UNISON has been involved in ongoing discussions about the restructuring in GLDP Services with Mungo Foundation management over recent months. You will remember the background to this is Glasgow City Council’s move to personalise services for service users with learning disabilities through self directed support.
You may well have now been involved in assisting in the completion of Self Evaluation Questionnaires on behalf of service users. It is important that staff, and key workers especially, be consulted on the completion of these questionnaires as staff are amongst the closest to knowing the needs of the service user. These forms will now be put through a Resource Allocation System by the Council which will determine the budget that each service user gets for support. The Council have been explicit that they expect to make on average 20 to 30% savings per service user.
UNISON supports the idea that service users should have more control and say over the service they receive, we do though have major concerns about this move being introduced at a time of massive contractions in public spending as is happening here. More info on UNISON’s views on personalisation can be found in a speech by Simon Macfarlane, Regional Organiser which is on our blog for Mungo Foundation members, this can be found at http://unison-mungofoundation.blogspot.com/ .
After scoring staff according to the selection criteria, TMF came to us an initial proposal for allocating staff to posts. Through further discussions and negotiations we made representations seeking the maximum number of Project Worker posts possible.
On Thursday 16th December I and Simon Macfarlane met with TMF management to be updated on the position. The proposals which you will be hearing from management on mean significantly more staff remain on the Project Worker grade; this is obviously to be welcome. Some staff will have to move project, we have been assured that you have been spoken to about this on an individual basis if this is a potential outcome for you.
Management have been frank that they are faced with a dilemma in that they do not yet know the outcome of the Resource Allocation System process mentioned above, but fully anticipate 20% or more cuts to come out of it. This we are afraid is a reasonable assumption for them to make. They therefore have advised us that they propose to offer staff in GLDP services posts on 20% less hours than their current contract, subject to no one dropping below the 16 hour threshold for Working Tax Credits.
This is obviously very difficult news for you and comes on the back of rising prices, pay freezes and a forthcoming increase in VAT. UNISON is here to support you through this difficult time, and can advise the following:
• We are told the reduction in hours will take effect on 1 April 2011;
• We are told there will be pay protection for 3 months for downgraded staff, we are seeking clarity on this;
• We believe that you are being offered a new post as part of a redundancy consultation exercise and thus you should be entitled to a trial period should you wish one and/or to ultimately to refuse a post at reduced hours and receive a redundancy payment;
• We have sought assurances that wherever possible extra hours will be offered to staff first. On this point you should remember that if you for instance end up on a 30 hour and 36 minute contract and work additional hours over this, then up to the full time hours of 38 you are entitled for additional paid annual leave and sick pay entitlement for each extra hour worked. We have been assured by TMF that they have systems in place to deliver this but we would advise members to be vigilant to ensure they get what they are entitled to as it will be complicated;
• As and when TMF pick up any further services they should look wherever possible to increase the hours of existing staff who wish more hours.
We also want to give you an opportunity to comment on this proposed course of action. The alternative we have been advised by TMF is that if they don’t reduce hours by 20% across the board it is likely they will have to make more staff redundant. It is a difficult call to make but on balance we feel most members would prefer to save jobs. However, we want to hear your views on this. As you hopefully know I am now seconded 3 days a week to carry out union work on behalf of members. I am based at 380 Govanhill Street and am on union duties Monday to Wednesday, you can email me or telephone my mobile is 07882 551134. Please do get in touch and let me have your views.
I also want to let you know that UNISON has written to both the political leader of the Council Gordon Matheson and the Chief Executive asking for a meeting to discuss funding and wages in voluntary organisations including specifically the Mungo Foundation, we will keep you updated on this via our blog and other communications.
Finally, please remember we are stronger together and we are here to support you, so if you are not already a member now is the time to come onboard, please contact me or visit the blog to join. As members you can also get a range of support and advice such as financial advice from organisations UNISON has links to, for more information on this please see our website at http://www.unison.org.uk/benefits/special.asp . We also have a dedicated charity UNISON Welfare for members facing hardship and this can be contacted via your branch by calling them on 0141 331 4450.
