 5 July 2010. That meeting, attended by 225 members, agreed without opposition that we need to be prepared to take industrial action across the Council as a whole in order to resist cuts and job losses, and to oppose compulsory redundancies.

We know that the four hundred job losses which have been threatened since May, some of which are now being implemented, will increase after the Chancellor of the Exchequer announces the details of the Comprehensive Spending Review on Wednesday 20 October. Your branch believes that we must be prepared to use all means to resist cuts that threaten our jobs and will devastate vital local services.

Because of the rigid time limits and legal restrictions around official ballots for industrial action we cannot afford to wait further before commencing the consultative ballot. Should we need to hold an official ballot for industrial action we would need, in order to comply with the law, to give a week’s notice to the Council before the ballot, to allow at least three weeks for the ballot and to give at least a week’s notice to the Council before taking any action.

UNISON’s Regional Office will only approve a ballot if there is evidence that the members to be balloted will support action in the ballot. Therefore we need to know the views of members now if we are to be in a position to commence a ballot should we need to do so, which seems likely. In order to keep our options open to be able to ballot for strike or other industrial action we need to demonstrate a good turnout and a convincing majority of “YES” votes in the consultative ballot.

In line with the agreed policy of our branch, I would urge you to vote “YES” in favour of industrial action in the consultative ballot. We do not seek strike or other industrial action. We are negotiating with the Council on a daily basis to avoid and limit redundancies and have organised effective campaigning against job cuts which has already avoided and limited job losses.

However we do need to be able to call action if necessary if we are to be in the strongest possible position to negotiate with the employer. Those of us who have experience of previous rounds of budget cuts know that strike action, and other industrial action, have saved jobs and services in the past and can save jobs and services in the future.

If we fight to defend ourselves we may win and we may lose – but if we fail to fight we shall certainly lose.

Ballot papers for the consultative ballot will be despatched by post to home addresses from Monday 4 October. The deadline for return of the consultative ballot papers will be 5pm on Friday 22 October. If you have not received a ballot paper by Monday 11 October please email me at j.rogers@unison.co.uk for a replacement ballot paper. Further information about the ballot will be despatched with the ballot papers.

Elections for Convenors in Lambeth Council

2010-10-02T16:20:00.000Z

The Branch Committee has agreed a timetable for elections for Convenors (senior shop stewards) for the Council’s four Directorates.

Any two members in the relevant Directorate may nominate any current shop steward to stand as Convenor for Adult and Community Services (ACS), Children and Young Person’s Services (CYPS), Finance and Resources (together with the Office of the Chief Executive) (F&R&OCE) and Housing, Regeneration and Environment (HRE).

The deadline for nominations is noon on Friday 22 October and the nomination form is available online here.

In the event that there are contested elections the ballot period will run from 8 to 29 November. Watch this space for further information.

UNISON response to CYPS cuts proposals

2010-08-02T22:35:00.000Z

UNISON INITIAL RESPONSE TO
MANAGEMENT PROPOSALS TO
RE-SHAPE CYPS 2010

Firstly UNISON and the Joint Trade Unions do not accept the management consultation timeframes for the re-shaping of CYPS.
Therefore UNISON reserve the right to alter or add to this ‘initial response’ as we see fit in what we consider a reasonable timescale and expect that management will respond to and consider any further submissions from UNISON as would be reasonable and in keeping with good consultation and good practice.
The attached comments from UNISON should be read alongside all other comments and correspondence from UNISON and from the joint trade unions, all of which UNISON endorses and, for the avoidance of doubt, all of which contribute to our response to consultation which we consider to be ongoing.

1. Introduction

This document summarises some questions and comments from UNISON and should be read alongside all other comments and observations previously made and which will be made before and after 27 July. The context of this document is the duty of the employer to consult “with a view to reaching agreement” about ways of avoiding dismissals, reducing the number of dismissals and mitigating the consequences of any dismissals. To date we have witnessed no indication of a willingness or intention on the part of management to comply with this obligation.

2. The overview of the proposals

The “high level strategic business case document” does not provide any meaningful explanation for any of the specific proposals, which in many cases do not appear to be informed by this “high level” strategy but to reflect unrelated managerial objectives.

One indicator of the quality of this piece of work is that in section 1.2 it refers to there being “four principles” which will inform which services are prioritised – and then goes on to outline five distinct bullet points. It would be a poor use of management and trade union time to devote much further energy to this disappointing document.

3. Resources and Strategy Division

156 posts are being transferred into Resources and Strategy and reduced to 116 posts. This is a net loss of 40 posts but that includes the deletion of 24 vacant posts. However other vacancies are being retained and the total number of jobs at risk is higher than these figures would suggest.

21 staff are “category A” redundant. Additionally 46 staff are in eight different “category B” generic reduction groups from which a net loss of 14 staff is proposed. Therefore it is proposed to delete 35 filled posts as well as 24 vacant posts (19 more than required to achieve a net reduction of 40).

The business case document does not explain or justify why more than twice as many filled posts are being deleted as would be required to achieve the budget reduction which is sought. In the context of the statutory responsibility of the employer to consult as set out above, the following questions require a response;

Why are management proposing to delete 35 filled posts in order to achieve a net reduction of 40 posts in an area with 24 current vacancies?
Why are post deletions concentrated amongst lower grades?
Why is it proposed to have an additional SMG2 post in a slimmed down division?
Does the Total Net cost to base budget of the current structure include the cost of Schools HR posts currently in Inclusion and Standards?
What is the Total Net cost of the current structure exclusive of Schools HR?
What is the Total Net cost of the posts within Schools HR at present?

UNISON’s provisional view is that in order to reduce the number of dismissals, these proposals should be reworked in order to maximise assimilations at every grade band.

Workforce Strategy Early Years:
A number of individual submission’s have been management as part of the consultation by the members of this service and UNISON will be advising on management’s response.
Please also see attached document from Workforce Strategy Managers group submitted as part of the consultation process in conjunction with UNISON:
Please respond to points raised.

Workforce Development and the PDC

It is felt by staff in the service that current organisation of training administration does not deliver an efficient service or support quality improvement. There is no database to support the administration or to provide basic management information about training. It is unclear how the new CYPS structure will address this. There appears to be only one post responsible for training administration in the new structure, to replace the current 4 posts. This will rapidly lead to the breakdown of the current service. Please respond.

4. Buildings and Schools for the Future Division
Given recent changes in Government policy it is self-evident that further proposals will need to be brought forward in this area. There is no certainty that the LEP will proceed (or would have any purpose). Rather than subject staff in this area to two reorganisations in short order, UNISON recommends that management withdraw the current proposals and consult urgently on revised proposals once information is available to confirm the Council’s future requirements in this area. In order to avoid disadvantaging staff in this Division, all affected staff should be treated as redeployees in respect of other reorganisations within the Directorate.

Management have received several individual submissions on proposed structures before the Governments announcements for the BSF programme in June. Some of these submissions relate to the implications of TUPE transfers in relation to the formation of the LEP etc. How do management intend to answer these individual queries in regard to the LEP if the current proposals are not withdrawn?

5. Directorate wide reductions in Business Support posts

In addition to the proposals for each Division in the Directorate we have been presented with a paper proposing reductions Directorate-wide in “Business Support” (Admin) posts across the Directorate. These proposals impact upon 134.6 FTE posts across the Directorate (of which 107.6 FTE are filled posts). These posts are arranged in six “Category B” generic reduction groups (by grade) from which 44 posts (17 filled posts) are to be deleted.

UNISON points out that reducing presumed “back office” staff in order to protect “front line services” frequently produces hidden reductions in service delivery as “front line” staff have to devote more time to administrative functions and have less time available for direct service delivery. None of the documents with which we have been presented address this issue. The following questions therefore arise;

What analysis has been undertaken on the impact of the workload of other posts arising from these reductions in business support posts?
What training and support is proposed for other staff taking on functions of the deleted posts?

At staff consultation 20/07/10 management and senior HR admitted that the proposals to reduce staff numbers in this division were dependent on the outcome of the reshaping of the other key CYPS divisions and that the Assistant Directors of those Divisions were as yet unclear as to the level of business support they might actually need. This approach is deeply flawed and the generic reductions proposed in the business case cannot possibly be based on an accurate projection of the level of business support required throughout the service.
Therefore this information regarding business support given to UNISON as of 14 June 2010 is rendered absolutely meaningless and cannot be considered meaningful consultation and therefore also breaches section s188 notice.

UNISON assert that it make’s more strategic sense to reorganise the Business Support Division after the proposals for the other divisions have been finalised and the respective Assistant Directors have established what level of business support they actually do need.
Otherwise there is a danger that the generic reductions in Business Support could go too far and lead to under capacity in the immediate future?

What method of selection process will management use for the generic Business Support staff, whose JD’s have stayed the same, affected by the generic reduction process?
If there are no changes to the current JD’s (from 2005) of this group of workers what skills/knowledge base will they be assessed on?
UNISON also require a justification for this and any other selection method/criteria used throughout the process.

6. Specialist Division proposals The new proposed Specialist Division is based on the existing Social Care Division from which there are no post proposed post deletions (but see section 5 above). A total of 21 posts are being transferred into the Division, increasing the establishment from 422.09 FTE to 443.09 FTE.

There are no redundancies threatened in this area as a result of the proposals for this Division but there is also no information on vacancies. UNISON therefore requests;

A schedule of all vacancies remaining in the proposed structure for the Specialist Division, and;
A list of all agency workers (and consultants if any) in the Division indicating which post(s) (if any) they are covering.

7. Universal Division proposals in outline

The new Universal Division will provide services open to all children and young people through three Sub-Divisions; School Standards and Improvement; Community Children, and; Education Strategy and Planning.

At the level of Divisional Management there appear to be proposals for the deletion of four filled posts – however, the wilful obstruction of the Trade Union role through the unprecedented managerial refusal to provide us with the “implications on posts” table showing staff names obscures information.

UNISON requests a corrected version of the table on p.16-17 which includes errors (for example one PO8 post which is being deleted shows the post holder’s category as “C” rather than “A” – the three SMG2 posts all show the post holder’s category as “C” which is also clearly an error). These are significant material errors of fact which contribute to our overall assessment that CYPS are failing to comply with their duties under s188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992.

7a. School Standards and Improvement Sub-Division

This area sees significant cuts, including;
Deletion of the EMA (Ethnic Minority Achievement) team;
Deletion of the SEN (Special Educational Needs) Literacy team;
Deletion of the National Strategies team;
Deletion of the “Best for All” team;
Deletion of schools IT support;
Reduction of School Improvement Adviser and Teaching and Learning Consultant posts.
This is described in the document as an overall reduction of “about 70” posts.

In practice this translates into the deletion of 34 posts (23 filled posts and 11 vacancies) as “Category A” (additionally 21 casually employed interpreters and translators see their roles eliminated). There are also fourteen filled posts in two generic “Category B” reduction groups from which a net loss of ten filled posts is sought (in some cases groups are described as “Category B” although only vacancies are being deleted – “Category B” vacancy deletions account for a further 7 posts reductions. The total number of post deletions is 51 posts (of which 33 are filled posts) plus the 21 casually employed staff.

However some of these redundancy proposals are ideologically driven rather than being budget driven. For example the deletion of the SEN literacy team (the cost of which is – according to the document – “almost fully covered” through service level agreements with schools) is justified on the basis that a local authority “should act as a commissioner rather than provider of services.” At the meeting with management on 12 July it was suggested to us that the document is misleading and that the costs are not in fact “almost fully covered”. The financial information we requested regarding the SEN team deletion (which should have been provided at the outset) which was provided on the 19 July 2010 showed that the annual subsidy was only £40k on expenditure of about £250k and UNISON does not agree this cost justifies deletion of the team, but rather a strategy to increase income.
This justification for these redundancies does not reflect the overall explanation of the reasons for redundancies offered to us by the Council in the Chief Executive’s letter in May (or in the “high level” document from CYPS in June). It is not compliant with s188 for the employer to mislead us as the reasons for proposed redundancies in this way. In order to reduce the number of redundancy dismissals, UNISON proposes that management withdraw the proposed deletion of this team pending consultation with schools on the future of this service.

In order to try to retrieve the position created by management’s failure to comply with the Council’s obligations, UNISON also requests the following information immediately;

The total net cost of the current service were it to be provided by commissioned agencies?

7b. Community Children Sub-Division

This is another area in which redundancy dismissals are being proposed for reasons which do not relate in any way to the justification for redundancies notified by the Council to the trade unions in purported compliance with s188. Within this area three PO9 posts, one PO6 and one PO4 are directly assimilated into new posts. Otherwise in the One O’Clock Clubs and Adventure Play all posts are deleted – even though sufficient posts are being created that no redundancies are financially necessary. Between these two areas this amounts to the deletion (as “Category A”) of 79 posts (of which 65 are filled posts). At Kennington Children’s Centre the posts of 9 staff are deleted as Category A (8 of which are filled) (some posts here are part time so the Full Time Equivalent (FTE) figures are 6.28 FTE posts (5.28 filled). Additionally 9 staff are in a “Category B” generic reduction group from which 7 filled posts are amongst the 10 posts being deleted.
Across the Community Children Sub-Division there are therefore a total of 80 filled posts being deleted. At the same time 84 new posts are being created. It is clear that local management (who are themselves generally proposed to be assimilated) are using the threat of redundancy dismissals to drive through changes to job descriptions and working hours, whilst giving themselves the opportunity to selectively dismiss staff at public expense. It is outrageous and unacceptable that senior management propose to offer redundancy payments to staff unnecessarily at a time when the Council needs to economise more than ever before.

Bearing in mind that the consultation in which we are attempting to take place in spite of obstruction from CYPS management must be consultation “with a view to reaching agreement” about ways of avoiding dismissals, UNISON has proposed that management withdraw the proposed redundancies in this Sub-Division and consult separately upon proposals to change job descriptions or working hours without threatening mass dismissals. Management’s continuing refusal promptly to comply with this reasonable request strongly suggests that CYPS management do not intend to comply with the requirements of s188.

In the case of One O’clock clubs UNISON are again disappointed that the reshaping exercise being proposed appears to be driven by spurious “service improvement justifications” rather than any budget difficulties. It should be noted that these plans for so called ‘service improvement’ are based on a consultation exercise which took place in 2006.
UNISON would like to ask why there has been no up to date consultation with parents and service users?
However, if management and Lambeth Council want to see consultation with parents and service users in action they need look no further than the level of support that has been shown for One O’clock Clubs at the huge Trade Union/Community lobby of the CYPS sub-scrutiny committee- July 19 2010, the lobby of the Council Cabinet 26 July 2010 and over 500 signatures and comments collected so far on petitions in support of the service.

UNISON is also asking for managements comments on the One O’clock Club staff submission presented to Executive Director for CYPS, Councillors A. Lumsden and J. Best 23/0710.
The main points of which are as follows:

Why are all posts below P.O. level in One O’clock Clubs being deleted? These are frontline staff and it has been established that these proposed deletions are not budget lead. Indeed, the staff complement in the proposed new structure will be increasing by approximately twelve posts and in some cases, hours extended.
Why have the play leaders been downgraded in the proposed new structure and had their hours reduced? Can you explain what is different in the new J.D.s to warrant the above changes?
Why is a longstanding inexpensive service being obliterated in favour of SureStart Children’s Centres when the original Sure Start remit was to bring new initiatives whilst not affecting existing services?
We are a cost effective service running on a resources budget of £480 per year (providing there is not a freeze on spending) per club, making a total of £4, 800 a year for all ten clubs in our section at present. Why would management think it a good idea to change a well respected and well used service, already reaching all sections of the local community in favour of a more costly venture? Outreach workers from Children’s Centres already use the One O’clock Clubs service to access the vulnerable families that have always been supported by the club staff. Testimony to this has been made many times over the years through verbal and written comments such as ‘saviours of sanity’ and ‘life savers’ by parents and carers using the service.
Why are all managers’ posts still in place with some seemingly having assimilation rights? Who deemed this to be so while not giving the same opportunity to the One O’clock Club and Adventure Playground workforce?
If consultation started in June, why was the signage on One O’clock Club buildings already changed to ‘STAY AND PLAY’ in May? Who decided to erase the identity which had been built up over 45 years? Who was consulted?
Why do we have so many managers when the Clubs were run effectively by one manager for the majority of years they have existed? Is this “job creation” just for the sake of it?
Are the proposed changes the reason why our protective clothing has not been replaced, despite repeated requests at shop steward/management meetings after over the past three years? Several samples have been tried and sizes for all staff forwarded to management but still we are waiting.
At the shop steward/management meeting’s with JT at least 5 years ago we proposed the use of 3 or 4 peripatetic workers instead of pool staff and also the re-introduction of deputy Playleaders would have given Senior Playleaders more scope to better work in conjunction with other practitioners to offer a more cohesive partnership whilst retaining the ethos of the One O’clock Club Service which the public value and want to retain. We are not adverse to change and have over many years been part of various Directorate changes and sub-division of our service (the creation of Play Projects being one) but these proposals are not justified to better the serve the public in any shape or form. Why now are some of our suggestions being used to facilitate these proposals when they were deemed to be unviable back then?
As workers in a frontline service, we feel aggrieved that these proposals do not take into account the many years of hard work and goodwill put in by staff who between them have a total of nearly 300 years service. We have worked a total of nearly 300 years service. We have worked to build an environment that has been respected and appreciated by generations of families, and by reading comments on petitions, is still valued and very much wanted in its present form. These people are the lifeblood of the community and their feelings and requirements should be paramount when proposing change – we wouldn’t be in existence today if this service hadn’t been providing what the public wants.
(Submitted by One O’clock Club UNISON stewards 23/07/2010)

UNISON would also like to draw management’s attention to their historic failure to provide One O’clock Club staff with adequate (or for many years any) access to computer and intranet facilities. There has been an ongoing saga, bordering on the farcical, with regard to providing these staff with Laptop Computers at their respective workplaces, UNISON have complained to management about this many times to no great effect. Even now provision of working laptops is inadequate and this has discriminated against this group of workers in terms of consultation, feedback etc. in the current reshaping process.
UNISON are deeply concerned that this historic failure by management will discriminate against some staff members when accessing IT skills in future. This would be unacceptable and discriminatory.
Again UNISON would call on Lambeth and management to work with One O’clock Club staff to improve the service without resorting to use of redundancy procedures to cover up for past management failures

Kennington Children’s Centre: consultation and staff comments.

Staff at Kennington Children’s Centre are particularly aggrieved that the management business case highlights supposed deficiencies regarding the service and the supposed need for a reduction of posts. However, no mention is made of the of the historic failure of management to support this staff group, address issues and staff concerns or implement staff suggestions to improve the service.

Kennington Children’s Centre was brought under direct Council control due to serious problems regarding the then management of Henry Fawcett School (problems with the school not the management of the Children’s Centre).
If management have known that the Kennington Children’s Centre was operating at an over capacity of staff since then, then they have had years to address this issue in consultation with the staff group.
Yet in all this time there has been no attempt to redeploy staff at Kennington into other areas of the service where there are staffing shortages and no offers of suitable alternative employment for staff etc.
Staff at Kennington put forward ideas to their management to increase fees and charges that would bring in revenue and contribute to the Centre funding; this has not been considered by management until now.