Alice Lyness
UNISON Convenor
Friday, 14 January 2011
Thursday, 13 January 2011
The top ten tax shirkers – vote now
The government talks tough about clamping down on benefit ‘cheats’. Yet when faced with tax avoidance by the very wealthy, which sucks far more out of our economy than benefit fraud, ministers go quiet.
To help throw some light on this murky world, the Tax Justice Network has nominated its top ten tax shirkers and we’d like you to choose the worst offender. The winner will receive a small token of our esteem.
We're not suggesting anyone is breaking the law. But that's the problem: we need action to make sure those involved in the multi-billion pound tax avoidance industry, who act legally but use loopholes and tax havens to pay less tax, are stopped in their tracks.
You can vote here http://falseeconomy.org.uk/tax
VOTING ENDS ON MIDNIGHT 30th JANURY 2011
To help throw some light on this murky world, the Tax Justice Network has nominated its top ten tax shirkers and we’d like you to choose the worst offender. The winner will receive a small token of our esteem.
We're not suggesting anyone is breaking the law. But that's the problem: we need action to make sure those involved in the multi-billion pound tax avoidance industry, who act legally but use loopholes and tax havens to pay less tax, are stopped in their tracks.
You can vote here http://falseeconomy.org.uk/tax
VOTING ENDS ON MIDNIGHT 30th JANURY 2011
Monday, 10 January 2011
The benefits of UNISON membership......UNISON secures £27,398,985 compensation for personal injuries
Assaults, car crashes, back injuries and slips at work are among the cases UNISON has won £27,398,985 worth of compensation for in 2010.
The UK's largest public sector union has handled 3,893 cases to help members receive justice for the pain and suffering caused by personal injuries.
UNISON's General Secretary, Dave Prentis, said:
"A lot of these injuries could and should have been prevented. These jobs are not dangerous - nursery workers, dental technicians and dinner ladies - but, because employers have been negligent, some UNISON members have lost their health, families, confidence and careers.
"Employers have a duty of care and where they fail, workers and their families deserve compensation for the pain and suffering caused by personal injuries.
"Last year UNISON secured £28million for workplace injuries but, one year on, and it's clear some employers have still not learnt their lesson and introduced safer working practices".
In Scotland, UNISON handled 224 cases and members received £1,602,762.20 compensation.
Remember if you are not a member you can join by clicking the link on the front page.
The UK's largest public sector union has handled 3,893 cases to help members receive justice for the pain and suffering caused by personal injuries.
UNISON's General Secretary, Dave Prentis, said:
"A lot of these injuries could and should have been prevented. These jobs are not dangerous - nursery workers, dental technicians and dinner ladies - but, because employers have been negligent, some UNISON members have lost their health, families, confidence and careers.
"Employers have a duty of care and where they fail, workers and their families deserve compensation for the pain and suffering caused by personal injuries.
"Last year UNISON secured £28million for workplace injuries but, one year on, and it's clear some employers have still not learnt their lesson and introduced safer working practices".
In Scotland, UNISON handled 224 cases and members received £1,602,762.20 compensation.
Remember if you are not a member you can join by clicking the link on the front page.
Friday, 17 December 2010
Protection of Workers (Scotland) Bill
You may be aware, UNISON was instrumental in pursuing legislation through the Scottish Parliament to protect Emergency Workers. The Emergency Workers (Scotland) Act, 2006 made it a specific offence to attack or hinder an emergency worker in performance of their duties. At the time UNISON argued that the Act should not just cover the traditional “Blue Light” services of Police, Fire-fighters and Ambulance personnel and we were successful in having all workers in acute hospitals included in the list of those to whom the Act would apply. To date over 800 members of the public have been successfully prosecuted under the Act.
However, this still leaves many thousands of our members who are not protected, such as social workers, parking attendants, environmental workers, health service staff working in the community, classroom assistants and many others. It is for this reason that UNISON supports a private members bill in the Scottish Parliament proposed by Hugh Henry, MSP. The private members bill gained sufficient support to proceed and is at the first stage in the Scottish Parliament as the Protection of Workers (Scotland) Bill. If successful the Bill will make it an offence for a member of the public to assault a public sector worker carrying out their job or because of the job they do.