7c. Education Strategy and Planning Sub-Division

This small Sub-Division takes on some of the functions of the current “Building Schools for the Future” Division. 3 posts (2 filled) are deleted as “Category A” and 1 new post is created.

8. Targeted Division Proposals

Targeted Services (as opposed to Universal Services) are provided for specific groups of children and young people. Overall the presentation of staffing information in this division is probably least satisfactory and most confusing.

In the new structure these services are managed as; Specialist Youth Service; Community Youth; Inclusion, and; Change Management and TAC (Team Around the Child). At Divisional Management level there are three “Category A” deletions and three senior staff affected by the deletion of two posts in a “Category B” generic reduction group within the overall framework of the reduction from nine to five posts at this senior level.

Youth Support Service Response: Submitted by UNISON in conjunction with Youth Support Service staff: Please respond to the following:

Under “Establishing Community Youth Services” Part E of the “Establishing Targeted Division Proposals” (P.75):

3.1 & 3.2: makes absolutely no explanation of how the service will link with multi-agency teams, no diagrams and no knowledge of Youth Work practice amongst management. This could be seen as just ‘wishful thinking’ which seems quite typical of most reorganisations of CYPS since its inception.

4.2: This work is detached work and not outreach and is defined by a professional protocols from the National Youth Association. They don’t know what they are doing as management have no Youth Work knowledge or the theories that inform it.

4.4 Hub co-ordinators are only one of two full timers per Youth Centre and yet their workload is meant to cover face to face work too and management of up to 7 p/t workers, this is an impossible job if all the alleged multi-agency teams are using the building and need support. It makes more sense to have three full timers as the workload is being spread amongst part time staff, who at best will not be able to deal with many of the situations they face

4.10 The refugee project that was lauded by Ofsted is not being delivered anywhere and has collapsed, with staff being sent to various sites. There is no programme to cover the project and young people have slipped out of Council contact.

These are small things, the main contention is that more cuts will be made then necessary for budget reductions of full time workers and the money that could maintain them is being transferred into Hub Co-ordinators who provide less face to face with young people and part time workers who will have little or no specialised experience.
As the cuts hit targeted services, more young people will end up at risk and the first line of defence will be the experienced full time workers who are in service, not centre co-ordinators catering for imaginary partners and multi-agency teams who might use the youth clubs for their work.
Part of the argument is that there are too many full time staff on each site and no work to do, this is because they have taken large sections of the work away and passed them on to partners like Fulham FC Kickz and commissioned groups, without consulting over what young peoples’ needs are, beyond having a chat with Lambeth Youth Council who have no remit to represent young people. There is no voting process and in many young peoples’ eyes the YC has become an elite group of friends often paid in vouchers to attend meetings and front expensive ad campaigns ( see ‘Read the Label’).

Group work programmes for NEET young people cannot be carried out by Youth Offending Services, as they are not trained in Group work and alongside PAYP workers can only carry out a mentoring or tagging role.
Full time Youth Workers provide the only real intervention work with young people within the structure, before they become criminalised and supported by other aspects of the service.
By this time it may be too late. Also there is no mention of the work that is carried out by full time Youth Workers in trying to combat Gang violence and recruitment, most of which occurs in Youth clubs and their surrounding communities,
Commissioning attempts via ‘Young and safe’ initiatives are well and good, but the facilitators leave and can’t build the lasting relationship that a vulnerable young person needs to get past their negative lifestyles.
An example is the much lauded Xit Programme that won the Guardian Community Award in 2009, as now an externally commissioned group refused to work with young people at various youth clubs (i.e. Gas Gang at Marcus Lipton Youth Club) as they were deemed to be too dangerous.

With fewer workers who can work outside of evening hours individually, or as a group worker pulling Gang members in for reflection and other opportunities, the situation in Lambeth will deteriorate and many young people will not receive the life chances they deserve.
Management have said at consultation meetings that they expect part time workers to be specialists, but the four evenings a week (or one Saturday for an evening) will mean anyone who is a specialist will find the work too intensive and will stay in their full time specialist role wherever that may be. The only part timers we have attracted over the years is young people and young women specifically who struggle to deal with the challenges of youth clubs and get positioned in support roles co-ordinating accreditation, youth volunteering etc, leaving even less face to face workers to lead intervention programmes before young people get caught up in the Youth Justice system.

Lastly all staff should be able to go whatever post based on their experience, skills and knowledge and not on whether they have a degree or not. Most have worked for Lambeth a long time and have shockingly never been service supported to qualification, till 2009. We could seriously have a talent drain if qualifications are enforced and yet if all posts are filled by unqualified staff, the ratio of 50% staff to be qualified by 2014 can be achieved. Recent graduates have struggled with our young people, outside of Youth forum type settings where the young people are aspirational and need little or no support.
(Submitted on behalf of Youth Support Staff 27/07/10)

UNISON is also forwarding the following submission by members of the Association of Educational Psychologists (Lambeth) for management response:

Association of Educational Psychologists (TUC Affiliated) Lambeth Branch

The Association of Educational Psychologists (AEP) is the trade union and professional association for Educational Psychologists (EPs) in the United Kingdom. AEP is organised exclusively for and by EPs and currently has 3250 members across England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Educational psychologists work with children and young people aged from 0-19 but the majority of their time is spent with school-age children. They play a key part in helping shape how educational settings approach a vast range of educational issues including curriculum development, Special Educational Needs, gifted and talented support and behaviour management.

Proposed Restructure of Children & Young People’s Service (CYPS)– Key Concerns and Risk to Future Service Delivery for the Educational Psychology Service

The proposed restructuring of CYPS / budget cuts represent a serious threat to the delivery of vital Educational Psychology Services (EPS) within Lambeth.

Key Concerns / Risks Associated with a Reduction to current service provision

Lambeth is a diverse borough with high levels of need and scores highly on many indices of social deprivation.

Risk to Core Statutory Services

Ø The Educational Psychology Service currently carries out psychological assessments which are an essential part of the Statutory Assessment of the needs of children and young people with special educational Needs (SEN) carried out under section 323 of the 1996 Education Act.

Ø As an absolute minimum, we require 6.9 FTE Educational Psychologists (EPs) to carry out the core statutory responsibilities of the local authority.
Ø The original cash limit for the EPs was set at £359 007 (already £279 000 short of the cost of statutory services).
Ø A further proposed cut of 42% leaves the service with a budget of £210 007, which will only fund 2.5 EPs (* 6.9 EPs needed for the minimum statutory service). This has recently been amended to £290,473.
Ø The proposed cuts to the core EPS budget, if ratified, mean that Lambeth will be unable to fulfil its legal responsibilities in relation to statutory work from September / October 2010.
Ø This would leave the Local Authority in breach of its statutory duties. This would in turn impact on Lambeth’s Annual Performance Assessment, lead to increased parental complaints to the Special Needs and Disability Tribunal (SENDIIST), possible complaints to the Ombudsman, Judicial Reviews and complaints to the press.

Risk to Preventative Work – Traded Services with Schools

Ø The EPS supports schools through a consultative model of service delivery in which we work closely with teaching staff and families to assess pupils’ needs and plan jointly to meet these needs preventatively within an inclusive environment. We provide training, run parent groups (for children with autism for example), work closely with schools and other agencies to safeguard children, including contributions to Child Protection Case Conferences)

Ø We work collaboratively with schools and other agencies to ensure that children and young people’s needs are identified and addressed in a timely manner. Failure to carry out such work may lead the Local Authority to face litigation in relation to a failure to identify disabilities (such as Dyslexia) or leave Lambeth in breach of its statutory duties (to carry out a systematic assessment of developmental and educational needs) in relation to the Children Act (2004) as happened in Lambeth in 2006.

Key Questions to put to the officers of the local authority:

How will the local authority ensure that the restructure of CYPS and the proposed budgets allow the council to fulfil its statutory duties win relation to the EP role/Statutory Assessment of Children with SEN?

Without the support of traded EP services how will schools within the Local Authority successfully include children with a range of SEN? How will the Local authority carry out all mandated Statutory Assessments without vital preventative work in schools?

We urge you to:
Support the continuation of current ‘traded services’ with schools. These must be allowed to continue, since these provide a vital preventative service, minimises requests for Statutory Assessments (since schools are supported in managing pupils needs) and ultimately will save the council money as the need for expensive specialist provision will be minimised.
(Submitted in conjunction with UNISON by AEP- Lambeth members)

8a. Change Management and TAC Sub-Division

There are 7 Category A post deletions of filled posts plus one PO6 post which is identified as Category B but this appears to be an error. There are ten staff in Category B. The fact that in this Sub-Division the budget information is provided in outline serves to emphasise the inadequacy of the information provided in respect of those Sub-Divisions for which this information is unavailable.

8b. Inclusion Services Sub-Division

There are significant staffing reductions in this area. 23 posts are deleted as Category A (of which 20 are filled) and a total of 41 staff are in 8 different “Category B” generic reduction groups from which there is a net loss of 11 filled posts (as well as 3 vacancies). The total reduction in posts is therefore 37 posts (31 filled posts).

UNISON has highlighted that the issues around the proposed deletion of the team of EWO’s, which should be funded by buy back from schools, are essentially similar to those raised in relation to the SEN team above. These proposed redundancies do not related to the justification for redundancies offered to us by the employer.

UNISON is not convinced that the proposals in relation to the EWO’s have not been influenced improperly by an individual with a motive to develop a private company to replace this service.

In order to reduce the number of redundancy dismissals, UNISON proposes that management withdraw the proposed deletion of this team pending consultation with schools on the future of this service.

Please see the counter proposal below advanced by members of the EWO Team to that proposed in the ‘Targeted’ consultation document.

The EWO team would like to respond to the proposals for ‘Establishing the EWO Service’ in the Targeted Division’ as set out in the Consultation pack (June 2010).

The proposed structure in the targeted Services consultation document is untenable for the following reasons:

There is no clear structure as to how court work will be forwarded to the courts officer, the post has now been placed in another division, and the same also applies to Penalty Notices which has proved to be invaluable to schools and needed in order to reinforce the LA position.
Statutory & legislative work that is carried out by EWO’s was not mentioned in the consultation document.
There is no clear structure with regards to CME pupils and how this will be referred to the CME officer in respect of 10 day targets for schools, EWO are the first point of call when reporting a child missing education.
The insinuation that FSW carry out a similar role to EWO’s does not corroborate the present trend within schools. Family Support Workers are not attendance focused they are family focused and therefore do not place emphasis on attendance and punctuality. the overlap of their role and EWO’s is not as clearly defined, as mentioned in meetings with management
Parents have the right to refuse working with FSW unlike the EWO whose role it is to ensure good attendance and punctuality by using legal means.
It is also not clear how the LA plan to serve parents and young people in respect of the fair access protocol when giving advice.
The schools have not been given clear guidelines on how to manage cases that are outstanding and referrals that currently need to be made.
The schools need the EWO presence on site in order that the relationship they have with parents is not compromised and that parents are able to seek guidance and support when they believe the school is not complying with regulations. The long arm approach proposed in the document will not facilitate this working practice.
The EWO service provides information first hand to parents with regards to school places and also transfers mid year. Giving parents realistic advice, and also putting them in contact with other EWO’s professionals throughout the Greater London Area.
It has also not taken into consideration parents who make application to home educate their child/children.
Previous attempts by the LA to run the EWS with only 3 members of staff have not been successful in the past and this was highlighted by the poor figures in year 06/07, 07/08 08/09. Although the LA have stated that the onus lays more with schools historically schools have shown that they are unable to cope, without substantial LA backing via the EWS service.
Clear improvements have been seen more recently, in the attendance figures for schools across the LA in the academic year 09/10 and this has also been recognized nationally. It is also reflected in truancy patrols carried out this year when hardly any children where identified as truanting from school.
The oncosts have not been clearly defined or looked to see where reasonable deductions can be made, without affecting the service such as changing full time contracts to term time.

We therefore ask the Authority to reconsider this ‘deletion’ and seek solutions to retain the service in order to continue building the authorities and the schools credibility with statutory government agencies.

In order to continue to provide a comprehensive service the schools, parents and young people with Lambeth we propose the following.

Alternate Structure for EWO Service

In order to sustain a credible EWO service and maintain the current trend of buyback from school and the increased attendance and punctuality targets within the borough, the following structure is being proposed, in place of the one in the Targeted consultation booklet.

· Snr EWO (PO2/3) term time
· EWO SO2 x 5 - term time
· EWO will visit primary schools that purchase the SLA for half a day and secondary schools for a full day.
· In order to charge fairly and take into account the amount of strategic work and consultation with outside agencies and other statutory organizations the charges proposed would be as follows:

Primary £410

Secondary £510

The AIM structure will be revised to in order that it is more realistic for the ease of schools to facilitate referrals. The EWO service will continue to provide strategic and consultation advice.

The EWO’s undertake the following roles to assist schools in promoting good attendance

· EWO - helps to ensure that children referred to them, attend school regularly and punctually at the place where they are registered.

· EWO works with a School on early intervention strategies and referral processes to enable swift progression of casework when a child has poor attendance and/or persistent absence

· EWO will progress the casework further by carrying out a home visit to set targets with the parent/carer
· EWO will refer to the Courts Officer to progress the casework further.
· Two audits a year will take place where an EWO will inspect attendance and admissions registers in every Lambeth school creating a report where action needs to be taken to improve.
· EWO’s will carry out truancy patrols regularly. This is where EWO’s are walking the streets in conjunction with the police to identify children and young people of compulsory school age who should be in school.

Schools do not want their relationships with parents jeopardized and so require the EWO to advocate on behalf of both the school and parents, the EWS service is the link between other services and the first point of call to the following services

Ø Housing & Planning Dept.
Ø Looked After Children Team
Ø Social Services
Ø Library Service
Ø Hospital Tuition Service
Ø Inclusion Outreach Officer
Ø Speech and Language Therapist Team
Ø Educational Psychologists

In comparison to the staff ratio of neighbouring boroughs it appears that in order to have a sustainable service that meets the needs of targeted children, at least 6 EWO’s are required, to sustain the service and provide legislative and statutory duties.

Lambeth = 7 EWO servicing 51 Primary’s 13 Secondary’s (current team)

Below are the ratios of staff in our neighbouring boroughs:

Wandsworth: 15 EWO –both secondary and primary
Southwark: 15 EWO - 60 primary 14 secondary
Croydon: 9 EWO 120 schools
Westminster: 8.5 EWO Primary 40 Secondary 9
(Submitted on behalf of EWO team members 27/07/10)

8c. Specialist Youth Services Sub-Division

This area includes the Youth Offending Service, Young and Safe and the Family Intervention Project. In addition to the direct impact of job losses the management document itself highlights the risk of excessive workloads in this area. Two posts are deleted as “Category A” (one of which is filled) and 27 staff are in “Category B” generic reduction groups from which a net loss of six filled posts and three vacancies are sought. The overall loss is of 11 posts (7 of which are filled posts).

Consultation reveals that staff in this sub-division are particularly concerns about the impact on workloads that reducing posts in the service will have.

8d. Community Youth Services Sub-Division

This area includes what remains of the Youth Service as well as Connexions. 23 posts are deleted as “Category A” (17 of which are filled posts) and 21 staff are in two “Category B” generic reduction groups from which a net loss of 16 filled posts are sought. Therefore the total reduction in posts is 39 (33 of which are filled).

The larger generic reduction group is of full time youth support workers (a reduction from 23 down to 8) which is accompanied by an increase in the number of part time youth support workers from 21 to 36. There are also 15.5 FTE other new posts in the structure. (Overall the net reduction in posts is only 15.5, from 104 FTE to 88.5 FTE).

UNISON rejects the imposition of part time working in this way, in circumstances in which the business case provides no meaningful justification for this shift. We have asked for an explanation (provision of which is a prerequisite for the commencement of meaningful consultation) and this is awaited.

A Connexions staff member has communicated the following concerns and comments directly to UNISON, please could management respond to the following:

“The proposed job losses will have an enormous impact on individuals and their families as they struggle to pay rent, mortgages, travel, food and other living costs.
But the job losses will not just devastate individuals and their families.

Job losses are a cut to the services where the posts come from.

I am currently employed as a Connexions Personal Adviser in Children and Young People's Services and I have been reading the recently published 'Children and Young People's Service (CYPS) Service improvement Plan 2010-13' with interest.

In "Appendix B - Delivering Lambeth Council's Priorities in 2010-13" the "department's priorities under each corporate outcome (are listed)".

One stated priority is "further increase number of young people in employment, education and training (EET)". It is proposed that one Connexions Personal Adviser will lose their job in this round with three more due to go by the end of the year. It is not clear to me how a further decrease in young people not in education, employment and training can be achieved when experienced specialists are going to be lost.
Lambeth is an incredibly poor borough as is acknowledged by your own statistics. Again, from the 'Children and Young People's Service (CYPS) Service improvement Plan 2010-13' you explain in 'The Lambeth Context' that "poverty affects many children and young people in Lambeth...poverty is associated with social inequalities and exclusion that are manifest in poor educational outcomes, poor health, anti-social behaviour and general lack of ambition and aspirations".

In a letter to staff on 25 May 2010 Derrick Anderson claims "the aim of the re-organisation is to work more effectively and maintain or deliver better services with fewer resources and approximately 400 fewer posts".

This statement is completely disingenuous. Services will be devastated by job cuts and the resulting cuts in services. If you want this scale of cuts you have to accept that services will be impacted.

A further example. How is the deletion of the EMA (Ethnic Minority Achievement) team, the SEN (Special Educational Needs) Literacy team, the National Strategies Team, the 'Best for All' team, the schools IT support and the reduction of School Improvement Adviser and Teaching and Learning consultant posts (Lambeth UNISON letter to Phyllis Dunipace 29 June 2010) going to support the continuation of the achievements in Children and Young People's Services as outlined in the 'Children and Young People's Service (CYPS) Service improvement Plan 2010-13' foreword by Councillor Pete Robbins and Phyllis Dunipace including "Lambeth schools attaining the best ever GCSE results which have exceeded targets...the second lowest gap in the country (of achievement at GCSE level between those on free school meals and those not)".

Many other examples could be cited showing exactly the same concerns.

I would also like to make some general comments about the consultation. Firstly that Lambeth should comply with their legal obligations with respect to Trade Union consultation. There should have been an equalities impact assessment before the commencement of consultation (which there was not) and there should be detailed financial information included in all business case documentation for the reshaping as a prerequisite to meaningful consultation. It is completely unacceptable that management propose to delete filled posts whilst creating vacancies and refusing to assimilate staff.

Management have generally failed to take account of the impact of post reductions on workloads of remaining staff and should be carrying out risk assessments to determine what the impact on workloads will be. As stated above, the needs of children and young people in Lambeth remain undiminished and teams and services should not be expected to do more with less”.
(RT Connexions)

9. Overall picture of job losses

Overall, based on the analysis above and with the caveat that it is not possible to assess the number of job losses in the Change Management and TAC SubDivision of the Targeted Division, there appear to be almost 300 filled post deletions, compared with a figure of 250 in the “high level strategy” document and 215 in the Chief Executive’s letter in May.

The variation between this figure and the original figure of 215 post deletions is accounted for by two main factors.

Firstly, a number of vacant posts have been deleted.