However a majority of MSPs on the Committee considering the Bill (SNP, Liberal Democrats and Conservatives) voted against it proceeding. We will therefore need to persuade all MSPs to support it when it is debated in the chamber early next year.
UNISON, in conjunction with the STUC, is launching a campaign in support of the Bill. To assist with this, please email your MSP seeking their support for the bill. Further information on the campaign can be found here.
This will be a very important piece of legislation for our members and will give another layer of protection in our fight against violence.
Please do all you can to publicise the Bill and take part in our campaign.
Using a variety of methods: publicity, advice, legislation we can tackle this unnecessary burden on our members. Please make every effort to take up the recommendations contained in this letter and assist the campaign.
However, this still leaves many thousands of our members who are not protected, such as social workers, parking attendants, environmental workers, health service staff working in the community, classroom assistants and many others. It is for this reason that UNISON supports a private members bill in the Scottish Parliament proposed by Hugh Henry, MSP. The private members bill gained sufficient support to proceed and is at the first stage in the Scottish Parliament as the Protection of Workers (Scotland) Bill. If successful the Bill will make it an offence for a member of the public to assault a public sector worker carrying out their job or because of the job they do.
However a majority of MSPs on the Committee considering the Bill (SNP, Liberal Democrats and Conservatives) voted against it proceeding. We will therefore need to persuade all MSPs to support it when it is debated in the chamber early next year.
UNISON, in conjunction with the STUC, is launching a campaign in support of the Bill. To assist with this, please email your MSP seeking their support for the bill. Further information on the campaign can be found here.
This will be a very important piece of legislation for our members and will give another layer of protection in our fight against violence.
Please do all you can to publicise the Bill and take part in our campaign.
Using a variety of methods: publicity, advice, legislation we can tackle this unnecessary burden on our members. Please make every effort to take up the recommendations contained in this letter and assist the campaign.
Friday, 10 December 2010
Living Wage letter to Glasgow City Council
UNISON Regional Organiser, Simon MacFarlane has written to the Chief Executive of Glasgow City Council, George Black, leader of the Council, George Matheson and the Principal Officer of the Council, Kevin Rush to request a meeting to discuss the council's support for a Glasgow Living Wage.
Below we reproduce the text of the letter:
I am writing to ask to meet with you to discuss the Living Wage and its applicability to the voluntary sector. The Living Wage will only be of genuine benefit if it provides a floor across as much of the economy in Glasgow and beyond as possible. It is my view that the Council must use it social, economic and moral leavers to help deliver this.
Being the first Council in Scotland to sign up to the Living Wage is to be commended, however it is time for the Authority to act. Words and a website have their part to play but the Authority needs to put its money where its mouth is.
My job in UNISON is supporting our members who work in the community and voluntary sector. Many or our members work for charities involved in the provision of social care. These organisations have seen their funding to service provision ratio squeezed year on year and as the bulk of the costs in this area are staff this directly impacts on our members.
To give just one example, the Council is the major funder of The Mungo Foundation, many staff here earn below the Living Wage of £7.15, some are only a few pence above the National Minimum Wage, yet instead of wages rising they have been frozen for two years.
As the major funder of The Mungo Foundation you should be calling on them to implement the Living Wage, and crucially you should be funding them to do so.
I would like to meet with you along with some of our members who are affected by these issues to discuss this matter.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Below we reproduce the text of the letter:
I am writing to ask to meet with you to discuss the Living Wage and its applicability to the voluntary sector. The Living Wage will only be of genuine benefit if it provides a floor across as much of the economy in Glasgow and beyond as possible. It is my view that the Council must use it social, economic and moral leavers to help deliver this.
Being the first Council in Scotland to sign up to the Living Wage is to be commended, however it is time for the Authority to act. Words and a website have their part to play but the Authority needs to put its money where its mouth is.