Secondly, and outweighing this factor considerably, in some areas managers have used this opportunity to delete more filled posts than they “need” to to achieve spending reductions, creating new posts into which they are not assimilating all of the threatened staff and/or abandoning the provision of services funded (or which ought to be funded) by “buy back.”

UNISON believes that the hallmark of these disjointed proposals which are presented inconsistently and with very variable levels of information and explanation, is that in a number of areas managers are using the excuse of the budget crisis to pursue other agendas and that this is aggravating the overall redundancy problem by at least one hundred filled posts.

10) Problems with the consultation process

UNISON’s participation in the consultation process has been materially impeded by acts and omissions on the part of management, all of which must be rectified immediately if consultation is to proceed.

First, the refusal of management in CYPS to meet the Council’s normal standard of information provided in a reorganisation by letting the trade unions have the names of affected staff is as unhelpful as it is inexplicable. Since there could be no “data protection” issue given that staff initials were published alongside organisation charts showing names, the only consequence of the management refusal has been to delay the necessary work of the trade unions. UNISON considers the presentation of information in the normal format to be a prerequisite for the commencement of meaningful consultation.

Secondly, the quality of equality monitoring data has been (at least until today) unacceptably poor. An Equality Impact Assessment should have been undertaken at the initial stage and its interim results shared with the trade unions. UNISON considers that this is a prerequisite for the commencement of meaningful consultation.
Please see UNISON initial comments and breakdown of the so called “Equalities Impact assessment” we received as of Friday 23 July 2010 (below).

UNISON’s initial analysis of data from the Equality Impact Assessment

This presents an initial analysis of data from the Equality Impact Assessment for the CYPS Reshaping proposals. It assess whether there is a statistically significant difference in the risk of redundancy facing staff with reference to gender, race and disability. For gender and disability no significant difference is present. However there is a highly significant difference in the risk of redundancy facing Black employees compared with White employees and this requires further investigation.

Introduction

The basic data in the Equality Impact Assessment given to the trade unions on 22 July should have been available at the commencement of consultation (and UNISON does not accept that consultation can be said to have commenced meaningfully prior to receipt of this information).

The purpose of an Equality Impact Assessment is to analyse data to determine whether or not the Council is complying with its duties under the Sex Discrimination Act, Race Relations Act and Disability Discrimination Act as well as other requirements of legislation and/or Council policy.

It is very significant to an employee's experience of a reorganisation whether or not they are at risk of redundancy. The data in the Equality Impact Assessment enables us to analyse the incidence of risk of redundancy with reference to various characteristics of employees relevant to the Council’s statutory equality duties.

The proportions of staff with one characteristic (in terms of gender, race or disability) who are at risk or safe can be compared with the same proportions for staff with a different characteristic and simple statistical tests can determine whether or not there appears to be any significant disparity requiring further explanation.

(It is easy to perform such calculations online - see http://www.graphpad.com/quickcalcs/contingency1.cfm or http://faculty.vassar.edu/lowry/odds2x2.html.)

Staff who are “at risk” and staff who are “safe”On the one hand there are employees in "Category A" (whose jobs have been deleted) and in Categories "B" and "C/B" (who face a possible redundancy selection). These employees may be characterised as "at risk".On the other hand there are employees in "Category C" (who are being "assimilated" into jobs), those experiencing only a change in line management and those experiencing no change at all. Whilst these employees are certainly affected by the reorganisation they are not at risk of redundancy and to that extent may be characterised as "safe".Of the 1190 staff in CYPS 442 (37%) are at risk and 748 (63%) are safe.

Gender – no apparent disparity in risk of redundancy

Of the 867 Female staff 310 (36%) are at risk and 557 (64%) are safe.

Of the 386 Male staff 144 (37%) are at risk and 242 (63%) are safe.

This data can be presented in tabular form as follows;

at risk
safe
Total
Female
310
557
867
Male
144
242
386
Total
454
799
1253

Using the Chi square test the two-tailed P value equals 0.6431.

The association between rows (gender) and columns (risk of redundancy) is considered to be not statistically significant. This means that there is no apparent gender disparity in the risk of redundancy in the CYPS reshaping proposals.

Race – significant disparity in risk of redundancyTwo groups (Black and White) between them comprise a large majority of the workforce and therefore, for the purposes of this initial commentary a comparison is made between the experience of these two groups.

Of the 602 Black staff in CYPS 256 (43%) are at risk and 346 (57%) are safe.Of the 467 White staff in CYPS 137 (29%) are at risk and 330 (71%) are safe.

This data, comparing only the experience of Black and White staff, can be presented in tabular form as follows;

At risk
Safe

Black
256
346
602
White
137
330
467
Total
393
676
1069

Using Chi Square test the two-tailed P value is less than 0.0001, which means that the chances that such a distribution would arise by random chance if there were no relationship between the race of employees and the risk of redundancy in the CYPS Reshaping are less than one in ten thousand (less than 0.01%).

This is highly statistically significant and demonstrates that there is a need to explain (account for) the very much greater risk of redundancy face by Black staff in CYPS when compared with White staff.

Bearing in mind the Council's duties under s71 of the Race Relations Act 1976 as amended it is crystal clear that the Council must – at a minimum - now pause the Reshaping whilst this clear evidence of racial disparity in the risk of redundancy is investigated.

Disability - no apparent disparity in risk of redundancy

There are very few staff with a disability and a significant number of

Of the 49 disabled staff 16 (33%) are at risk and 33 (67%) are safe.

Of the 1119 non-disabled staff 411 (37%) are at risk and 708 (63%) are safe.

This data can be presented in tabular form as follows;

at risk
safe
Total
Disabled
16
33
49
Non-Disabled
411
708
1119
Total
427
741
1168

Using the Chi square test the two-tailed P value equals 0.6684.

The association between rows (disability status) and columns (risk of redundancy) is considered to be not statistically significant. This means that there is no apparent disparity in the risk of redundancy in the CYPS reshaping proposals between staff who are and are not disabled.

Conclusions and Recommendation

The data in the Equality Impact Assessment does not suggest that there is any disparity in the risk of redundancy facing staff on grounds of gender or disability. However there is a statistically significant disparity in the risk of redundancy between Black and White staff, with Black staff facing a significantly higher risk of redundancy.

UNISON recommends that the Reshaping must pause for a brief period whilst further analysis is undertaken to explain why this disparity has arisen, and for management to reconsider whether the making of proposals which lead to a significantly disproportionate risk of redundancy to Black employees is acceptable having regard to Council policy and Section 71 of the Race Relations Act.

Thirdly, we have not been given details of job evaluations for posts in the new structure. The evaluation of posts is very material to the provision of information on the numbers to be dismissed and therefore, without information on job evaluations the Council cannot comply with the information requirements of s188. UNISON considers that provision of this information is a prerequisite for meaningful consultation.

In these circumstances UNISON does not recognise the management timetable as being reasonable or appropriate. Therefore UNISON reserve the right to alter or add to this ‘initial response’ as we see fit in what we consider a reasonable timescale and expect that management will respond to and consider any further submissions from UNISON as would be reasonable and in keeping with good consultation and good practice.

Andrew Tullis: UNISON Convenor CYPS
Jon Rogers: Lambeth UNISON Branch Secretary

27/07/10

Joint Union Leaflet - What is going on in CYPS?

2010-07-24T19:10:00.003Z

This is the text of a leaflet issued jointly by UNISON, GMB and the NUT in Lambeth;

What is going on in CYPS?

You may well ask. The trade unions are concerned that the “reshaping” of CYPS (Lambeth's Children's and Young People's Services Directorate) is the least well-managed reorganisation we have come across in several years. Management are complying with their responsibilities late, or not at all, and are increasing the threat to jobs by pursuing other agendas.

Managers have contradicted each other about whether their proposals are entirely budget-led. Management have failed to provide comprehensive financial information in every “business case” for the reorganisation. This makes it all but impossible to prepare alternative proposals during the consultation period.

CYPS could balance its budget by cutting around 200 posts (some of which are vacant). This would be bad enough and we would oppose it – but in fact they are proposing to dismiss around 300 employees. Managers (particularly in the proposed Community Children’s SubDivision which includes One O’Clock Clubs and Adventure Play) are brutally pursuing other objectives under cover of this budget crisis in order to drive through unjustified sackings.

It took more than a month before CYPS management would let the trade unions see an “Equality Impact Assessment” – now we know why! The figures show that black staff are far more likely than white staff to be at risk of redundancy (1.45 times as likely to be precise). The Council has said nothing about what it will do about this unlawful indirect race discrimination.

After weeks of saying they would not shift their timetable management have extended the deadline for comments – by just two days! This is not nearly enough time to respond just to the Equality Impact Assessment – and we still do not have meaningful financial information for most of the Directorate! The trade unions will continue to demand real consultation.

If we let CYPS management get away with their disgraceful, incompetent and discriminatory conduct of the “reshaping” of CYPS we will be inviting similar behaviour by managers across the Council (and Lambeth Living).

If we let the brutal, reactionary managers of the “Community Children’s SubDivision” get away with threatening mass dismissals in the One O’Clock Clubs and Adventure Play in order to drive through changes in working hours and job descriptions (whilst selectively dismissing staff) this sort of thing will happen again and again.

If we permit the ideologically driven deletion of the successful Special Educational Needs and Ethnic Minority Achievement Teams we will invite similar closures of vital services.

If we allow the Council to ignore the fact that its job cuts are disproportionately hitting black staff we will be colluding with institutional racism. We cannot trust management to live by the Council’s “FRESH” values and if we believe in them – or even if we don’t - it is up to us to enforce them.

All trade union members employed by Lambeth Council and Lambeth Living need to stand together in opposition to the disgraceful treatment of staff in CYPS. Unity is strength. An injury to one is an injury to all.

Each trade union will consider what action to take to try to ensure fair treatment for local government workers in Lambeth. Please make sure you attend all the meetings of your trade union so you can have your say.

If you are not a trade union member – join now!

If you are a trade union member;
• Recruit your friends and colleagues into a trade union – unity is strength!
• Organise a local trade union meeting and elect a shop steward or representative if you do not already have one;
• Prepare for the likelihood of strike action by putting a bit of money aside after each pay day so you can stand up for yourself if you need to;
• Write to your MP and local Councillors to oppose cuts in public services – remind them that we could close the deficit through reductions in tax dodging, introduction of fair taxes and cuts in real waste (Trident nuclear submarines).

TELL DAVID CAMERON AND GEORGE OSBORNE WHAT YOU THINK!

2010-07-06T17:26:00.001Z

The following is the text of a message sent to the Branch by our Head of Local Government;

Cameron, Osborne and Pickles are asking all public sector workers for your ‘best cost saving ideas’, to help them implement cuts - so let’s tell them! Please reply by going to this website, which is open until 8 July - http://spendingchallenge.hm-treasury.gov.uk/

Below are some responses that you and members of your branch can use. Please ensure you cascade this around all your members and ask them to respond by 8 July.

1. 65% of local government workers earn below £21,000 pay them the £250 now!

2. Local government workers have the lowest pay and worst conditions of service in the public sector, don’t cut them further!

3. Get local residents to decide on council tax levels to maintain vital local services – not Council Tax freezes from Westminster

4. Stop wasting public money on privatising local services

5. Stop dividing ‘front’ and ‘back’ office worker. They need each other to deliver efficient and effective local services

6. Councils – not private companies - must continue to run local services to ensure transparency and a real say for local residents

7. Stop cutting vital public services – this will make life harder for everyone, especially women and poorer households, and set back the economic recovery

8. Stop cutting public sector jobs – this will hit tax revenues, increase unemployment and make the deficit worse

9. Cut the bankers’ bonuses, and make them pay for the crisis they caused – a Robin Hood Tax could raise billions every year

10. Cut spending on private consultants and employment agencies – directly employed in-house staff are the best people to improve services

11. Cut out the privatisation profiteers – outsourcing and PFI are damaging our public services and cost the taxpayer more

Branch Meeting Decisions

2010-07-06T17:24:00.001Z

What follows is the text of the motions agreed at yesterday's Branch Meeting, as amended;

Motion A – Defending Public Services – Fighting the Cuts

This Branch Meeting reaffirms our support for public services and our opposition to cuts and job losses.

We note that a meeting convened in accordance with the policy agreed at our Annual General Meeting took place on Wednesday 30 June with representatives of the Tenants Council, Lambeth Pensioners’ Action Group, the National Union of Teachers and the University and Colleges Union as well as UNISON representatives and other local people.

We endorse the following statement from that meeting;

We, the undersigned resolve to work together to resist cuts in public services in Lambeth and beyond. We oppose;
The cuts and redundancies announced by the Council in May;
Further cuts arising from cuts in Grant Aid imposed by the Government;
Further cuts arising from the Government’s Emergency Budget.
We support local people, service-users and workers who are organising to resist these cuts in services. Children’s Services are in the forefront of this first wave of job cuts.
We call upon the Council to resist rather than implement cuts in public services.
We call specifically for;
Support for the joint trade union lobby of the Children and Young Persons Scrutiny SubCommittee on Monday 19 July;
Support for a lobby of the Cabinet on Monday 26 July;
The establishment of a broad-based “Lambeth Save Our Services” Campaign to support and co-ordinate opposition to cuts in public services.
We call upon all local trade unions, the Trades Council, community groups, tenants organisations, voluntary organisations, pensioner organisations, campaign groups, faith groups and Labour parties to support a broad-based “Lambeth Save Our Services” Campaign.

We resolve to play a full part in public campaigning and political lobbying to resist cuts in public services in Lambeth in line with, and as part of UNISON’s “Million Voices for Change” campaign and to promote positive alternatives to public spending cuts including UNISON’s Alternative Budget and the People’s Charter.

We instruct Branch Officers to work with other trade unionists and community activists to produce a broadsheet outlining cuts to public services in Lambeth for distribution at the Country Show on Saturday 17 and Sunday 18 July, and to promote the lobby of the Cabinet on Monday 26 July.

We resolve to send this motion to the Trades Council.

We note that these attacks on workers’ jobs and services are taking place internationally and that the European TUC has called for a day of action against austerity cuts on Wednesday 29 September. We call on the TUC to call a one-day general strike on this day against the Tory-Lib Dem budget.”

Motion B – Lambeth Council notification of redundancies

This Branch Meeting deplores the notification from the Chief Executive on 24 May of the deletion of over 300 posts. We reaffirm that this wholly inadequate letter from the Chief Executive failed to satisfy the information requirements of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992.

We note that management are proceeding in different ways in each Directorate. We resolve that we shall not permit the Council to “divide and rule” and affirm that we see these job cuts as a matter for the whole branch and the whole Council workforce. We resolve to resist all cuts and job losses. We believe that this serious attack requires a serious response and that this means we must prepare for industrial action across the whole Council.

We instruct Branch Officers to prioritise the following over the next two months, recognising that this will mean that other lower priority activity may not take place;
Increase recruitment activity through floor walking in order to increase UNISON density and improve our bargaining strength;
Organise meetings in all areas hit by job cut proposals and elect shop stewards where there are not already stewards;
Encourage all shop stewards to attend training on how to deal with reorganisations which is being arranged;
Verify the accuracy of our membership records so that we are able to organise ballots for industrial action should this be necessary.

We call upon Lambeth Council to guarantee that there shall be no compulsory redundancies. Should the Council not give such a guarantee we authorise the Branch Secretary to declare a trade dispute with the Council.

We reaffirm the policy adopted at our Annual General Meeting that we will respond with Council-wide strike action and instruct all shop stewards and Branch Officers to campaign for support for this policy amongst the membership.

To prepare for this, we instruct the branch officers and branch committee to conduct a consultative ballot of all members employed by Lambeth council or Lambeth Living, asking them whether they would be prepared to take industrial action up to and including strike action in defence of jobs and services.

We call upon UNISON at Regional level to support the Branch in making an application to the Employment Tribunal in respect of the Council’s breaches of the statutory requirements for redundancy consultation.

Motion C – Job Cuts in CYPS

This Branch meeting condemns the CYPS management proposals for job cuts in CYPS where management have increased their redundancy proposals from the 215 notified by the Chief Executive in May to more than 280.

We believe these cuts will inevitably have a detrimental effect on the lives of many children in Lambeth. We note that this is only the first wave of cuts and other attacks, including the Government’s promotion of “Academy” status to achieve mass privatisation of the education system.

We congratulate the UNISON members, other trade unionists and local people who have already begun to campaign against these proposed job cuts. As part of our opposition to all public spending cuts we resolve to coordinate campaigns to Save Children’s Services in Lambeth.

As the first step in this campaign we resolve to make the defence of Children’s Services the major focus for our activity at the Lambeth Country Show on Saturday 17 and Sunday 18 July, and to support the joint trade union lobby of the CYP Scrutiny Committee meeting from 6.30pm on Monday 19 July.

Motion D – Lambeth Council Redundancy and Redeployment

This Branch meeting reminds the Labour Group of the first two paragraphs of their agreement with the trade unions, made before the local elections;

· The Council will remain committed to Lambeth First’s objective of increasing the proportion of local people in employment. This will mean protecting employment wherever possible and encouraging recruitment of local people;· The Council and trade unions will aim to negotiate a redundancy procedure which limits job losses and maximises opportunities for employees to remain in work.

We demand that Councillors put pressure on officers to agree with the trade union side proposals to make redeployment easier, and that the Council agree a revised redundancy procedure which meets with the approval of our Branch Committee by 13 July at the latest.

We also condemn the Council’s refusal to extend beyond 30 June the previous agreement to permit redeployment between Lambeth Council and Lambeth Living and call upon the Council and Lambeth Living to continue to permit reciprocal redeployment.

Motion E – Campaigning against attacks on our pensions

This Branch condemns the Government’s decision to uprate public service pensions (as well as benefits and tax credits) in line with the Consumer Prices Index (CPI) rather than the Retail Price Index (RPI).

This represents a significant long term cut in the value of the pensions of our retired members, and the future pensions for those of us still working.

We condemn this attack upon our pensions, which breaks promises made by both the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats before the election. We call upon UNISON to raise this issue with the TUC and to organise co-ordinated national action alongside other public service unions to defend our public service pensions and resolve to lobby local MPs to oppose this attack upon pensions.

Motion F – Co-operative Council, Shared Services and Total Place

This Branch notes the series of initiatives coming from our employers, which include the “Co-operative Council”, proposals for shared services with Southwark and Lewisham Councils, and “Total Place” (or “One Lambeth”) which could involve shared services with other public services in Lambeth.

We support genuine initiatives to improve public services. However in the current climate we believe that all these initiatives are likely to become means of making cuts in public services, which we oppose.

We therefore instruct branch officers to;
Obtain and publicise to the membership information about all such initiatives;
Ensure that UNISON is consulted at an early stage and to respond to any consultation in line with our policy of opposition to cuts in public spending;
Develop links with all other union branches who may have members affected by these initiatives, including through Lambeth Trades Council;
Work with trade unions and community organisations to develop alternative proposals to develop and improve public services which do not involve making cuts and redundancies.

Motion G – Branch Environmental Officer

This Branch supports UNISON’s Green agenda and believes that we should aim to have a Branch Environmental Officer and a network of Environmental representatives.

We therefore instruct the Branch Committee to prepare proposed Amendments to the Branch Rules for the next Annual General Meeting in order to give effect to this belief.