My job in UNISON is supporting our members who work in the community and voluntary sector. Many or our members work for charities involved in the provision of social care. These organisations have seen their funding to service provision ratio squeezed year on year and as the bulk of the costs in this area are staff this directly impacts on our members.
To give just one example, the Council is the major funder of The Mungo Foundation, many staff here earn below the Living Wage of £7.15, some are only a few pence above the National Minimum Wage, yet instead of wages rising they have been frozen for two years.
As the major funder of The Mungo Foundation you should be calling on them to implement the Living Wage, and crucially you should be funding them to do so.
I would like to meet with you along with some of our members who are affected by these issues to discuss this matter.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Thursday, 2 December 2010
Personalisation speech to Community Care Providers Scotland Conference
Speech by Simon Macfarlane on Personalisation to Community Care Providers Scotland Conference on 25th November 2010 (as part of a debate on whether workers had been dealt a full hand or no hand by personalisation).
UNISON’s position on personalization is clear - we support it, we have policy in support of personalisation; as recently as 2nd November our first ever Community Conference for our new dedicated voluntary sector service group passed a motion clearly stating our support for the principles of genuine personal choice and control and independence in personal care. The motion also though set out our real concerns around the impact on the personalised workforce and the funding and quality of care.
This is entirely consistent from a union that has equality at its core and has pioneered self-organisation and vigorously addressed access issues within its own organisation.
So UNISON’s position is not that the work force has been dealt no hand, our concern is much more that the current construct of personalisation is in danger of becoming a house of cards due to inadequate resources.
UNISON has long been engaged in the personalisation agenda and the challenges it brings. In the past, UNISON was wrongly criticised for what was seen as our opposition to direct payments, and assertions were made that our members discouraged their take up.
To counter this in 2006/7 UNISON met with various representatives of disabled people’s organisations, such as the Glasgow Centre for Inclusive Living (GCIL), Scottish Personal Assistants Employers Network (SPAEN), and the Scottish Consortium of Direct Payment Support Organisations (SCODPSO). A joint statement followed confirming our support for the principle of independent living. More importantly, all parties agreed to work together on areas of mutual acceptance.
The statement acknowledged that direct payments had a legitimate role. However, it was clear that direct payments were not a substitute for other flexible and responsive public services, and were not appropriate for all people’s needs. It was further agreed that direct payments must complement a range of public services and must not be used to cover for inadequacies in public provision. Additionally the organisations agreed to jointly promote union membership.
UNISON believes that the personalisation and transformation of social care has been introduced without adequate funding, with the focus being on reducing the cost of supporting individuals and reducing the proportion of provision in the public sector and potentially the voluntary sector.
In England which is further down the track of personalisation the evidence is clear on the impact on staff personalisation is having:
The National Minimum Data Set for Social Care in England shows that between December 2008 and February 2010 the following occurred to pay rates in the following posts:
Care Workers at NVQ 1 or 2 level saw their pay in the private sector drop from £6.30 to £6.00, in the voluntary sector it dropped from £7.04 to £7.03 and in the public sector is went from £6.80 to £7.73.
For higher graded staff the results were equally stark. Senior Care Workers above NVQ2 saw their wages drop in the private sector from £6.85 to £6.80, in the voluntary sector from £8.34 to £8.08 whilst in the public sector they rose from £9.11 to £10.69.
In Scotland I’ve spent the last 18 months in brutal negotiations with many organisations here today, seeing pay freezes, redundancies, terms and conditions slashed, and so far I have seen no evidence that a move to personalisation will lead to any reversal of this trend.
There is an issue that personal and privatised care has not increased the quality and choice of care for all care recipients, it has also produced a sector of the care market and workforce that is unregulated and provided little incentive for employers to invest in a well trained and paid workforce.
Not all service users wish to take a Direct Payment and become an individual employer. UNISON believes that individual service users would benefit from the option of paying for a Personal Assistant (PA) but not being their direct employer. This could be done by local authorities or voluntary organisations directly employing a pool of PAs which service users can select from. In this way PAs would be employed by the local authority and not budget holders acting as micro employers.