In the mean time we resolve to seek one or more volunteers to develop this area of work and instruct the Branch Committee to appoint at least one Interim Branch Environmental Officer to ensure that the work is done in time for the AGM.

Motion H - Right to Work Model Motion for 3 October Demonstration at Tory Conference

1) We reject the austerity policy of David Cameron’s government.
2) An increase of VAT to 20 percent, a three year freeze of Child Benefits, a public sector pay freeze and an increase in the retirement age to 66 represents a full scale assault on the living standards of working people.
3) We note that George Osborne has pledged to slash 25% from the budgets of all government departments in his autunn spending review
4) Working people are being asked to pay for a crisis we did not cause.
5) We declare our solidarity with those fighting similar measures in Greece and elsewhere in Europe.
6) Accordingly we agree to support, sponsor and build the demonstration outside the Tory Party annual conference in Birmingham on Sunday 3 October.
7) We agree to make a donation of …. Towards transport costs to Birmingham on 3 October.
8) We agree to affiliate to the Right to Work campaign (cost for local organisations £30 per year)

Shared Services - UNISON demands consultation

2010-07-02T18:49:00.002Z

In the light of the recent news that Labour Councillors across Lambeth, Lewisham and Southwark are hoping that plans to "share services" will help them protect "frontline services" from cuts UNISON has today written to Lambeth Council management to remind them of Lambeth Labour Group's agreement with the trade unions.

This says that "The Council will adopt policy to ensure that trade unions are consulted at the earliest stage of consideration of any shared services. This will entail the involvement of trade unions at the stage of options appraisal, in conjunction with partner organisations." Shared services are one of the many challenges to be considered at Monday's Branch Meeting - and the Branch will need to work with our sisters and brothers in neighbouring boroughs to respond.

Branch Meeting Agenda

2010-07-01T14:09:00.001Z

To members of Lambeth UNISON

Dear Colleagues,

UNISON Branch Meeting – Monday 5 July – 12.30pm – 2pm
Assembly Hall, Lambeth Town Hall, Acre Lane entrance

The Council has agreed paid time off for members of UNISON to attend a Branch Meeting on Monday lunchtime as above. Please make every effort to attend and pass this message on to colleagues who may not receive this email.

The Agenda for the meeting is set out below.

Best wishes,

Jon Rogers
BRANCH SECRETARY

AGENDA

1. Introductions and apologies for absence;
2. To note the election of the Branch Secretary;
3. To consider electing an Assistant Branch Treasurer and a Branch Young Members’ Officer;
4. To receive a report on public spending cuts in Lambeth;
5. Motions;
a. Defending Public Services - Fighting the Cuts;
b. Lambeth Council notification of redundancies;
c. Job Cuts in CYPS;
d. Lambeth Council Redundancy and Redeployment;
e. Campaigning against the attack on our Pensions;
f. Co-operative Council, shared services and Total Place;
g. Branch Environmental Officer.

Motion A – Defending Public Services – Fighting the Cuts

This Branch Meeting reaffirms our support for public services and our opposition to cuts and job losses.

We note that a meeting convened in accordance with the policy agreed at our Annual General Meeting took place on Wednesday 30 June with representatives of the Tenants Council, Lambeth Pensioners’ Action Group, the National Union of Teachers and the University and Colleges Union as well as UNISON representatives and other local people.

We endorse the following statement from that meeting;

We, the undersigned resolve to work together to resist cuts in public services in Lambeth and beyond. We oppose;
The cuts and redundancies announced by the Council in May;
Further cuts arising from cuts in Grant Aid imposed by the Government;
Further cuts arising from the Government’s Emergency Budget.
We support local people, service-users and workers who are organising to resist these cuts in services. Children’s Services are in the forefront of this first wave of job cuts.
We call upon the Council to resist rather than implement cuts in public services.
We call specifically for;
Support for the joint trade union lobby of the Children and Young Persons Scrutiny SubCommittee on Monday 19 July;
Support for a lobby of the Cabinet on Monday 26 July;
The establishment of a broad-based “Lambeth Save Our Services” Campaign to support and co-ordinate opposition to cuts in public services.
We call upon all local trade unions, the Trades Council, community groups, tenants organisations, voluntary organisations, pensioner organisations, campaign groups, faith groups and Labour parties to support a broad-based “Lambeth Save Our Services” Campaign.

We resolve to play a full part in public campaigning and political lobbying to resist cuts in public services in Lambeth in line with, and as part of UNISON’s “Million Voices for Change” campaign and to promote positive alternatives to public spending cuts including UNISON’s Alternative Budget and the People’s Charter.

We instruct Branch Officers to work with other trade unionists and community activists to produce a broadsheet outlining cuts to public services in Lambeth for distribution at the Country Show on Saturday 17 and Sunday 18 July, and to promote the lobby of the Cabinet on Monday 26 July.

We resolve to send this motion to the Trades Council.

Proposed – Ruth Cashman, Assistant Branch Secretary

Motion B – Lambeth Council notification of redundancies

This Branch Meeting deplores the notification from the Chief Executive on 24 May of the deletion of over 300 posts. We reaffirm that this wholly inadequate letter from the Chief Executive failed to satisfy the information requirements of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992.

We note that management are proceeding in different ways in each Directorate. We resolve that we shall not permit the Council to “divide and rule” and affirm that we see these job cuts as a matter for the whole branch and the whole Council workforce. We resolve to resist all cuts and job losses. We believe that this serious attack requires a serious response and that this means we must prepare for industrial action across the whole Council.

We instruct Branch Officers to prioritise the following over the next two months, recognising that this will mean that other lower priority activity may not take place;
Increase recruitment activity through floor walking in order to increase UNISON density and improve our bargaining strength;
Organise meetings in all areas hit by job cut proposals and elect shop stewards where there are not already stewards;
Encourage all shop stewards to attend training on how to deal with reorganisations which is being arranged;
Verify the accuracy of our membership records so that we are able to organise ballots for industrial action should this be necessary.

We call upon Lambeth Council to guarantee that there shall be no compulsory redundancies. Should the Council not give such a guarantee we authorise the Branch Secretary to declare a trade dispute with the Council.

We reaffirm the policy adopted at our Annual General Meeting that we will respond with Council-wide strike action and instruct all shop stewards and Branch Officers to campaign for support for this policy amongst the membership.

We call upon UNISON at Regional level to support the Branch in making an application to the Employment Tribunal in respect of the Council’s breaches of the statutory requirements for redundancy consultation.

Proposed – Jon Rogers, Branch Secretary

Motion C – Job Cuts in CYPS

This Branch meeting condemns the CYPS management proposals for job cuts in CYPS where management have increased their redundancy proposals from the 215 notified by the Chief Executive in May to more than 280.

We believe these cuts will inevitably have a detrimental effect on the lives of many children in Lambeth. We note that this is only the first wave of cuts and other attacks, including the Government’s promotion of “Academy” status to achieve mass privatisation of the education system.

We congratulate the UNISON members, other trade unionists and local people who have already begun to campaign against these proposed job cuts. As part of our opposition to all public spending cuts we resolve to coordinate campaigns to Save Children’s Services in Lambeth.

As the first step in this campaign we resolve to make the defence of Children’s Services the major focus for our activity at the Lambeth Country Show on Saturday 17 and Sunday 18 July, and to support the joint trade union lobby of the CYP Scrutiny Committee meeting from 6.30pm on Monday 19 July.

Proposed – Andy Tullis, CYPS Convenor

Motion D – Lambeth Council Redundancy and Redeployment

This Branch meeting reminds the Labour Group of the first two paragraphs of their agreement with the trade unions, made before the local elections;

· The Council will remain committed to Lambeth First’s objective of increasing the proportion of local people in employment. This will mean protecting employment wherever possible and encouraging recruitment of local people;· The Council and trade unions will aim to negotiate a redundancy procedure which limits job losses and maximises opportunities for employees to remain in work.

We demand that Councillors put pressure on officers to agree with the trade union side proposals to make redeployment easier, and that the Council agree a revised redundancy procedure which meets with the approval of our Branch Committee by 13 July at the latest.

We also condemn the Council’s refusal to extend beyond 30 June the previous agreement to permit redeployment between Lambeth Council and Lambeth Living and call upon the Council and Lambeth Living to continue to permit reciprocal redeployment.

Proposed – Jon Rogers, Branch Secretary

Motion E – Campaigning against attacks on our pensions

This Branch condemns the Government’s decision to uprate public service pensions (as well as benefits and tax credits) in line with the Consumer Prices Index (CPI) rather than the Retail Price Index (RPI).

This represents a significant long term cut in the value of the pensions of our retired members, and the future pensions for those of us still working.

We condemn this attack upon our pensions, which breaks promises made by both the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats before the election. We call upon UNISON to raise this issue with the TUC and to organise co-ordinated national action alongside other public service unions to defend our public service pensions and resolve to lobby local MPs to oppose this attack upon pensions.

Proposed – Peter Woodward, Branch Chair

Motion F – Co-operative Council, Shared Services and Total Place

This Branch notes the series of initiatives coming from our employers, which include the “Co-operative Council”, proposals for shared services with Southwark and Lewisham Councils, and “Total Place” (or “One Lambeth”) which could involve shared services with other public services in Lambeth.

We support genuine initiatives to improve public services. However in the current climate we believe that all these initiatives are likely to become means of making cuts in public services, which we oppose.

We therefore instruct branch officers to;
Obtain and publicise to the membership information about all such initiatives;
Ensure that UNISON is consulted at an early stage and to respond to any consultation in line with our policy of opposition to cuts in public spending;
Develop links with all other union branches who may have members affected by these initiatives, including through Lambeth Trades Council;
Work with trade unions and community organisations to develop alternative proposals to develop and improve public services which do not involve making cuts and redundancies.

Proposed – Ruth Cashman, Assistant Branch Secretary

Motion G – Branch Environmental Officer

This Branch supports UNISON’s Green agenda and believes that we should aim to have a Branch Environmental Officer and a network of Environmental representatives.

We therefore instruct the Branch Committee to prepare proposed Amendments to the Branch Rules for the next Annual General Meeting in order to give effect to this belief. In the mean time we resolve to seek one or more volunteers to develop this area of work and instruct the Branch Committee to appoint at least one Interim Branch Environmental Officer to ensure that the work is done in time for the AGM.

Proposed – Dan Jeffery, Assistant Branch Secretary

Lambeth UNISON welcomes the Labour Leadership contenders to Lambeth...

2010-06-30T22:13:00.001Z

Full marks to the One O'Clock club stewards who were instrumental in leafletting this evening's hustings for the Labour leadership in Brixton with the following leaflet;

"UNISON welcomes Labour Party members to the Lambeth Leadership Hustings

Please ask the candidates…

How shall we fight the cuts?

Local people voted for a Labour Council hoping to be protected from Tory Cuts. Even before the Grant cuts and Emergency Budget announced by the ConDem Government, Lambeth Council had announced over 300 job losses.

In the Adventure Playgrounds and One O’Clock Clubs highly paid managers are proposing to delete the jobs of the entire workforce – even though the Council is not reducing the budget for that SubDivision.

UNISON members are resisting these cuts and looks to local Labour Party members for support. We hope to work with Labour to resist cuts in public services. We pledge to resist cuts in public services whoever makes them.

Labour needs to choose the Leader of the Opposition to Tory Cuts. UNISON’s Alternative Budget shows how the deficit could be cut by fairer taxation and cuts in real waste – not by savage reductions in public services.

UNISON’s appeal to Lambeth Labour Party members;

Please ask your Councillor to lobby to minimise job losses. The Council can start by stopping senior management’s slaughter of jobs in Adventure Play and the One O’Clock Clubs.

Please ask the Leadership candidates – what leadership will you offer to resist cuts in public services?"

It is now up to Labour Party members in Lambeth to support Labour supporters who deliver vital public services and Labour supporters who receive them.

The details of job cuts in Children's Services

2010-06-30T21:48:00.002Z

What follows is the text of a letter sent today to management in Children's Services concerning the cuts in jobs and services which are being proposed;

"Dear Phyllis,

Redundancy Consultation

I regret the unfortunate coincidence that saw the launch of consultation on a major wave of job cuts take place during the week of UNISON Conference.

I am writing with some questions, comments and observations in anticipation of a meeting this afternoon with CYPS management. I write following consultation with the GMB in particular and believe that what I say would generally have the assent of the trade union side.

Context of the Consultation

I remind you that the context of our consultation is set by the requirements of s188(2) of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 and that your officers are required to consult us “with a view to reaching agreement” about ways of;
a) avoiding dismissals;
b) reducing the number of employees to be dismissed, and;
c) mitigating the consequences of dismissals.

In order to commence this consultation you must disclose to us the information required by s188(4) of the Act (which in some cases you plainly have not done).

Overall Scale of Job Losses

Following May’s purported corporate redundancy notification it was clear that the Children and Young People’s Service (CYPS) would bear the brunt of this first wave of job losses (with a projected total of 215 post deletions).

Details of plans to reduce the number of divisions and restructure within the new divisions, deleting posts, were presented to the Trade Unions on Monday 14 June. These proposals delete even more filled posts (at least 283) as a result of deliberate managerial choices to delete more posts in order to create new posts without assimilating existing staff.

This contravenes Lambeth First’s primary objective of increasing the proportion of local people in employment

Resources and Strategy Division

156 posts are being transferred into Resources and Strategy and reduced to 116 posts. This is a net loss of 40 posts but that includes the deletion of 24 vacant posts. However other vacancies are being retained and the total number of jobs at risk is higher than these figures would suggest.

21 staff are “category A” redundant. Additionally 46 staff are in eight different “category B” generic reduction groups from which a net loss of 14 staff is proposed. Therefore it is proposed to delete 35 filled posts as well as 24 vacant posts (19 more than required to achieve a net reduction of 40).

It is clear that the quality of information provided to the trade unions not only falls short of the established norm for Council reorganisations but also still fails to comply with s188(4)(b) and (c) of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act since job titles are not provided in all instances.

Buildings and Schools for the Future Division

The “new” “BSF” Division has a net loss of 8.35 FTE posts from 44. However 7 staff are “category A” and 18 staff are in four different “category B” generic reduction groups from which a net loss of 8 staff is proposed. It is therefore proposed to deleted a total of 15 filled posts (7 more than required to achieve the proposed net reduction).

Directorate wide reduction in Business Support posts

In respect of the brief business case for these deletions it is not clear whether the total number of post deletions here is double counted in other documentation. I am assuming that this is not the case but would appreciate confirmation.

Universal Division proposals in outline

At the level of Divisional Management there appear to be proposals for the deletion of four filled posts.

School Standards and Improvement SubDivision

This area sees significant cuts, including;
• Deletion of the EMA (Ethnic Minority Achievement) team;
• Delation of the the SEN (Special Educational Needs) Literacy team;
• Deletion of the National Strategies team;
• Deletion of the “Best for All” team;
• Deletion of schools IT support;
• Reduction of School Improvement Adviser and Teaching and Learning Consultant posts.
This is described in the document as an overall reduction of “about 70” posts.

In practice this translates into the deletion of 34 posts (23 filled posts and 11 vacancies) as “Category A” (additionally 21 casually employed intepreters and translators see their roles eliminated). There are also fourteen filled posts in two generic “Category B” reduction groups from which a net loss of ten filled posts is sought (in some cases groups are described as “Category B” although only vacancies are being deleted – “Category B” vacancy deletions account for a further 7 posts reductions. The total number of post deletions is 51 posts (of which 33 are filled posts) plus the 21 casually employed staff.

Community Children SubDivision

The poorly drafted and opaque “business case” for this SubDivision will certainly give rise to a major dispute unless there is a significant change of approach from management.

This area encompasses the One O’Clock Clubs, Adventure Playgrounds and Kennington Children’s Centre (other Children’s Centres are managed by and within local schools).

Within this area three PO9 posts, one PO6 and one PO4 are directly assimilated into new posts. Otherwise in the One O’Clock Clubs and Adventure Play all posts are deleted – even though sufficient posts are being created that no redundancies are financially necessary. Between these two areas this amounts to the deletion (as “Category A”) of 79 posts (of which 65 are filled posts).

At Kennington Children’s Centre the posts of 9 staff are deleted as Category A (8 of which are filled) (some posts here are part time so the FTE figures are 6.28 FTE posts (5.28 filled). Additionally 9 staff are in a “Category B” generic reduction group from which 7 filled posts are amongst the 10 posts being deleted.

Across the Community Children SubDivision there are therefore a total of 80 filled posts being deleted. At the same time 84 new posts are being created. If anyone in CYPS management thinks that it is acceptable to assimilate only the senior managers whilst making eighty unnecessary redundancies of low paid staff then they are in for a rude awakening.

Education Strategy and Planning SubDivision

This small SubDivision takes on some of the functions of the current “Building Schools for the Future” Division. 3 posts (2 filled) are deleted as “Category A” and 1 new post is created.

Targeted Division Proposals in outline

At Divisional Management level there are three “Category A” deletions and three senior staff affected by the deletion of two posts in a “Category B” generic reduction group within the overall framework of the reduction from nine to five posts at this senior level.

Change Management and TAC SubDivision

The information provided for this area fails to indicate in many cases the numbers of new posts. There has been a total failure to comply with s188 in respect of this SubDivision.

Inclusion Services SubDivision

There are significant staffing reductions in this area. 23 posts are deleted as Category A (of which 20 are filled) and a total of 41 staff are in 8 different “Category B” generic reduction groups from which there is a net loss of 11 filled posts (as well as 3 vacancies). The total reduction in posts is therefore 37 posts (31 filled posts).

Specialist Youth Services SubDivision

In addition to the direct impact of job losses the management document itself highlights the risk of excessive workloads in this area. Two posts are deleted as “Category A” (one of which is filled) and 27 staff are in “Category B” generic reduction groups from which a net loss of six filled posts and three vacancies are sought. The overall loss is of 11 posts (7 of which are filled posts).

Community Youth Services SubDivision

23 posts are deleted as “Category A” (17 of which are filled posts) and 21 staff are in two “Category B” generic reduction groups from which a net loss of 16 filled posts are sought. Therefore the total reduction in posts is 39 (33 of which are filled). The larger generic reduction group is of full time youth support workers (a reduction from 23 down to 8) which is accompanied by an increase in the number of part time youth support workers from 21 to 36. There are also 15.5 FTE other new posts in the structure. (Overall the net reduction in posts is only 15.5, from 104 FTE to 88.5 FTE).

Conclusion

I conclude that we will need intensive and extensive consultation Division by Division and SubDivision by SubDivision – but conducted at Directorate level in order to challenge rigorously proposals from local managers which are tending to increase rather than reduce the number of redundancy dismissals. These consultations must take place with a view to reaching agreement about ways of reducing the number of dismissals.

Further questions and observations

In all the above cases the trade unions need far better quality information in order to contribute meaningfully. In particular we need to see documents with lists of names rather than only initials, in line with the Council’s normal established practice. Obviously those lists would be confidential and would be used only to enable trade unions to contact affected members.

The following additional points have been raised with the trade union side by the GMB arising from consultation with their members and I take this opportunity to pass them on;

• When were the new job descriptions evaulated and by whom? What are the scores?
• Term time only employees cannot be consulted during periods when they are not contracted to work and therefore the consultation period should be extended by the school closure period.
• Agency workers have been recruited this month in PDC
• Amended proposals have been issued to staffs in the Park Campus in the last week and the trade unions have not been advised
• Some staff do not have access to a PC e.g. 1 O’clock clubs
• Consultation starting on different days up to 7 days apart
• Members have advised us of a shortage of consultation packs at some meetings.

I look forward to continuing this discussion this afternoon.

Please note that UNISON reserves our position in respect of s189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 and also to declare a trade dispute with the Council about this matter.

Best wishes,

Jon Rogers"

Following this afternoon's meeting it has been agreed that we will meet weekly to consult on the proposed redundancies.

Watch this space...

Silence equals assent?

2010-06-30T21:39:00.002Z

As reported here previously, on 24 May the Chief Executive of Lambeth Council notified the trade unions of proposed job cuts and the trade unions responded to point out the ways in which the Council was failing to comply with the law.

After waiting patiently for five weeks for a response to the assertion that the Council was failing to comply with the law (an assertion amply supported by the clear evidence that the Chief Executive was wrong when he told us how many redundancies there would be in the Children and Young Persons Services Directorate - see next post) UNISON today sent the following message to the Chief Executive.

Dear Derrick,

Breach of s188 Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act

You wrote to me on 24 May notifying proposed redundancies in purported compliance with the Requirements of Section 188(4) of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992.

I replied on the same day stating that I did not accept that your letter provided the information required by s188(4) of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 and therefore did not accept that you had complied with the Act such that the time period of 90 days specified in s188(1A) of the Act could be taken to have commenced.

I take from the absence of any response to that letter that silence equals assent. This assumption on my part is also consistent with comments reported to me by management representatives at Friday’s Directorate consultation meeting in ACS.

I am therefore writing to put you on notice that, in respect of the proposed reductions notified to us in your letter of 24 May it is still the case that you have failed to comply with the requirements of s188(4)(b) and (c) of the 1992 Act. To the extent that failure to provide adequate and sufficient information impedes meaningful consultation the Council is also breaching s188(2) of the Act.

On behalf of UNISON I formally reserve our position in respect of the action which it is open to us to take under s189 of the Act. By copy of this letter I am requesting that this item be added to the agenda of the next Corporate Consultation Forum meeting on Friday 9 July.

Best wishes,

Jon Rogers
BRANCH SECRETARY

This finally elicited a response from the Council, who told the Assistant Director of Human Resources to say;

"Dear Jon

Thank you for your letter.

Arrangements will be made for a reply to be sent and we anticipate that this will be forwarded to you by the middle of next week."

Watch this space...

Lambeth UNISON Branch meeting 5 July

2010-06-30T18:19:00.002Z

All UNISON members in Lambeth are invited to a Branch Meeting on Monday 5 July at 12.30pm at the Town Hall to discuss the proposed cuts and job losses and how the Union should respond.

The Council has agreed paid time off for members to attend the meeting.

Opposition to public service cuts in Lambeth

2010-06-30T18:14:00.004Z

An initial organising meeting attended by 19 local residents and workers met today at the UNISON office. Representatives of the local Pensioners' and Tenants' movements were present alongside members of local branches of the University and Colleges Union (UCU), the National Union of Teachers (NUT) and several members of Lambeth UNISON.

The meeting endorsed the following statement;

We, the undersigned resolve to work together to resist cuts in public services in Lambeth and beyond. We oppose;
· The cuts and redundancies announced by the Council in May;
· Further cuts arising from cuts in Grant Aid imposed by the Government;
· Further cuts arising from the Government’s Emergency Budget.
We support local people, service-users and workers who are organising to resist these cuts in services. Children’s Services are in the forefront of this first wave of job cuts.
We call upon the Council to resist rather than implement cuts in public services.
We call specifically for;
· Support for the joint trade union lobby of the Children and Young Persons Scrutiny SubCommittee on Monday 19 July;
· Support for a lobby of the Cabinet on Monday 26 July;
· The establishment of a broad-based “Lambeth Save Our Services” Campaign to support and co-ordinate opposition to cuts in public services.
We call upon all local trade unions, the Trades Council, community groups, tenants organisations, voluntary organisations, pensioner organisations, campaign groups, faith groups and Labour parties to support a broad-based “Lambeth Save Our Services” Campaign.

The meeting agreed to contribute to an Anti-Cuts Broadsheet to be produced by the trade unions represented at the meeting for distribution at the Lambeth Country Show on 17 and 18 July and discussed further campaigning activity which could be supported, including a community forum at which details of proposed cuts - and genuinely progressive alternatives - could be discussed.

A further meeting will take place after the lobby of the Cabinet on 26 July.

A full report will be made to the Branch Meeting on Monday 5 July - see next post!

Lambeth's "Co-operative Council" - UNISON response

2010-06-01T18:53:00.003Z

What follows is the branch's initial response to Lambeth Council's proposals to become a "Co-operative Council."

We intend to sound a note of caution about Lambeth Council’s plans to become a “Cooperative Council.”

UNISON members are never afraid of change or innovation. It is our members who have delivered improving services in Lambeth and we welcome recognition for this - but we will resist this project if it ends up being no more than a Trojan Horse for spending cuts.

UNISON welcomes steps to increase the involvement of local people and service users in the design of public services – but changes in the “delivery” of services could repeat the mistakes of TeamLambeth or the mixed record of tenant management of estates. The proposal that the public sector may withdraw from providing some services and ‘empower’ the community to deliver them is just a straightforward cut in service provision.

The Council’s plans – set out in the Co-operative Council “White Paper” to develop a “contract for place” between local and Central government are based upon offering significant spending reductions – and giving the lion’s share of these back to the Treasury to reduce the Government’s budget deficit.

UNISON does not accept that public services should be cut to close a deficit created by the financial crisis. We believe that billions could be raised by collecting taxes properly and by fair taxation of corporate and personal wealth. The rich – not the poor – should pay for this crisis. The most important contract the Council has is with the voters of Lambeth who elected a Labour Council to protect our services from Tory cuts, and yet within a month of the election we have been notified of over 300 job cuts.

UNISON will give evidence to the Co-operative Council Commission which Lambeth Council will be establishing. UNISON will speak up for our public services.

For details of UNISON's National Campaign to protect public services click here.

Support the Freedom Flotilla - end the Siege of Gaza

2010-06-01T18:46:00.003Z

The following statement has been agreed by branch officers in line with the established policy of our trade union branch and national UNISON policy.

"Lambeth Unison branch deplores the actions of Israeli yesterday in the murderous killings of more then 10 unarmed activists and the injuring of many more onboard one of the Freedom Flotilla ships that were on their way to deliver aid to the people of Gaza.

Under the cover of darkness Israeli soldiers stormed the Mavi Marmara, the lead ship of the six-vessel Freedom Flotilla aid convoy, in international waters. The Freedom Flotilla was organized by a coalition of groups that sought to break the Israeli-led siege on the Gaza Strip that began in 2007. Together, the flotilla carried 700 civilian activists from around 50 countries and over 10,000 tons of aid including food, medicines, medical equipment, reconstruction materials and equipment, as well as various other necessities arbitrarily banned by Israel.

A wave of angry demonstrations took place yesterday around the world outside Israeli embassies in absolute disgust and condemnation against the actions of Israel. Members from Lambeth branch attended the demonstration in London that blockaded Whitehall and then marched to the Israeli embassy. Further demonstrations will be held outside the embassy all this week which we would urge Unison members to attend to show solidarity with the activists on board the flotilla and the Palestinian people.

There will be a national demonstration on Saturday 5 June at 1.30pm at Downing Street, London (nearest tube Westminster or Charing cross)

Lambeth Unison would like to extend our deepest sympathy to the families of the brave activists that were killed on board the Mavi Marmara and we are proud to be part of the International Free Gaza movement of which those activists were a part.

We support the International call for the immediate release of ships and civilians held by Israel, the aid to be delivered to the people of Gaza and for the illegal blockade of Gaza to be lifted!

End the siege now!"

Gurmeet Khurana

International Officer – 1 June 2010

300+ job cuts in Lambeth Council

2010-05-24T19:56:00.002Z

The Chief Executive of Lambeth Council today wrote to UNISON to notify us of proposals to delete 334 posts over the next few months. These proposals exclude the ACS Directorate (at this stage) and include proposals for the following job losses by Directorate;

Office of the Chief Executive 25 posts to be deleted.

Finance and Resources 36 posts to be deleted

Housing Regeneration and Environment 58 posts to be deleted (this excludes areas of the Directorate funded from the Housing Revenue Account)

Childrens and Young Persons Services 215 posts to be deleted.

UNISON responded as follows to this letter;

"Thank you for your letter of today’s date. Let me state at the outset, on behalf of UNISON, that I do not accept that your letter provides the information required by s188(4) of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 and therefore do not accept that you have complied with the Act such that the time period of 90 days specified in s188(1A) of the Act could be taken to have commenced.

I imagine that my trade union side colleagues, to whom I am copying this response, will agree with these views.

I shall set out the basis for this view below and shall also respond to your letter, which I accept as an initial notification of your intention to provide sufficient information to comply with s188(4) at a future point and as a positive indication of your willingness to consult ahead of the commencement of the 90 day period.

Reasons for your proposals

When you are in a position to comply with s188(4) of the Act you will have to disclose to us in writing the reasons for your proposals. These you have set out, at this stage, in five numbered paragraphs, to which I respond as follows;

1. You state that the impact of the recession requires a reduction in public expenditure. This is not correct. A responsible Government would not reduce public expenditure in a recession as the negative multiplier effects of the reduced public expenditure may well worsen the recession. Reductions in public expenditure are a political choice not an economic necessity. You also state that long standing local issues need to be addressed to enable the Council to move forward as it strives towards excellence. Substantial reductions in expenditure will not assist the Council to strive towards excellence and it is not helpful to pretend otherwise.

2. I note that your current proposals are based upon decisions already made by Members in the budget setting process and appreciate that this means that there may be further proposed reductions arising from decisions of the new Coalition Government which may impact upon the funding of the local authority.

3. You state that, in addition to saving money, the proposals which you are making will provide greater synergy and enable professionals to work together. Given the absence of detail (to which I will turn below) I am not in a position to make any judgement about this claim. I think, from experience, that it is unlikely that proposals to make major financial savings will improve services.

4. You say that “the prioritisation of frontline services within an environment of contracting resources allows the Council to clearly articulate which services it will deliver and which services will be curtailed as the new service delivery models are established” – you will note that I have not attempted to summarise this paragraph. Aside from observing that the Council should once more contact the Plain English Campaign to provide training for the authors of our official documents, I think I can only say that the absence of detail makes it impossible to see whether your proposals do in fact reflect this aspiration (whatever it is).

5. You say that you intend to reduce staff whilst maintaining and improving service levels. I think it is the role of the trade union sometimes to be your “critical friend.” I therefore have to tell you that this is impossible. You have to tell Members that it is impossible. Members have to tell the working class voters who elected them to guard against the worst excesses of a Conservative Government that this is impossible. I refer you in this regard to the fifth of the “FRESH” values.

Details of potentially affected posts

S188(4)(b) of the Act requires that you provide us with “the numbers and descriptions of employees whom it is proposed to dismiss as redundant” and s188(4)(c) similarly requires that you provide us with “the total number of employees of any such description employed by the employer at the establishment in question.” It is plainly the case that your letter and its Appendix do not meet these requirements.

It is for this reason that I confidently assert that your letter fails to comply with s188(4) and cannot therefore commence the statutory consultation period as outlined in s188(1A). It is self-evident that, at a minimum, we would need to have job titles for deleted posts in order that you satisfy the legal requirement to provide us with “descriptions” of the employees whom it is proposed to dismiss as redundant.

I accept that you intend at this stage only to provide an overview and that you simply do not have the further detail yet.

I believe that your contacting us at this stage is both helpful and welcome (albeit the content of the overview may not be welcome).

I make no criticism of you for providing us with this limited information at this stage. I simply point out that the information which you are able to provide at this stage is not adequate to meet the requirements of s188(4) and therefore incapable of commencing the consultation period specified in s188(1A).

The proposed method of selecting the employees to be dismissed

You have advised that you will be releasing “non-professional” agency workers and consultants and will be restricting recruitment to posts which are not scarce disciplines. You have also advised that vacant posts will be deleted “with an assessment as to whether current staff can be developed to meet the requirements of the new service delivery modes.” There is some opacity in the latter point.

You have also advised that Directorates will aim for fewer layers of management, increased spans of management control and the elimination of duplication. With regard to the last of those points your Senior Leadership Board may wish to remind themselves of the comments of the trade unions concerning the decentralisation of the Human Resources function last year.

Whilst noting these points I am not sure that these observations amount to compliance on your part with s188(4)(d) of the Act. I invite you to consider this further when you are in a position to comply with s188(4)(b) and (c) – as you are not at present.

It may be that our agreeing a new redundancy policy (see below) will simplify your compliance with s188(4)(d) since you will be able to refer to the relevant provisions of what I hope will be an agreed procedure.

The proposed method of carrying out the dismissals

You comment that the Council has an agreed and well established reorganisation process. I beg to differ. We have an agreed redundancy procedure which does not reflect the existing practice of the employer (having been agreed in the last century) and the trade unions feel strongly that we must now improve upon and update our redundancy policy in order to avoid compulsory redundancies.

I have today been assured that I will, tomorrow, receive the latest management thinking on the redundancy policy and – if that is the case – I will provide the trade union side response within 24 hours. I believe that Members will be sympathetic to our negotiating a redundancy procedure which limits job losses and maximises opportunities for employees to remain in work. The trade unions will expect to agree such a new redundancy policy before the Joint Strategy Forum meeting on 1 July with a view to the application of the new policy to any and all reorganisations and redundancies arising from your letter of today’s date.

I think that your letter gives rise to a large number of questions which UNISON, and indeed the trade union side, will wish to raise with you formally. However, I will refrain from further correspondence whilst I discuss these with colleagues. (The exclusion from your Appendix One of all reference to ACS is clearly one matter which requires explanation!) We are clearly moving into a difficult period in which we will need to meet regularly and frequently. "

A further bulletin to all members will be issued in the near future. The Branch Meeting to be held on 7 June will now be moved to 5 July and this will be notified in that bulletin.

UNISON General Secretary election - use your vote

2010-05-16T22:16:00.002Z

Members will shortly receive ballot papers in the election for UNISON General Secretary - the ballot opens tomorrow and closes on 11 June.

There are three candidates in the election. The Lambeth Branch nominated Paul Holmes.

Ballot papers will be sent to members' home or other notified address in writing. Members will be provided with a pre-paid envelope for the return of the ballot paper to the independent scrutineer. All voting is by post.

Members not on the UNISON central membership system on 17 February 2010 will not be eligible to vote in this election.

If you don't receive a ballot paper or have another query, please contact our ballot helpline on 0845 355 0845. Lines are open 6am-midnight Monday to Friday and 9am-4pm on Saturday. The textphone number is 0800 0 967 968.

Please remember to use your vote!

Branch Meeting 7 June

2010-05-14T12:47:00.002Z

The following two letters have been issued today to UNISON members in Lambeth Branch;

Dear Colleagues,

BRANCH MEETING MONDAY 7 JUNE 2010

12.30pm, Assembly Hall, Lambeth Town Hall

You are warmly invited to a Branch Meeting to take place at 12.30pm on Monday 7 June in the Assembly Hall. Lambeth Council has agreed paid time off for this meeting and other employers will also be approached about this.

The agenda for the meeting is as follows;
Elections for vacant Branch Officer positions;
Implications of the General and local election results;
Preparations for UNISON Conference.

This important meeting will be our first opportunity to meet together following the General and local elections and to consider the implications of these for our jobs, pay and pensions. Please make every effort to attend.

If you wish to take advantage of the paid time off granted for this meeting please request time off from your line manager as soon as possible as late notice requests may not be granted.

If you wish to submit a motion for debate at the meeting please send this to jrogers@lambeth.gov.uk or in writing to the Branch Office by noon on Friday 28 May. Motions will be published online at www.lambethunison.blogspot.com together with details of the arrangements for submission of amendments to motions.

The Branch Returning Officer is writing separately concerning the arrangements for submission of nominations for the vacant branch officer positions.

Yours sincerely,

Jon Rogers
ACTING BRANCH SECRETARY

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Dear Colleagues,

ELECTIONS FOR VACANT BRANCH OFFICER POSITIONS

Elections will take place for vacant branch officer positions at a Branch Meeting which will take place on Monday 7 June 2010 at 12.30pm in the Assembly Hall at Lambeth Town Hall.

The following positions are currently vacant;
Branch Secretary;
Assistant Branch Treasurer;
Branch Young Members Officer (who must be aged under 27 as at the end of January 2011).

If you wish to make a nomination for any of these vacant positions please complete the form below and return it to me at the Branch Office by 5pm on Friday 28 May 2010. Nominations must be made by two members and signed by the candidate.

Yours sincerely,

Paul Fitzgerald
BRANCH RETURNING OFFICER

NOMINATION FOR BRANCH OFFICER ELECTIONS 7 JUNE 2010

I wish to nominate ____________________________________________________
(Name of candidate)

For the vacant position of _______________________________________________
(Please insert title of post. Branch Secretary, Assistant Branch Treasurer or Branch Young Member’s Officer.)

Name of member making the nomination __________________________________

Name of member seconding the nomination ________________________________

Signature of candidate _________________________________________________

Labour holds Lambeth

2010-05-10T13:30:00.003Z

Labour retained control of Lambeth Council with an increased majority (44 Labour, 15 Liberal Democrats and 4 Conservative councillors). What follows is the agreement struck between Labour and the trade unions, the implementation of which we will be monitoring carefully;

The Labour Party and trade unions in Lambeth commit to the following:

· The Council will remain committed to Lambeth First’s objective of increasing the proportion of local people in employment. This will mean protecting employment wherever possible and encouraging recruitment of local people;
· The Council and trade unions will aim to negotiate a redundancy procedure which limits job losses and maximises opportunities for employees to remain in work. The Council will commit to year on year reductions in the use of agency workers and consultants;
· The Council will not seek to reduce the conditions of service of its staff without agreement, will continue to support national pay bargaining and will support the continued development of the Local Government Pension Scheme to provide secure, defined benefit pension provision;
· The Council will review the implementation of job evaluation in order to work to achieve equal pay and to eliminate any discriminating pay gaps, in particular by encouraging training and development of existing staff;
· The Council will encourage its own workforce and employees of contractors and other employers in the borough to be members of trade unions, and will encourage all its partners to engage with trade unions as representative organisations of the workforce;
· The Council will adopt policy to ensure that an in-house service improvement is considered, in consultation with the trade unions, before consideration is given to the outsourcing of any service;
· The Council will adopt policy to ensure that trade unions are consulted at the earliest stage of consideration of any shared services. This will entail the involvement of trade unions at the stage of options appraisal, in conjunction with partner organisations;
· The Council will adopt policy to ensure, in every lawful way, that staff working for contractors are treated fairly, that the Code of Practice on Workforce Matters is complied with and that no worker delivering a service to the Council receives less than the London Living Wage.
· The Council will keep faith with our young people by creating employment opportunities in the public sector through the creation of apprenticeships and traineeships.
· Labour will always strive to implement fair and equal terms of employment. We will also promote greater social responsibility as part of procurement strategies, doing our utmost to promote employment and economic wellbeing within our authority boundaries.