In Scandinavia models such as this are common and they offer significant benefits to the person requiring support and the personal assistant.
We need workforce remodelling agreements both at national level and at employer level. The direction of travel is clear and the key stakeholders are broadly signed up to this. So we need the Scottish Government, Local Authorities and Health Boards to set out some minimum standards and safeguards for individuals needing support, workers and providers. There is an opportunity for some joint work between CCPS and UNISON here.
It is incumbent on voluntary organisations to be clearer and louder about the need for care services to be adequately resourced and in particular about the pay and conditions of workers in the sector. It isn’t right to portray pay freezes as evidence of the voluntary sector’s efficiency. Poverty pay and poor conditions are simply inimical to high quality personalised care. The right to a personalised care service can’t be an unfettered right, it comes with significant responsibilities. Many will need help and assistance in meeting those responsibilities and the voluntary sector has a unique and crucial role in assisting people to get the personalised support they need whilst acting in an ethical and responsible manner.
It doesn’t have to be like this. Personalisation can and should be introduced with adequate funding and safeguards for staff. The voluntary sector needs to get active in campaigns such as UNISON’s Public Works and the STUC’s There is a Better Way campaigns. There’s too much fence sitting going on when many of the people you and our members support will be deeply affected by benefit cuts and the myriad of other cuts.
So I say to you don’t let personalisation tumble like a pack of cards. Join with UNISON and the STUC in campaigning for a better settlement for public services however they are provided. If your organisation doesn’t yet recognise a union, come speak to me about how we can work together to make personalisation work for service users, organisations and staff.
UNISON’s position on personalization is clear - we support it, we have policy in support of personalisation; as recently as 2nd November our first ever Community Conference for our new dedicated voluntary sector service group passed a motion clearly stating our support for the principles of genuine personal choice and control and independence in personal care. The motion also though set out our real concerns around the impact on the personalised workforce and the funding and quality of care.
This is entirely consistent from a union that has equality at its core and has pioneered self-organisation and vigorously addressed access issues within its own organisation.
So UNISON’s position is not that the work force has been dealt no hand, our concern is much more that the current construct of personalisation is in danger of becoming a house of cards due to inadequate resources.
UNISON has long been engaged in the personalisation agenda and the challenges it brings. In the past, UNISON was wrongly criticised for what was seen as our opposition to direct payments, and assertions were made that our members discouraged their take up.
To counter this in 2006/7 UNISON met with various representatives of disabled people’s organisations, such as the Glasgow Centre for Inclusive Living (GCIL), Scottish Personal Assistants Employers Network (SPAEN), and the Scottish Consortium of Direct Payment Support Organisations (SCODPSO). A joint statement followed confirming our support for the principle of independent living. More importantly, all parties agreed to work together on areas of mutual acceptance.
The statement acknowledged that direct payments had a legitimate role. However, it was clear that direct payments were not a substitute for other flexible and responsive public services, and were not appropriate for all people’s needs. It was further agreed that direct payments must complement a range of public services and must not be used to cover for inadequacies in public provision. Additionally the organisations agreed to jointly promote union membership.
UNISON believes that the personalisation and transformation of social care has been introduced without adequate funding, with the focus being on reducing the cost of supporting individuals and reducing the proportion of provision in the public sector and potentially the voluntary sector.
In England which is further down the track of personalisation the evidence is clear on the impact on staff personalisation is having:
The National Minimum Data Set for Social Care in England shows that between December 2008 and February 2010 the following occurred to pay rates in the following posts:
Care Workers at NVQ 1 or 2 level saw their pay in the private sector drop from £6.30 to £6.00, in the voluntary sector it dropped from £7.04 to £7.03 and in the public sector is went from £6.80 to £7.73.
For higher graded staff the results were equally stark. Senior Care Workers above NVQ2 saw their wages drop in the private sector from £6.85 to £6.80, in the voluntary sector from £8.34 to £8.08 whilst in the public sector they rose from £9.11 to £10.69.