Quiz your candidates now!

2010-04-30T08:44:00.004Z

The UNISON website has a very useful facility to ask questions of Parliamentary candidates in your local area so that you can take those answers into account in deciding how to vote in Thursday's General Election.

In a few minutes you can send an email to all the candidates (for whom the Union has an email address) asking them whatever questions you want. The Union has prepared a standard letter which you can use - but you can add to, delete from or amend the standard letter as you see fit.

This is an excellent opportunity both to put pressure on candidates (if we can swamp them with emails) and also to find out what candidates have to say if you are still making your mind up how to vote on Thursday.

To get started click here.

The Branch Committee had wanted to organise an election hustings locally (and will be pursuing our disagreement with the advice which we were given that that would contravene UNISON Rules) - in the mean time however all UNISON members (and our friends and families) can organise our own "electronic hustings" at the UNISON website.

One note of caution - local authority employees should not use their employer's internet connections for this sort of political activity in the pre-election period (it would always be best to do this sort of thing from your own personal computer).

Local Election Hustings in Lambeth

2010-04-23T07:19:00.002Z

This is a message to UNISON members which must not be forwarded using Council resources during the election period;

To UNISON members in Lambeth Branch

Dear Colleagues,

A MILLION VOICES FOR PUBLIC SERVICES – TIME TO ASK QUESTIONS OF THE CANDIDATES IN THE GENERAL AND LOCAL ELECTIONS

In this General Election campaign a lot is being said about public spending cuts – that threatens our jobs, our pay, pensions and conditions of service and the vital public services which we work to provide.

UNISON is campaigning to defend public services under the banner of our “Million Voices” campaign (see http://www.unison.org.uk/million/). I hope that you will sign up to this campaign – and that you will use the opportunity of the election, as a citizen, to put pressure on politicians in line with UNISON policy. Some local opportunities to ask questions of candidates standing in the elections are as follows;

Monday 26 April, 7.30pm, the Nettlefold, West Norwood Library Centre
1-3 Norwood High Street

A Candidate Question Time Event for the Dulwich and West Norwood Constituency organised by the the Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS) as part of their “Make Your Vote Count” campaign (see http://www.pcs.org.uk/)

Saturday 1 May, 3pm, St Matthew’s Hall, St Matthew’s Road
An election hustings hosted by Lambeth Tenants Council with whom UNISON works closely.

If you are attending any of these hustings and would like to take any UNISON publicity or information materials please contact the Branch Office.

Please use every opportunity to impress upon politicians that there is support for public services and that there will be opposition to public spending cuts.

Yours sincerely,

Jon Rogers
BRANCH SECRETARY

Union demands funds for “crumbling” Libraries

2010-04-21T19:57:00.001Z

South Lambeth and Durning libraries closed by power failures, Streatham, Clapham, Waterloo, Durning, Minet, Archives and Carnegie closed by staff shortages, Streatham, South Lambeth, Durning, Carnegie, Minet and West Norwood closed by heating failures, Brixton closed by broken doors and toilet floods, Streatham closed by a blocked fire escape and collapsing ceiling, West Norwood and Carnegie closed by floods through leaking roofs.

This is business as usual in Lambeth's crumbling, dirty, ancient, and increasingly dangerous public libraries according to public service trade union UNISON.

”Lambeth Labour Party promised in their 2006 election manifesto to increase investment in libraries,” said a UNISON spokesperson. “At the time the Council acknowledged a long history of underinvestment in the library service. The service had insufficient money to maintain buildings to basic health and safety standards, to replace failing IT or to buy sufficient book stock. The Council were warned about the state of building maintenance due to the age of facilities and underinvestment over many years and that serious incidents could cause closure of libraries. That is what is happening now.”

UNISON points out that rather than increase the Libraries budget the Council has cut funding by more than 20%. Many library jobs are kept vacant to save money and senior management posts have been filled "temporarily" for more than two years by managers attempting to do two jobs at onceUNISON is demanding a clear plan of improvement with a sensible budget and timetable and is calling upon local people to support the demand for adequate funding of Lambeth libraries.

UNISON’s detailed demands for investment in Lambeth Libraries are as follows;

Immediate provision of funding for priority one repairs in maintenance backlog (approximately £2 million), together with a timetable for spending on priority 2 and 3 repairs;

The Libraries budget must be restored to the 2005 level (which was £6.15 million. Adjusted for inflation we estimate it should be around £6.5 million);

The Council must commit to provide additional funding for additional services - e.g. e-books, new libraries, enlarged libraries;

The Council must ensure that at least 95% of vacant library posts including Head of Libraries are filled within 6 months by full time permanent employees appointed through full open recruitment process.

Unison after the election

2010-04-15T14:25:00.001Z

Today's meeting of the Lambeth UNISON Branch Committee agree to submit the following motion for consideration by the UNISON Greater London Regional Council on 27 May and agreed to call upon all London UNISON branches to send delegates so that there is a quorum at the meeting;

UNISON GREATER LONDON REGION AFTER THE GENERAL ELECTION

Regional Council believes that the outcome of the General Election will have major implications for UNISON members in Greater London both as public service workers and as citizens. Given the large measure of consensus between the leadership of the major political parties about the need to cut the public sector deficit at the expense of public services we can anticipate, in the aftermath of the General Election, much greater clarity about the detail of threats to our members’ jobs and the services we work to provide, and which we – as citizens - receive. The scale of these threats is likely to be unprecedented in recent times. In this context UNISON’s Million Voices campaign will continue to be relevant and necessary.

Whilst not all details are yet clear we can also anticipate some important changes to the environment in which we will be working to protect our members’ interests following the General Election, for example;
 We can expect to see a scale of proposed job cuts in many areas which may test to destruction models of union organising predicated upon a “partnership” with the employers;
 We cannot anticipate reasonable pay offers in any sector in the near future;
 We can foresee major threats to public service pension provision in the medium term if not the short term;
 We can anticipate increasing official hostility to trade unionism in some areas, driven by hostile media coverage and leading to attacks upon trade union facilities;
 We have opportunities to recruit public service workers in order to organise against these threats, but will need to meet the expectations which we will thereby raise;
 We can foresee an increased need to resort to official industrial action, and also an ever increasing scrutiny of compliance with the draconian legal requirements which continue to be imposed upon us when we try to take such action;
 Attacks on our jobs and services may take the form of reorganisations which transcend branch boundaries within a sector, or sector boundaries within a locality, requiring local coordination not just within UNISON but across the trade union movement as a whole. Trades Councils are the appropriate body to coordinate this work;
 We will need to be flexible and open to new ideas about how we organise and campaign and must encourage open debate about such ideas.

Regional Council believes that to meet these new challenges in this new environment our Region must adopt a new approach to developing the Million Voices campaign and promoting UNISON policy, based upon a culture of joint working across Service Groups, an effective partnership between employed staff and activists within the framework of a lay member led trade union and a culture of tolerance and respect for debate and diverse views.

Regional Council instructs the Regional Committee to have regard to and be guided by the views of the Regional Council expressed in this motion and in particular to;
1. Consult Regional Service Group Committees about how to enhance cross sector working to respond to threats to jobs, pay and pensions across Greater London and to report back to the Regional Council;
2. Work with Regional Service Group Committees to monitor attacks upon trade unions and trade union facilities and to work with branches and Service Groups to resist such attacks;
3. Issue guidance to branches on how to step up recruitment and organising activity in the face of the attacks on jobs and services which we anticipate;
4. Encourage branches to work with other trade unions, service-users and community groups to establish broad based campaign against cuts;
5. In conjunction with Regional Service Group Committees, ensure that branches are properly briefed about how to obtain support for official industrial action and that all requests for support for such action are monitored and the response to the requests are reported to the Regional Committee and, in appropriate summary form, to the Regional Council;
6. Work with and involve Regional Self-Organised Groups in this work;
7. To contact all branches within one month of this meeting to identify the current extent of participation in Trades Councils by UNISON branches in the Region and to encourage branches to;
 participate fully in their Trades Council if affiliated;
 affiliate to their Trades Council if one exists;
 establish a Trades Council if none exists in their area.

Defend Direct Labour - lobby Cabinet 22 March

2010-03-07T16:43:00.004Z

It is great to be able to report here the positive outcome of the meeting last week between the Council Leader and the UNISON Convenor for Lambeth Living, at which Councillors expressed their interest in UNISON's proposals for an innovative tenant and worker cooperative providing direct labour as an alternative to privatisation of in-house services.

We need a good turnout of UNISON members at the Cabinet meeting on Monday 22 March in order to reinforce the effective lobbying already carried out to encourage Councillors to support in-house service provision (under the democratic control of tenants and workers) as an alternative to privatisation.

Please be there outside the Town Hall at 6.30pm on Monday 22 March!

“John Lewis Council” – Union responds to Labour Plans for Lambeth

2010-02-18T16:10:00.000Z

Public service trade union UNISON has responded to the news – reported in The Guardian on Thursday 18 February – that Labour wants Lambeth to become a “John Lewis” Council.

“The Council isn’t a Department Store,” said UNISON Joint Branch Secretary Jon Rogers, “we don’t need political soundbites – we need adequate funding for public services.”

“We do want to work with the Labour Council to improve services – front line workers know how to improve services and want to do so. The first step should be to sack all the expensive consultants who are costing us several hundred pounds a day each and talk to workers and local people about how to develop our services.”

UNISON has welcomed the Council’s proposal for a Citizens’ Commission to involve residents and service users in discussions about how to deliver public services and will give evidence to the Commission.

“We don’t think that our services need disruptive change such as outsourcing to private companies or other new organisations,” said UNISON Joint Branch Secretary, Nick Venedi, “we want to speak to the Citizens Commission – and the Labour Council – about how Council workers can improve services, not about privatisation.”

Defend Council Housing conference

2010-02-10T11:10:00.002Z

The conference takes place on Friday 19 March at the TUC conference centre, Great Russell street, WC1B 3LS with contributors including Austin Mitchell and other MPs, Tuc, Councillors, tenants including Leeds Tenants Federation, Heather Wakefield. There are plans for an evening tenants question time with all the main parties answering tenants questions on council housing, secure tenancies, fair funding and robbery.

Anyone wishing to attend this should apply direct to the branch office.

Nick Venedi

Regional Council election results

2010-02-08T16:37:00.004Z

I am publishing the list of the regional Council election results:

Regional Convenor

Margaret Greer, 103 votes
Gloria Hanson, 144 votes (elected)

Deputy Regional Convenor

Conroy Lawrence, 158 (elected)
Allen Reilly, 93

Regional Finance Convenor

John Gray, 154 (elected)
Doug Thorpe, 94

Regional Publicity Officer

Lynn Bentley, 145 (elected)
Phoebe Watkins, 108

Bola George, 101
Monica Hirst, 151 (elected)

Regional Young Persons Convenor

Anna Longman, 96
Emma Roland, 153 (elected)

Nick Venedi

Regional Council AGM 3 Feb 2010

2010-02-02T11:18:00.002Z

The Regional Council AGM is scheduled to take place on Wednesday 3 February 2010 in central London. The following are on the agenda:

1. Election of scrutineers

2. Notice of elections

3. Annual report

4. Finance report

5. NEC reports

6. Committee reports

An election will take place at the Regional AGM for the lay officer positions. The result will be known after the meeting.

Nick Venedi

Haiti earthquake appeal

2010-01-30T10:23:00.003Z

Congratulations to all Lambeth activists who were able at short notice to collect £641 which will go to the TUC Haiti Earthquake appeal fund. People like Claire, Anne Marie, Chester, Ruth, Gurmeet, Enor, Juliet and many others to name but a few. This shows how effective the Branch is when it comes to making things happen. Thanks to all who helped with this and to Gurmeet who co ordinated the effort.

Nick Venedi

How the Branch Committee works

2010-01-29T11:34:00.001Z

Here is a brief report on what to know about the Branch Committee

Who is on the Branch Committee?

We are one of 150 branches in the London region. We have a membership of approximately 2,300 members, 1,800 of those are directly employed by Lambeth Council the others work for Ofsted, Capita, Lambeth college and a number of smaller employers like Parking Services and the Recreation contracts plus a number of smaller ones like the Clapham Park project. So Lambeth Unison does not exclusively represent Lambeth employed staff only.

Each area, or Directorate, has a number of shops ( areas where members work in) Each shop can elect a shop steward who should (after training) represent members on the ground. All shop stewards should come to Branch Committee which takes place every third Tuesday of every month. Shop Stewards can put motions to BC on behalf of their shops and take part in debates and democratic decisions. Convenors are senior Stewards in every area and they are responsible for co coordinating all the Industrial Relations related work on the ground. Branch Committees are very significant.

What does the Branch Committee do?

The Branch Committee makes decisions on behalf of the Branch. It is also the place where Branch Secretaries and Convenors report back on the detail of what has been happening in the branch for the whole month so there will be reports from Secretaries on progress made on negotiating with the different employers.

How can Shop Stewards be involved?

First of all all new and existing Shop Stewards should make every effort to attend the introduction to Shop Stewards training then there is a lot more other training that can be accessed. You will need to talk to myself or preferably Sheila Simpson who co ordinates training as she is the Education Officer for the branch. Shop Stewards should also get involved with the ongoing debates and discussions on how the branch is developing and bring back ideas from their own shops. Recruiting new members is of course another major role and priority.

Conclusion

You are all encouraged to come to me or Jon with any issues you have at shop level and of course a lot of you email us on a daily basis with inquiries. We are here to help and support you and between us we have 44 years of Industrial Relations related and TU experience. We will also be looking at attending all shop steward committee meetings to ensure that they are supported in the work that they are doing and will of course encourage Convenors to make sure that shop steward committee meetings take place regularly as is the production of locally produced newsletters which the two new Publicity Officers, Enor and Andrew can help with.

Best wishes

Nick Venedi

Branch Secretary
Lambeth Unison
6a, Acre Lane SW2 5SG

www.Lambethunison.blogspot.com

0207 926 2858

Rights of Agency Workers

2010-01-28T10:19:00.004Z

The Rights of Agency Workers in Relation to basic terms and conditions of service is a current issue of concern. This is a brief analysis of what the state of play is currently.

After a 12 week qualififyng period, an agency worker will be entitled to the same basic working and employment conditions, including pay, as if they had been directly employed as permanent staff.

The definition of pay includes any pay related matters. There are exclusions to this such as redundancy pay, contractual sick pay and maternity, paternity or adoptions leave. This is an area where Trade Unions will campaign for equality in the future.

The time table for implementing the changes are as follows:

The Agency Worker Directive implemented by 5 December 2011

Government to publish regulations by October/December 2009 (already done)

The bad news is that the British government intends to delay implementation until October 1 2011.

Nick Venedi

Keeping Quality Services in House - seminar 17 March 2010

2010-01-27T12:16:00.002Z

As part of Unisons on going work around privatisation, the service group will be hosting a seminar on the 17 March 2010 at Friends House, Euston Road.

Unison have invited Professor John Bennington from Warwick Unisversity as the keynote speaker. During the morning session delegates will hear from branches about their successful campaigns and be able to discuss various relevant issues. Workshps around effective campaigning will be held in the afternoon and will be led by expert facilitators.

The main purpose of the day is to encourage branch representatives to share their experiences, talk about local successes and privatisation struggles. There will be opportunities to network and exchange information.

Unison activists, Shop Stewards, are encouraged to think about attending.

Joint Strategy Forum

2010-01-26T09:43:00.000Z

What is the Joint Strategy Forum?

This is the highest negotiating body within the authority. The Forum includes key Councillors from the Administration (Deputy Leader) the Chief Executive, Head of HR, 5 Unison reps (Branch Secs and Convenors) 3 from GMB and two from NUT so it is the highest negotiating body in the Council for staff employed by Lambeth. The Corporate Consultation Forum is lower than this body and meets on a monthly basis. JSF meets around 4 times a year or whenever it becomes necessary.

Budget proposal for 2010/11

The proposals (at face value) do not appear to look drastic as the budget looks to be in balance. This does not, however, take into account possible overspends or major changes that a future government may decide to impose on local authority finances (probable). The one thing to note is that the Council has made between 0% to 1% provision for a pay award and this will of course be a matter for the national joint negotiating body (and our unions national reps) to advice us on, Lambeth Council's provision is within what all other employers have done. I will be able to report further once I am able to look at the detail of the report.

Anticipating cuts in 2011/12

It was said that the Council would have to anticipate cuts of around 10% to 20% (depends on many different factors) in the year 2011/12 (we will know about this around September)

Other things to bear in mind

The Council will want to look at 'creative ways' of managing its finances in the next few years with the emphasis being on retaining rather than losing jobs. This of course could mean anything from exiting the national negotiating machinery and having local agreements, or coming up with ideas like flexible working arrangements etc (details of these will emerge, I am sure, soon..) we will need to decide on what the best course of action for us locally is.

Conclusion

It is clear that pressure from the government will force the Council to make cuts in the near future. A debate will of course have to take place both locally and nationally to agree a strategy to deal with this. I shall be looking at other organisations that are attached to Lambeth Unison as soon as I get that information, Ofsted, Lambeth college and Capita.
Regards

Nick Venedi

Concert for Haiti,3 February, TUC

2010-01-25T10:42:00.002Z

The TUC and its affiliated unions have organised the concert for Haiti on Wednesday 3 February at Congress House. The concert is part of the wider appeal to raise aqwareness about the situation in Haiti and funds for the relief effort through the TUC Aid - Haiti Earth quake appeal.

Details of performers, and tickets will be announced shortly (TUC website)

Nick Venedi

Local government employers announce pay freeze

2010-01-21T15:05:00.001Z

the article below is reproduced from the national Unison site.

UNISON, GMB and UNITE, representing 1.6 million workers in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, have today been told that their members face a pay freeze in 2010/2011. The unions are calling on the local government employers to think again, saying that local government workers will struggle to afford basic essentials, with nearly 3% inflation rendering the pay freeze a real terms pay cut. The unions are calling for them to come to their senses and make a reasonable offer, saying that there is room in council budgets to give workers decent pay.UNISON Head of Local Government, Heather Wakefield, said:"The employer's decision to cut our members' pay without negotiation is a slap in the face for hard working council employees who have kept local communities together through the crisis."Two thirds already earn less than #18k a year. Last year George Osborne, Tory shadow chancellor said the Tories would not freeze pay for those earning in this pay bracket, now the Tory LGA is doing just that."Our members are already covering posts left vacant by wide-spread redundancies. 75% of the workforce are women so this is an outright attack on women's pay."We know that councils can afford an increase. Council reserves have grown, while many have chosen to cut their own income by freezing council tax. Our members will be outraged by this threatened pay freeze."The trade unions will meet urgently to consider the next steps."Peter Allenson, National Officer for Unite the union, said:"There has been absolutely no negotiation with the employers. We have had a position put to us that will effectively reduce our members' living standards. There is no justification for what I would call a pay freeze, and our members would be angry and outraged to say the least."The employers should reconsider and come to negotiating table as soon as possible. In the mean time we will consult our members on the next steps."Brian Strutton, GMB National Secretary, said:"Council workers will be absolutely furious about this and I'm personally appalled at the arrogance of the employers. There has been no discussion, no negotiation - just a political decision by conservative controlled local government. "David Cameron needs to reign in his right-wing mavericks who run councils and have the audacity to think that this 2.5 % real terms pay cut for staff is how to deliver local services. "We will now hold an urgent meeting of the trade union side to determine our plan of action. I guarantee the mood will be very angry."

Recruitment a priority for the Branch

2010-01-20T11:41:00.004Z

The AGM voted in favour of a proposal contained in motion 10 which says..

'.. To adopt a target to recruit 500 additional members within Lambeth Council workforce in 2010 and to prepare a plan to achieve this target..

To prioritise recruitment with our main employer in 2010.. '

Plans will therefore be put together and a report will go to the next Branch Committee meeting which is scheduled to take place on Tuesday 16 February 2010. All comments and contribution before that will be welcomed.

Nick Venedi

Leave it out...

2010-01-18T14:34:00.002Z

Lambeth trade unions and the Council have been in discussions for some months about updating the Leave Code.

At the last moment the Council has sought to give itself the right to compel staff to book leave when the employer wants them to, subject only to their giving us twice as much notice as the leave they want to force us to book.

For staff who juggle leave all year to cover school holidays (or who just want to plan a single lengthy break away from all the stress of work, or to visit family) this is completely unacceptable.

UNISON's response sent today is as follows;

“There is no prospect of agreement to; “The Council may require employees to take annual leave on particular days. In such circumstances, the minimum notice given by the council must be at lease twice the length of the leave to be taken”.

This is a massive proposed change and not one which has been discussed.”

London Regional Committee Meeting 13 January 2010

2010-01-13T15:52:00.003Z

The London Regional Committee met today in central London. A number of decisions were made in terms of organising the Regional AGM which is scheduled to take place in February 2010.

The committee would support reducing the number of regional meetings from 4 to 3 or 4 (depending on a decision to be made by the mover of the two motions re rule change)

There will be 3 speakers at the AGM.

Officers presented reports and the Regional Secretary explained why a motion submitted by the Lambeth Branch was ruled out of order.

Recruitment in the London region rose by 3.1 % in the year ending December 2009.

Nick Venedi

Lambeth Unison AGM

2010-01-12T12:38:00.006Z

All Lambeth activist and members have been informed that the AGM scheduled to take place on Thursday 14 January is going ahead as planned. The meeting will start at 12.15, time off has been agreed. Please make every effort to attend.

Nick Venedi

Lambeth Unison AGM 14 January 2010

2010-01-11T10:25:00.002Z

The Branch Office would like to inform all members that the AGM scheduled to take place on Thursday 14 January 2010 will go ahead despite some difficulties with the weather. The meeting will start at 12.30 at the Lambeth Town Hall. Hot lunch will be provided. Time off has been agreed.

Nick Venedi

Adverse weather conditions and attending work

2010-01-08T10:16:00.003Z

Reports coming in from Directorates indicate that management have been flexible with regards to agreeing for staff to work from home. And whilst it is true that a number of jobs can not be done remotely the majority of Council workers could cover most of their duties based from home. The advice is to have a discussion with your line manager and agree some working from home model that can suit the needs of the service and offers you some protection and flexibility.

Update on Friday afternoon - for those who are not able to work from home we have been notified that the Council will be advising managers as follows;

"I am asking managers to excuse late arrival during the period of disruption resulting from the current adverse weather conditions.

We are all expected to make reasonable and safe efforts to attend work. If the disruption prevents you from attending work, you should contact your line manager or, failing this, a colleague as soon as possible to let them know.

Where it is not reasonably practicable to attend work, up to a day’s special paid leave may be granted. For further absence from work resulting from the weather conditions, annual leave, flexi-leave, unpaid leave, or making up the hours by agreement with your line manager may also be agreed. This applies to all workers and also staff facing carer problems due to school closures, or restrictions due to disability."

UNISON has raised with the Council that this advice is not sufficiently clear about arrangements for working from home, that there should be scope for additional leave beyond one day where this is genuinely necessary, and that cases involving disability should be dealt with on a case by case basis in accordance with the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act.

We will report here on further discussions.

Too cold at work?

2010-01-07T16:05:00.003Z

For those who do make it in to work in this icy weather it is important that there is adequate thermal comfort in the workplace (that means it shouldn't be too cold!)(or too hot, but that may not be too much of a problem for branch members in the next few days).

What follows is the advice of the Health and Safety Executive;

The temperature in workrooms should provide reasonable comfort without the need for special clothing (i.e. out door clothing). Where such a temperature is impractical because of hot or cold processes, all reasonable steps should be taken to achieve a temperature which is as close as possible to comfortable. 'Workroom' means a room where people normally work for more than short periods.

The temperature in workrooms should normally be at least 16 degrees Celsius unless much of the work involves severe physical effort in which case the temperature should be at least 13 degrees Celsius. These temperatures may not, however, ensure reasonable comfort, depending on other factors such as air movement and relative humidity.

HSE previously defined thermal comfort in the workplace, as: 'An acceptable zone of thermal comfort for most people in the UK lies roughly between 13°C (56°F) and 30°C (86°F), with acceptable temperatures for more strenuous work activities concentrated towards the bottom end of the range, and more sedentary activities towards the higher end.'

Normally in office buildings for example we would expect temperatures to exceed a minimum of 16 degrees Celsius during working hours. Where the workplace is initially too cold it is reasonable to allow a little time for the employer to remedy this (for example by providing additional heating). Local shop stewards should check when building heating is being turned on as in cold weather it may be sensible to give workplaces more time to warm up before most of the workforce arrive.

If a reasonable temperature cannot be achieved within one hour of the beginning of core time in a workplace, the advice of the branch is that shop stewards should insist that management take action which may include;

providing additional heating
allowing staff to work from another location
allowing staff to work from home.

If none of these options can allow staff to work at a reasonable temperature then staff should be sent home with pay as the employer would otherwise be failing in its statutory duty under Regulation 7 of the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 which states that "During working hours, the temperature in all workplaces inside buildings shall be reasonable."

Provision of heating in several main buildings is the responsiblity of Facilities Managment, and shop stewards may want to contact FM directly where there are problems - however it is a line management responsibility for the health, safety and welfare of employees and so stewards should also insist that line managers take action.

If approaches to FM and line management do not lead to a solution contact your UNISON Convenor for further advice.

Can't get in because of the snow and ice?

2010-01-07T15:49:00.004Z

Up and down the country UNISON members are working to keep services going and clear roads - but not everyone is able to get into their normal workplace.

Lambeth Council's advice to employees about getting to work in the current adverse weather is as follows;

"Despite the adverse weather we are striving to run normal services for our residents, so please continue to come into work as normal. If you have any problems getting to work due to the adverse weather please discuss arrangements with your line manager.

If you are working from home the standard remote access service, or VPN, will be available as usual. If you experience any issues, please contact the ICT Helpdesk on 020 7926 9111. If you don't need to be logged on to the VPN network to do your work, please log off the system and work in 'standalone' mode when possible, so that others can log into the network".

UNISON, on behalf of the joint trade unions, has set out our expectations of the employer and requested further discussion as follows;

"Staff will and should make reasonable efforts to get to work and work their contracted hours. In practice many employees will make considerable efforts to keep services running. The trade unions hope that the Council will give practical expression to its appreciation of these efforts.

The trade unions would obviously also expect a flexible approach where staff are unable to attend work either because of transport difficulties or because of weather related circumstances (most notably school closures).

We would expect that managers will advise employees of their right to request special leave, which may be granted with pay depending upon circumstances. The trade unions believe that circumstances in which an employee cannot safely get to work, or cannot attend work because of the weather-related closure of public services such as schools are circumstances in which paid special leave should be granted.

We would also expect that managers will consider flexibly proposals by staff that they work from home where this is practicable.

Where staff reasonably arrive late or have to leave early because of the weather we believe that they should be credited with having worked a full day.

We would also expect that Human Resources will advise that absences on these dates which are weather related should not be taken into account against employees in any formal process."

Any UNISON members who do not get a flexible response from their manager in discussion about difficulties getting to work should contact their local shop steward in the first instance.

Happy New Year 2010

2010-01-04T11:04:00.003Z

Happy New Year to all Lambeth Unison members. A few important days to remember.

Corporate Consultation Forum 8 January
Branch Assessment Meeting in central London (Jon Rogers to cover)
Regional Committee 13 January
Lambeth Unison AGM 14 January
Branch Committee on the 19 January
Deadline for motions and reports to go to the BC is Thursday 14 January
Regional LGBT 21 January

Nick Venedi

A letter from Jon

2009-12-30T10:37:00.000Z

I have been following the progress of a convoy taking aid to the Gaza strip. The convoy consists of over 200 vehicles carrying many thousands of pounds worth of aid, and has been organized by Viva Palestina and Code Pink. Many of the activists taking part have gone from the United Kingdom.
It has recently come to my attention that Egyptian authorities have blocked the progress of the convoy by denying entry to Egypt. The convoy is currently waiting in Jordan to be permitted to board a ferry across the Red Sea. I have heard from one person in the convoy who has described how they are cold and have little access to food at the moment.
I am kindly requesting that you use your position and influence to help us persuade the Egyptian authorities to permit the convoy to pass safely. This is very important to me, both for my hope that the people in Gaza will receive the much-needed aid, and also out of concern for my friends in the convoy.
Kind regards,
Jon Rogers
Branch Secretary
Lambeth Unison

Office hours

2009-12-29T11:31:00.004Z

A Branch committee meeting...

The office will have limited cover tomorrow Wednesday 30 December. You can email Nick Venedi at NickVenedi@aol.com if you have an urgent inquiry or facing a major problem otherwise Nick will be in tomorrow.

Nick Venedi

Aid for Palestinians held up

2009-12-26T13:10:00.001Z

The main international issue on which the branch has been campaigning in the past year has been solidarity with the Palestinian people. Recently we raised money to support the Viva Palestina aid convoy.

Currently the convoy is stuck in Jordan where the Egyptian authorities are refusing to allow the convoy to progress through Egypt to Gaza to deliver aid directly where it is required.

The branch has written to protest to the Egyptian authorities – and you can add your protest by telephone or email to the Egyptian Embassy in London on 020 7499 3304/2401 and/or eg.emb_london@mfa.gov.eg.

NB. The embassy email addresses are only meant for information, so you could include a kind note to forward the message to the appropriate diplomatic staff.

80% vote for action

2009-12-24T13:00:00.002Z

The ballot for strike action in opposition to the threat of compulsory redundancies in Housing Supply and Demand produced an 80% "yes" vote on a 56% turnout. UNISON has agreed with the Council to extend the deadline by which strike action would need to be taken in order to attempt to avoid compulsory redundancies without the need for strike action.

This successful outcome of the strike ballot demonstrates the determination which we will need to face up to the threat of job losses in the coming years. We will try to negotiate a better redundancy policy and also to avoid redundancies in each reorganisation - but we will need to be prepared to back our words up with deeds.

AGM Report

2009-12-23T11:35:00.001Z

The AGM report will be available in PDF format to all members from Tuesday 29th. Please email Nick Venedi at nickvenedi@aol.com for your own copy.

Nick Venedi

Climate change conference

2009-12-22T12:02:00.001Z

Copenhagen – UNISON response

UNISON, the UK’s leading public sector trade union, welcomed progress made at the Copenhagen talks last week, but called for more work to be done to reach a legally binding treaty to tackle climate change.

The union welcomed the finance that will help countries in the developing world to start adapting to climate change, including through investment in public services. But it was disappointed that text, mentioning the needs of workers, had been removed from the final compromise agreement.

Dave Prentis, UNISON General Secretary, said:

“The Copenhagen summit did not reach the legally binding deal that UNISON, and unions across the world, were hoping for. But it is a first step in reaching an agreement to limit global warming. UNISON is calling on all governments to keep up their commitment to reach a deal into the New Year and beyond.

“UNISON will carry on campaigning for a fair transition to a low carbon economy, that guarantees decent green jobs and training. And for a climate change agreement that helps poor countries cope with the cost of being green, and the effects of global warming.”

Xmas period office hours

2009-12-21T15:22:00.002Z

The office in Acre Lane will be open for business but there will be limited service provided from Wednesday the 23rd of December. Unison Members can contact officers via email during this period every attempt will be made to answer inquiries received via email.

NVenedi@Lambeth.gov.uk

Nick Venedi

AGM motions

2009-12-19T19:18:00.003Z

The deadline for submitting motions to appear in the AGM report has been extended to Monday 21 December 2.00 p.m. all motions received on time will be published in the official report.

The AGM is to take place on the 14 January 2010.

Nick Venedi

Shop Steward nominations, the final list

2009-12-18T11:29:00.002Z

Shop Steward nominations for 2010

Finance Resources and OCE

Jay Mehta
Chester Danvers
Caroline Clark
Nick Venedi
Frances Heath
Nazim Udin
Natasha Johnson
Patricia Adeneye
Maureen Thomas Redwood
Mel Mergia
Sheila Simpson
John Myers
Richard Gibbons
Edith Sido
Isolda McNeil
Sheila Simpson
Elizabeth Anthony

HRE and Lambeth Living

Gary Whiting
Claire Geary
Reg Morrison
Dan Jeffrey
Coral Charles
Trevor Dennis
Mary Cotey
Rob Gowland
Denise Nunn - St John
Hitesh Patel
Dave Goldring
Gurmeet Khurana
Ken Beumount
Katrina Hoogendam
AnnMarie Eccleston - Jackson
Enor Taiga/Hassina Malik
Tyrone Thomas
Anthony Payne
Dawn Smith
Ophelia Semone
Moses Moloi
Edward Owoyemi
Noe Bapeck

ACS

Jackie Lewis
Diane King
Aran Lewis
Tim O'Dell
Tara Solanki
Erol Mehmet
Raj Gupta
Roger Lewis
Ruth Cashman
Sahida Uddin

Cyps

Andrew Tullis
Munu Amunu
Jeremy Dewar/Barbara (js)
Corinne Fyfe

AGM Reports

2009-12-17T13:35:00.002Z

The deadline for receiving reports and motions for inclusion in the AGM report is tomorrow Friday 18th at 4.00 p.m. The report will be put together next week and will be going to the printers. Copies will be made available online (pdf) hardcopies will also be distributed to Shop Stewards and Convenors prior the AGM.

Nick Venedi

Shop Steward nomination forms

2009-12-16T14:37:00.002Z

Just a reminder that the deadline for submitting Shop Steward nomination forms for 2010 is Thursday 17 December 2009 at 4.00 p.m. the final list will be published on Friday the 18th. All Lambeth Activists are asked to consider serving their shops by becoming Shop Stewards.

Nick Venedi

December Branch Committee meeting

2009-12-15T14:12:00.002Z

The well attended Branch Committee meeting today agreed to extend the deadline for Shop Steward nomination forms. The extension expires on the 17th when all Shop Steward nomination forms must be in.

The Committee donated £50 to the Leeds strikers and a further £61 was collected. The money will go towards buying children of those on strike toys.

The leave code and the Single Status offer from the Council was discussed. Directorate and SOG (Self Organised Group) Convenors reported on news in their areas. The Treasurer reminded budget holders of the need to inform the office of any plans for any events which may cost money. This information needs to be with Branch Office by the 20th of December.

Nick Venedi

Branch AGM nominations

2009-12-14T12:51:00.004Z

The follwing nominations were received on time:

Nominations received by close of nominations on the 14 December 2009.
Position

Chair P Woodward , unopposed
Vice Chair R Morrison , unopposed
Secretary N Venedi/J Rogers (js) unopposed
Assistant BS S Simpson, D Jeffrey/R Cashman (js) (election needed)
Treasurer R Beasley, unopposed
Education/Life long S Simpson, unopposed
Health and Safety K Hoogendam M Moloi(election needed)
International Officer G Khurana ,unopposed
Publicity Officer A Tullis, E Taiga (election needed)
Deputy Publicity J Dewar, unopposed
Auditor 1 J Mehta, unopposed
Auditor 2 R Holton, unopposed
Returning Officer P Fitzgerald , unopposed
Welfare Officer G Whiting K Hoogendam (election needed)
Young Members James Caspell, unopposed
Membership Officer M Kotey/R Gowland (js) E Taiga (election needed)
Local government conference delegate N Venedi/J Rogers (js) S Uddin K Rafe unopposed
National conference delegate H Malik R Cashman S Uddin (election needed)

Regional Council delegate N Venedi K Hoogendam Unopposed. Two more seats to be elected at AGM

No nomination for Equalities Officer was received so experessions of interest will be invited at the AGM.
Shop Steward nominations will be announced separately.

Corporate Consultation Forum

2009-12-11T11:32:00.002Z

Corporate Consultation Forum took place this morning and the following subjects were dealt with (not all matters discussed can be posted here due to confidentiality issues)

Flexible Retirement Policy. Nick Venedi raised major concerns regarding the lack of a mechanism from the Council side allowing for staff to request flexible retirement which they contractually have a right to. The Council agreed that the absence of an agreed policy did not preclude those who had the right to ask for flexible retirement to do so. Staff side insisted that flexible retirement policy should be agreed separately and the lack of agreement on the deferred retirement age should not prevent implementing flexible retirement procedure.

Agency workers. A report was presented showing the number of agency workers employed by Lambeth.

Nick Venedi

Corporate Consultation Forum

2009-12-10T10:25:00.002Z

The next Corporate Consultation Forum (CCF for short) takes place tomorrow Friday the 11th in the Town Hall. This is the Forum where issues that have not been resolved at Directorate level are referred to or matters that are purely to do with the Corporate body. Discussion takes place between all the unions and senior officers from HR. Occasionally a Director turns up to explain things. If issues raised at CCF are not resolved these can be referred to the Joint Strategy Forum.

The CCF tomorrow will discuss progress on policy and the flexible retirement option that has not been dealt with at all by Lambeth Council.

Nick Venedi

Important deadlines

2009-12-09T13:13:00.003Z

The following deadlines are important to note:

1. Deadline for receipt of nominations for branch officer positions and Shop Stewards is 14 December 12.00 noon
2. Deadline for receipt of motions for inclusion in AGM report, 17 December 12.00 noon
3. Deadline for receipt of motions to go to Regional Council, 15 December

In addition the deadline for motions and reports to go to the 15 December Branch Committee is 11 December 2.00 p.m.

Nick Venedi

Regional Council meeting 8 December 2009

2009-12-08T13:00:00.002Z

The Regional Council meeting was inquorate. The required number of delegates were not in attendance. The Chair, Gloria Hanson, declared the meeting inquorate. In addition no questions could be asked by those attending.

The meeting heard 3 speakers

There was a speech by a Unison Officer working on the A million voices campaign. The Lambeth Unison Branch has signed up for this as did another 150 branches in the country.

Jeremy Corbin gave his parliamentary report which included some news on the Equalities Bill and the issues around the recession and government cut backs. He correctly argued that deleting 1 million jobs in the public sector would damage the economy our way of life and prospect of recovering.

A Shop Steward from the Post Office spoke about the Industrial Action. The meeting presented the comrade with a £5000 donation from regional funds which will have to be agreed retrospectively and by the regional AGM in February 2010.

The meeting ended by 11 as there was no opportunity to ask any questions.