In Scotland I’ve spent the last 18 months in brutal negotiations with many organisations here today, seeing pay freezes, redundancies, terms and conditions slashed, and so far I have seen no evidence that a move to personalisation will lead to any reversal of this trend.
There is an issue that personal and privatised care has not increased the quality and choice of care for all care recipients, it has also produced a sector of the care market and workforce that is unregulated and provided little incentive for employers to invest in a well trained and paid workforce.
Not all service users wish to take a Direct Payment and become an individual employer. UNISON believes that individual service users would benefit from the option of paying for a Personal Assistant (PA) but not being their direct employer. This could be done by local authorities or voluntary organisations directly employing a pool of PAs which service users can select from. In this way PAs would be employed by the local authority and not budget holders acting as micro employers.
In Scandinavia models such as this are common and they offer significant benefits to the person requiring support and the personal assistant.
We need workforce remodelling agreements both at national level and at employer level. The direction of travel is clear and the key stakeholders are broadly signed up to this. So we need the Scottish Government, Local Authorities and Health Boards to set out some minimum standards and safeguards for individuals needing support, workers and providers. There is an opportunity for some joint work between CCPS and UNISON here.
It is incumbent on voluntary organisations to be clearer and louder about the need for care services to be adequately resourced and in particular about the pay and conditions of workers in the sector. It isn’t right to portray pay freezes as evidence of the voluntary sector’s efficiency. Poverty pay and poor conditions are simply inimical to high quality personalised care. The right to a personalised care service can’t be an unfettered right, it comes with significant responsibilities. Many will need help and assistance in meeting those responsibilities and the voluntary sector has a unique and crucial role in assisting people to get the personalised support they need whilst acting in an ethical and responsible manner.
It doesn’t have to be like this. Personalisation can and should be introduced with adequate funding and safeguards for staff. The voluntary sector needs to get active in campaigns such as UNISON’s Public Works and the STUC’s There is a Better Way campaigns. There’s too much fence sitting going on when many of the people you and our members support will be deeply affected by benefit cuts and the myriad of other cuts.
So I say to you don’t let personalisation tumble like a pack of cards. Join with UNISON and the STUC in campaigning for a better settlement for public services however they are provided. If your organisation doesn’t yet recognise a union, come speak to me about how we can work together to make personalisation work for service users, organisations and staff.
TMF Pay update
UNISON members within TMF have this week been mailed a letter from Regional Organiser, Simon MacFarlane with an update on our claim for a pay uplift this year. Below is the text of the letter.
********************************************************
Dear Member
PAY 2010/11
I am writing to update you on what has been happening with regards to our discussions with TMF regarding a cost of living rise for this year. You will recall that members overwhelmingly voted to support the submission of a pay claim for 2.5% from 1 April 2010.
Following submitting the claim we continually chased TMF for a response to the extent we wrote to the Archbishop Mario Conti expressing our frustration at the delay. This prompted a meeting with Dana O’Dwyer, Chief Executive in September where we were able to have a constructive dialogue on the challenges facing the organisation and some of the frustrations we felt. At a meeting subsequent to this we finally met to discuss pay.
Sadly TMF have advised us that once again they are not in a position to make a pay offer this year. We fully expressed how disappointing this will be to our members who are facing real financial pressure and are staring at an increase in VAT come 1st January. TMF were able to respond in some way to our demands for the pay of the small number of manual workers in TMF to be reviewed and those staff will be written to shortly advising them the outcome of this. Any movement for the lowest paid is welcome but this fell well short of our aspirations.
Living Wage
As you will know part of your claim was for TMF to adopt the Scottish Living Wage of £7.00 per hour now rising to £7.15. Much of the work of TMF is funded by Glasgow City Council which has declared itself committed to the Living Wage, so we intend to seek a meeting with officers and politicians there, calling on them to fund TMF to enable them to implement the Scottish Living Wage.
We also wish to consult with you about how you want us to progress with regards to this year’s cost of living rise. We need to know whether you will reluctantly accept the situation or do you want us to fight on. Please use the enclosed ballot paper to indicate your position. We must advise that we believe that in order to move the employer it is likely that members would have to embark on a course of industrial action and even then there is no guarantee that TMF would make an improved offer. On the other hand if we don’t put up a fight we’ll never know.