Nick Venedi

December Regional Council 8 Dec 2009

2009-12-07T12:32:00.002Z

The Regional Council meeting is scheduled to take place tomorrow Tuesday 8 December 2009 at UL students union Malet street. The agenda includes the following:

1 Minutes

2. Regional Committee report

3. Finance report

4. Stephen Lawrence Action Plan

5. NEC reports

6. Motions (none submitted)

7. Committee reports

The Lambeth Unison delegates are. Nick Venedi, Katrina Hoogendam, Dan Jeffrey, Jackie Lewis

An update will be given tomorrow following the meeting.

Nick Venedi

TUC Course in tackling racism at work

2009-12-05T19:46:00.001Z

Cut and paste (or click on) the link below to see details of the course offered to trade union activists by the TUC.

http://www.tuc.org.uk/equality/tuc-17312-f0.cfm

Nick Venedi

Second day of protest HRE Dispute

2009-12-04T14:20:00.002Z

The second day of lunchtime protest took place today outside Hambrook House demonstrating about managements inability to investigate a serious allegation of assault reported by 2 Unison Members in HRE. The protests will continue until the Council fulfills its legal obligation and deals with its duty of care to employees who have been exposed to danger.

Demonstration outside Hambrook House

2009-12-03T14:54:00.002Z

Activists have been asked to attend a gathering outside Hambrook House today and tomorrow from 12.10 to 1.50 to demonstrate against managements reluctance to progress a complaint issued against a consultant who should be investigated. Management were given until 5.00 p.m. yesterday to respond but they failed to come back. Activists have been asked to gather again tomorrow Friday 4th December outside Hambrook House to protest.

Nick Venedi

Invitation to Lambeth Unison AGM

2009-12-02T11:32:00.001Z

Date: 2 December 2009.

All Lambeth Unison Members

Dear Member,

Re: UNISON AGM 14 January 2010.

I am writing to invite you to the Annual General Meeting of the Lambeth Unison Branch which is scheduled to take place on Thursday 14 January 2010 from 12.30 onwards (time off has been asked for and it is usually agreed by management)

This is perhaps the most important single meeting for the whole Branch where important motions, information, elections and policy decisions will be made. The meeting takes place at the Assembly Hall of Lambeth Town Hall, lunch and refreshments will be provided as always. The venue is wheelchair accessible and a sign language interpreter will be provided.

Please make every effort to attend as this is the one place and one event where all Lambeth Unison members should attend to ensure that the Branch, your Branch, functions and makes decisions endorsed through democratic involvement. The annual budget also needs to be agreed.

Please do not hesitate to contact the Office if you have any additional needs or want more information. I wish to thank you for being actively involved in your union and look forward to seeing you at your AGM.
Best wishes,

Nick Venedi & Jon Rogers
Joint Unison Branch Secretaries

Lambeth Unison Activists xmas get together...

2009-12-01T20:39:00.003Z

The annual Xmas Lambeth members activists get together (a drink down the local pub) will take place on Friday 18 December from 5.00 p.m. onwards in a venue on Acre Lane. For details please contact Nick Venedi. All activist members welcome.

Lambeth Branch campaign against privatisation supported from the Political Fund

2009-11-30T16:14:00.002Z

Thanks to the Greater London UNISON Regional Finance Team, the Lambeth Branch will be provided with sufficient resources (from the UNISON General Political Fund) to enable us to obtain the assistance of a consultant from the Association for Public Service Excellence to prepare an in-house bid for the services threatened with privatisation by managers in Lambeth Living.

This is just another small step on the way to getting fair consideration for an in-house service improvement programme as an alternative to privatising the Concierge, First Call and Estate Cleaning services. The hard work continues from here...

Viva Palestina collections raise £718

2009-11-30T12:38:00.003Z

The international officer, Gurmeet, has announced that the Lambeth wide collection for Viva Palestina has raised around £718. Congratulations to those who helped make this happen and specifically to Gurmeet for coordinating the effort. This is the second collection done locally and Lambeth Unison is proud of being able to help a just cause. Thanks to all who helped.

Branch Committee dates 2009/10

2009-11-28T11:48:00.002Z

The following are Branch Committee days. Deadlines for submitting reports and motions are always the Thursday before the Tuesday Branch committee meeting. All paperwork relating to meetings goes out late Thursday prior to the Tuesday.

Dec 15 2009
Jan 19 2010
Feb 16 2010
March 16 2010
April 20 2010
May 18 2010
June 8 2010
July 20 2010
Aug 17 2010
Sept 28 2010
Oct 19 2010
Nov 23 2010
Dec 21 2010

Extra Ordinary Branch committee meetings may be called in between within national and local Rule book.

Nick Venedi

Regional Council Meeting 8 December

2009-11-27T11:40:00.003Z

The Regional Council meeting is scheduled to take place on the 8th December 2009. Lambeth Unison has 4 delegates to the Council. The following is what is on the agenda. This is the forum where all of the 152 branches in London meet to discuss London wide issues.

Agenda

Minutes
Regional Committee Report
Finance Report
Stephen Lawrence Action Plan
NEC Report
Motions (non received!)
Committee reports
Any Other Business

Any member wishing to raise questions re this meeting please contact Nick Venedi on NVenedi@Lambeth.gov.uk

Nick Venedi

The Job Evaluation process

2009-11-26T11:03:00.002Z

Everyone employed by Lambeth Council has a contractual right to ask for their job description to be reviewed. This can be done through the Job Evaluation Scheme and within Single Status principles and national agreements.

The process is long and the best way to approach doing a job evaluation of your job is through your local representative who should be experienced in the process and how it is done.

You will need to update your job description and incorporate the parts in the new version that you feel are not in your existing one. Once you have been able to do this your line manager (or the Head of your section) has to agree that your amendments are true and reflect what it is that you do. It is often assumed that a line manager has the right to say no to your request for an evaluation. This is not correct. What your line manager has to do is agree the accuracy of what you say you do.

Other important principles to remember is that you will have to be in a specific post for more than 6 months before you can ask for an evaluation. Your rep should be able to explain all that.

You then submit your new updated version of the job description to HR who should then get a panel together to evaluate. The result is then communicated to you in writing. You will have a 3 month period to appeal against the decision if you think that the result does not reflect the grade you were expecting. The appeal has to be in writing.

Once you have submitted an appeal the HR department will put together a panel to hear your case. The panel will consist of a senior member from HR and a Union rep (usually a Convenor with sufficient training and experience) If this panel makes a decision that you disagree with (and you have valid reasons not to agree) then a final stage appeal will be arranged. This will be the last chance you get to get the correct grade.

You will, of course, be advised throughout this process by experienced Union rep who will work with you and offer expert support.

Any questions please contact Nick Venedi on NVenedi@Lambeth.gov.uk

A reminder that this evaluation scheme only applies to those employed directly by Lambeth Council and local government employees. Other organisations are obliged to have similar schemes that can withstand the Equality (Equal Pay) test.

Nick Venedi

Branch Committee decisions 24 November 2009

2009-11-24T14:43:00.004Z

The November Branch committee took place today Tuesday 24 2009.

The committee received the Branch Secretaries reports. Special emphasis was placed on the time table regarding the production of reports for inclusion in the AGM report. Reports need to be with the Branch office by 14 December. This is because the AGM is taking place on the 14th January and because of the Xmas period deadlines are strict (with printers)

The committee was also reminded that deadline for receiving nomination forms was also 14 December.

Members of the committee wished to thank the international officer, Gurmeet, for the splendid work she has done in collecting on behalf of Viva Palestina. Through her efforts the Branch was able to collect more than £500. Congratulations and thanks for those who contributed.

The committee had received a number of written requests from those who wish to stand for Lay officer positions in the Region. A number of these were agreed.

There were no motions presented and Convenors gave detailed reports on what is happening in their areas.

The next Branch committee meeting is scheduled to take place on the 15th December in the town hall.

Nick Venedi

AGM Positions, Treasurer, Equalities Officer, Education, Publicity Officer, Welfare Officer, International Officer.

2009-11-23T10:41:00.004Z

This is a brief description of what the Treasurer, Equalities Officer Education (Life Long Learning) Officer, Welfare Officer, International Officer do.

Treasurer. The Treasurer will manage the financial affairs of the Branch in conjunction with the Branch Secretary and within the national rules and the Financial Regulations agreed by Lambeth Unison AGM in 2002. The Treasurer will ensure that the Branch remains solvent and that full compliance is observed. The Treasurer will ensure that the financial integrity of the Branch is protected and will report to the Branch committee with statements and full reports (including budgets) to the AGM. The Treasurer will proposed annual expenditure and budgets.

Equalities Officer. The Equalities Officer works with the Branch committee and activists and SOG's to ensure that the Equalities agenda, national and local, are adhered to and that new initiatives are promoted.

Education and Life Long Learning Officer. This Officer is responsible for ensuring that initiatives relating to learning and development are developed by the branch and policy is implemented.

Publicity Officer. The Publicity Officer will work with the Branch Officers to ensure that the Branch is adequately projected in the media and that information goes out to members and activists who need to be kept informed. The Publicity Officer works with the Secretaries to ensure that any campaigns are correctly projected and promoted.

Welfare Officer. Helps members who may have financial difficulties and uses the national welfare scheme to achieve this.

International Officer. The International Officer will led on campaigns to do with international issues within national rules.

Any questions please contact Nick Venedi on NVenedi@Lambeth.gov.uk

Nick Venedi

AGM Positions - Chair, Vice Chair, Assistant Branch Secretary

2009-11-21T19:47:00.002Z

This is a brief description of the duties that the Chair, Vice Chair and Assistant Branch Secretary have in the union and specifically Lambeth Unison.

Chair. The Chair of the Branch is elected at the annual general meeting (AGM) annually. The Chair chairs the AGM, Branch Meetings and Branch Committee meetings plus other ad hoc gatherings when these are agreed. The Chair is a national rule book position. Any member in Lambeth Unison can chose to stand for election.

Vice Chair. The Vice Chair serves as deputy to the Chair when and if required.

Assistant Branch Secretary. This is another rule book position. The Assistant Deputises for the Secretary (that role was described yesterday) Any member can chose to stand for this position.

Any questions or inquiries please contact Nick Venedi at NVenedi@Lambeth.gov.uk

Nick Venedi

AGM positions - Branch Secretary

2009-11-20T15:04:00.004Z

This is a brief description of what the Branch Secretary is expected to do.

The position and the role of the Branch Secretary is defined and the major duties are described in the national rule book.

Every recognised Unison Branch is required to elect a Branch Secretary every year at the AGM.

The Lambeth Unison Branch Secretary is responsible for members employed by Lambeth Council, Ofsted, Lambeth college, Capita (Lambeth and Bromley) Lambeth Leisure Services, Lambeth Living and a number of members employed by smaler private contractors and disperseed throughout London such as the Clapham Parks project etc. There are currently 2,300 members in Lambeth Unison, 1,800 of them work directly for Lambeth Council.

The Branch Secretary is accountable to the monthly Branch Committee, Branch meetings and ultimately the AGM.

The Branch Secretary must coordinate the work and activities of Directorate Convenors and work with them to achieve Branch and national aims and objectives. The Secretary needs to ensure that the Branch remains within national rules and current legislation when there are Industrial Disputes and must ensure legal compliance (in conjunction with the Region) ensuring that the Branch does not expose itself to legal challenges.

The Branch Secretary also works and supports the work of other Branch Officers.

The Branch Secretary advices on matters to do with employment rights, leads on negotiations and discussions where and when there are reorganisations. The Branch Secretary has a number of specific duties which require her/him to liaise with the Regional and the Regional Organiser.

The Branch Secretary works with Shop Stewards, Officers and elected reps from the Self Organised Groups to achieve aims and objectives agreed in the Branch Development Plan. Recruitment initiatives is another major role for the Secretary.

Any Lambeth Unison member can stand for election for this position and members do not have to be Shop Stewards.

Any questions on this please contact Nick on NVenedi@Lambeth.gov.uk

Nick Venedi

Positions for the AGM - Shop Stewards

2009-11-18T18:46:00.004Z

I will attempt to explain what it is that an activist wishing to get more involved has to do and will start with a brief job description of what a Shop Steward is expected to do.

A Shop Steward serves and acts as the first point of contact in a given Shop. Lambeth Unison has a number of Shops these are spread over the 4 main Directorates and Lambeth Living areas. Other parts of Lambeth Unison, that come under other employers, such as Ofsted and Lambeth college, have their own Shop Stewards. structures

The Convenor of each distinct area (chief Steward) is responsible for coordinating the work of the Stewards and Steward committees that should take place locally on a frequent basis.

The Shop Steward is elected annually and serves for a period of one year in line with other Officers. All nominations are confirmed at the annual AGM. She or he will represent members and their interests in the specific shop and will deal with disciplinary and other work related matters. The Shop Steward will work with the local Convenor and focus on branch wide aims and objectives. Shop Stewards are expected to attend the monthly Branch committee which takes place every 3rd Tuesday of each month (usually) The Shop Steward will attend training to receive accreditation and can be involved with negotiating during reorganisation periods.

The Branch acknowledges the immense contribution Shop Stewards have to make and will encourage every member activist to get involved. Job share arrangements are also encouraged.

For any questions contact Nick Venedi on NVenedi@Lambeth.gov.uk

Nick Venedi

Nomination forms for AGM positions

2009-11-17T15:55:00.002Z

All nomination forms relating to Branch Officer positions were emailed out to all Shop Stewards and activists today. The forms will also be posted out by Friday this week and will go to all contacts. The closing date for receipt of completed nomination forms is Monday 14 December 2009. Five forms in total went out. Members of Lambeth Unison are invited to consider standing for the following positions:

Shop Steward in their own area and own shop
A number of Branch Officer positions
Local Government Conference delegate
National Conference Delegate
Regional Council Delegate

Copies of these forms can be obtained from your local Shop Steward or Convenor. Alternatively you can email one of the following for more information;

NVenedi@Lambeth.gov.uk
JRogers@Lambeth.gov.uk
JABlake@Lambeth.gov.uk

Nick Venedi

All Lambeth Unison members are encouraged to consider standing for any of these positions.

November Branch committee meeting

2009-11-11T19:01:00.001Z

A decision has been made to change the date of the next Branch committee meeting which was scheduled to take place on the 17th of November to Tuesday 24th November. This is because the 17th of November clashes with the Regional committee.

The deadline for submitting reports and motions to the November meeting is therefore Thursday 19th November 2009.

Nick Venedi

Postal Workers Dispute

2009-11-06T08:33:00.000Z

Agreement reached on postal dispute

The TUC has helped broker an agreement to end the current postal dispute. The settlement provides for 'a period of calm' in the run up to Christmas that will allow further discussions about Royal Mail modernisation to take place between management and the CWU.
The preceding two weeks had seen the TUC facilitating lengthy discussions between both sides to try to resolve the 'difficult and complex' dispute, with TUC general secretary Brendan Barber chairing talks at Congress House.
The TUC had previously assisted both parties to reach the 2007 Pay and Modernisation Agreement.
Read TUC statement on agreement @
http://www.tuc.org.uk/organisation/tuc-17206-f0.cfm
Read TUC statements on the dispute @
http://www.tuc.org.uk/organisation/tuc-17175-f0.cfm
http://www.tuc.org.uk/newsroom/tuc-17169-f0.cfm
http://www.tuc.org.uk/newsroom/tuc-17157-f0.cfm
http://www.tuc.org.uk/organisation/tuc-17153-f0.cfm
General Council statement of support for CWU @
http://www.tuc.org.uk/organisation/tuc-17139-f0.cfm

Nick Venedi

Branch Committee Meetings in 2009

2009-11-04T10:50:00.003Z

The next Branch committee meeting is scheduled to take place on Tuesday 17 November. The deadline for motions and reports is Thursday 12 November.

The December Branch committee will take place on Tuesday 15 December.

Nick Venedi

Lambeth Branch response on the UNISON political fund review

2009-11-03T22:19:00.000Z

1. The following are the comments from the Lambeth local government branch in response to the consultation questions in the document on the review of UNISON’s political funds, as agreed by our Branch Committee on 3 November 2009.

– what are the most important political and policy making processes affecting UNISON and its members?

– how will political, constitutional and policy changes impact on the union’s objectives and interests over the next five years?

– in what ways should branches, regions and the national union change their methods of campaigning and political organisation to meet these challenges?

2. The election of the UK Government, local authorities and devolved administrations are vitally important to UNISON members. The failure of New Labour and the likely election of a Conservative Government will presage serious attacks upon our members. At the same time the Labour Party is failing to adopt policies which reflect our members’ interests. The Union therefore needs to adopt a more independent approach politically.

– why do many branches not see the GPF and/or Labour Link as resources to help them lobby and campaign?

– how can we increase regional and branch engagement with the General Political Fund?

– how can we further strengthen regional and local Labour Link organisation?

3. The Union makes it unnecessarily difficult for branches to access political fund resources – branches should have an automatic entitlement to some political fund resources each year. Members will not engage with UNISON Labour Link whilst they see the Labour Party pursuing policies which attack the interests of our members.

– what resources and support do UNISON reps need to engage members and organise them to take political action?

– what kind of political education should be included in core training for stewards and organising staff?

– should we develop short courses for lead activists and organising staff on labour movement history and contemporary political issues?

4. UNISON needs to change its culture to one that encourages campaigning away from a “top down” officer-led culture which seeks to restrict campaigning by branches. The history of the trade union movement should be central to trade union education.

– what do members, branches, and lead activists need or want to know about the union’s political work, and how would this best be communicated to them?

– how could union communications better promote transparency and understanding of the operations of the General Political Fund and

Labour Link?

– how could union communications better encourage engagement and participation by members and branches in the union’s political work?

5. The Union should implement Conference policy and monitor and report on the voting record of politicians associated with our Union. Members need to know whether the politicians who benefit by their association with our Union support our policies. Members in local branches should have a direct input into decisions about which politicians UNISON supports and works with.

– is there more we need to do to ensure that subscription and allocation procedures are transparent?

– is there more we can do to encourage the greatest possible participation in the two sections of the political fund?

6. Members should not be allocated into the Affiliated Political Fund unless they make a deliberate choice to pay into the Labour Party. Branches should have direct control over some of the General Political Fund which should be available to be spent in accordance with the decisions of quorate Branch or Branch Committee meetings. The Union has to face up to the fact that if the proportion of members choosing to pay into the Affiliated Fund falls much below the present proportion (one third) it will no longer be tenable to maintain that UNISON is affiliated to the Labour Party.

– are existing structures for the governance of the General Political Fund adequate to ensure transparency, accountability and engagement?

– how can we encourage a higher level of participation in Labour Link structures at branch, regional and national level?

– are there ways in which we can improve the accountability and responsiveness of both Labour Link and the GPF to wider union

structures at local, regional, devolved and national levels?

7. There should be a single-section political fund under the control of National Delegate Conference and the separate structures for each section of the fund should be abolished. The existing structures were designed, prior to vesting day in 1993, specifically to avoid transparency, accountability and engagement and cannot be reformed.

BWG AGM

2009-10-30T10:07:00.001Z

Lambeth Unison Black Workers Group
Annual General Meeting &
Black History Month Celebration
30 October 2009

Agenda

· Registration Refreshments and Performance 12.00-12.30
By Kriss Kriss and the LTR Band
· Chair to Open AGM 12.30-12.35
· Report 12.35-12.45
· Ask AGM to accept reports 12.45-12.50
· Motions 12.50-13.00
· Nominations and Elections 13.00-13.20
I. Convenor