It is dispiriting to have to write in such terms to you but it is a reflection of the times and your union's first and foremost duty is to be upfront with you.
Convenor
On a more positive note we have secured agreement from TMF for Alice Lyness your Senior Steward to be seconded three days a week to work on behalf of members at this time. Alice is available to support members and is particularly keen to come and visit you and your colleagues at team meetings etc to speak to you about UNISON and hear about the issues that concern you. Alice is on union duties on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday and is based in Govanhill but is often out and about. She can be contacted via Mobile: 07882551134 and via Email. You can use the form sent with the letter to indicate if you would like Alice to visit you or contact you.
On the broader picture of the current financial climate UNISON is spearheading through its Public Works campaign and through supporting the STUC’s There is a Better Way campaign an alternative to the UK and Scottish Governments’ austerity programmes. It doesn’t have to be like this and we need you to come on board with these campaigns. For more info visit http://www.unison-scotland.org.uk/publicworks/index.html and http://www.thereisabetterway.org/ and please complete the enclosed postcard and return it in the envelope and we’ll send it to your MSP.
********************************************************
Dear Member
PAY 2010/11
I am writing to update you on what has been happening with regards to our discussions with TMF regarding a cost of living rise for this year. You will recall that members overwhelmingly voted to support the submission of a pay claim for 2.5% from 1 April 2010.
Following submitting the claim we continually chased TMF for a response to the extent we wrote to the Archbishop Mario Conti expressing our frustration at the delay. This prompted a meeting with Dana O’Dwyer, Chief Executive in September where we were able to have a constructive dialogue on the challenges facing the organisation and some of the frustrations we felt. At a meeting subsequent to this we finally met to discuss pay.
Sadly TMF have advised us that once again they are not in a position to make a pay offer this year. We fully expressed how disappointing this will be to our members who are facing real financial pressure and are staring at an increase in VAT come 1st January. TMF were able to respond in some way to our demands for the pay of the small number of manual workers in TMF to be reviewed and those staff will be written to shortly advising them the outcome of this. Any movement for the lowest paid is welcome but this fell well short of our aspirations.
Living Wage
As you will know part of your claim was for TMF to adopt the Scottish Living Wage of £7.00 per hour now rising to £7.15. Much of the work of TMF is funded by Glasgow City Council which has declared itself committed to the Living Wage, so we intend to seek a meeting with officers and politicians there, calling on them to fund TMF to enable them to implement the Scottish Living Wage.
We also wish to consult with you about how you want us to progress with regards to this year’s cost of living rise. We need to know whether you will reluctantly accept the situation or do you want us to fight on. Please use the enclosed ballot paper to indicate your position. We must advise that we believe that in order to move the employer it is likely that members would have to embark on a course of industrial action and even then there is no guarantee that TMF would make an improved offer. On the other hand if we don’t put up a fight we’ll never know.
It is dispiriting to have to write in such terms to you but it is a reflection of the times and your union's first and foremost duty is to be upfront with you.
Convenor
On a more positive note we have secured agreement from TMF for Alice Lyness your Senior Steward to be seconded three days a week to work on behalf of members at this time. Alice is available to support members and is particularly keen to come and visit you and your colleagues at team meetings etc to speak to you about UNISON and hear about the issues that concern you. Alice is on union duties on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday and is based in Govanhill but is often out and about. She can be contacted via Mobile: 07882551134 and via Email. You can use the form sent with the letter to indicate if you would like Alice to visit you or contact you.
On the broader picture of the current financial climate UNISON is spearheading through its Public Works campaign and through supporting the STUC’s There is a Better Way campaign an alternative to the UK and Scottish Governments’ austerity programmes. It doesn’t have to be like this and we need you to come on board with these campaigns. For more info visit http://www.unison-scotland.org.uk/publicworks/index.html and http://www.thereisabetterway.org/ and please complete the enclosed postcard and return it in the envelope and we’ll send it to your MSP.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)