Strike!

[Alastair]

I'm not at work today. This is why.

Civil service strike hits courts

I've never taken industrial action before, and would not normally do so over pay (I earn more than court clerks do, if you're wondering). However, the Management side imposed the pay deal in my Department, taking away my democratic right to negotiate my salary (through a union). That's reason enough to stand up and be counted - if not, they'll think they can do it again.

I appreciate that many members of this BBS may not agree with me, but I'm happy to discuss it with them.

[GoodSpeak]

Stand with your Bretheren for what you believe in.

Nobody else can do it for you and to knuckle under to management will surely pave the road to a certain over-lordship destine to keep you down.

As a union member myself, I fully understand and appreciate the sacrifice you are making.


It's not easy.

It isn't right you should have to do this.

Sometimes...it's all you got.


Been there, my friend...and we may go there this year since management, at my workplace, is insisting upon a 5% paycut.


If I could...I'd walk the picket line with you, side by side. And I mean that with all sincerity.


Keep up the good fight, Alastair. We fellow union members here in the States are with you in Spirit.


Believe it.



TimMc

Union Rep.

VUTA/CTA/NEA

[moneyp]

Anarchy now! (readying his Molotov cocktails)

[Alastair]

Thanks Goodspeak.

Thanks to Mrs Thatcher's anti-union laws you would have faced arrest for joining me on the picket line, should you have been in the area. You're only allowed to picket your own particular place of work and any picket larger than 6 people runs the risk of being broken up (and the picketers arrested) under public disorder laws. This all dates back to the Miners' Strike of 1984 (anyone in the UK see either of the documentaries about it last week?). The net effect is that non-union (and even union) staff feel happier to cross the picket line as it's pretty easy to sneak in behind someone else, and picket lines always look pathetic on television, allowing management/government to claim that no-one is supporting the strike. The only way I could support the strike was by withdrawing my labour.

The strike has had at least some effect - management side has reopened talks with the union. There's no way on earth they would have done that without the strike.

And it gave me a chance to go and see "A Mighty Wind" this afternoon. Ah, matinees - takes me back to my student days.

[Sergio Zamora]

Honk honk!

[GoodSpeak]

Originally posted by Alastair
Thanks Goodspeak.

Thanks to Mrs Thatcher's anti-union laws you would have faced arrest for joining me on the picket line, should you have been in the area. You're only allowed to picket your own particular place of work and any picket larger than 6 people runs the risk of being broken up (and the picketers arrested) under public disorder laws. This all dates back to the Miners' Strike of 1984 (anyone in the UK see either of the documentaries about it last week?). The net effect is that non-union (and even union) staff feel happier to cross the picket line as it's pretty easy to sneak in behind someone else, and picket lines always look pathetic on television, allowing management/government to claim that no-one is supporting the strike. The only way I could support the strike was by withdrawing my labour.

The strike has had at least some effect - management side has reopened talks with the union. There's no way on earth they would have done that without the strike.

And it gave me a chance to go and see "A Mighty Wind" this afternoon. Ah, matinees - takes me back to my student days.

Arrested?

Wow.

By way of an example...a local supermarket [Vons, for those on this BBS who know of the situation in LA] may be going out on strike soon and many of the people there are friends of mine. It is a comfort to know that when I pick up a sign and walk with them I will have the freedom, no...the RIGHT to support them. I am just amazed how the UK can justify such shoddy practices.

Keep us posted as to the eventual outcome...I hope for your sake, it won't be a long drawn out fight.



BTW, to anyone who is anti-union...this is the reason why unions exist. If management would just play by the rules and treat the employee like the professionals they are, there would be no need for Labor to organize.

[Alastair]

Well, we won. At least for now.

(I know most of this will be of only marginal interest to those of you who don't work in the public sector and Nat will probably tear his hair out if he reads it, but I thought Goody might like to hear the outcome)

After the two-day strike some of our demands were met (people at the top of their pay scale had their raises consolidated and made pensionable, rather than being one-off, taxable payments) and promises were made for the next pay round. I was sceptical, and it didn't address the point of having my right to negotiate taken away from me, but it was a start.

Our pay negotiations work towards an August 1 deadline and, as usual, they ran over - usually because the treasury drags its heels. However, this year there was a satisfactory outcome from the treasury, late though it was. This year the Treasury set an Earnings Growth Threshold of 3.5% for government departments. This could only be exceeded if a strong business case could be
made. My department managed to negotiate a 3.74% EGT, meaning that they could address our main concerns - pay progression and London weighting.

Depending on what job we do, we're split into pay spans. When you start a job you start on the minimum of the pay span, and theoretically work your way to the top while you stay in that job. The spans at middle management level (where I am) are around five or six thousand pounds wide. In the old days of normal civil service grades there was a progression system where, assuming your work was satisfactory, you'd know exactly how far you'd move up each year and how long it would take you to get to the level where you were being paid the agreed amount that an "experienced" member of staff at that grade should be earning. When spans were brought in no real thought was put into progression and you got the daft system where I've been in my "span" (grade) for four years but am still in the bottom third of the pay span and have no idea how long it'll take me to get to the top. Well, until this new pay offer came in. I now know that after six years I will be moved to the maximum, and until then I'll move up by a percentage based on how many years I've been in the span. Now, that might not sound like rocket science to you, but it's taken them five years to work that one out.

As those of you who've visited our capital will have noticed, it's more expensive to live in London than it is elsewhere in the country. The current system of pay allows for three London weighting zones - inner, intermediate and outer, depending on where you work - to help offset the cost of living here. Thing is, it costs just as much to live in Croydon or Barnet (both outer) as it does in Kennington (inner) and no-one on a civil service wage can afford to live in most of inner London anyway, not if they have a family certainly, so this really doesn't make much sense. So what they've done is abolish outer weighting and moved all those on it up to intermediate. It's not perfect - it's estimated that people living in Great London need approximately four thousand pounds p.a. extra to have the same level of living as those outside, and inner London weighting is only just over 2,000 quid, but we're getting there.

So my increase is just over 3.5%, with "jam tomorrow" of a substantial increase two years hence when I complete my sixth year in the span (assuming I don't get promoted before then, and believe me I'm working on it). I can live with that.

All things considered, it was worth striking. It showed that we were serious, and more progress has made this year than any other I can remember. I reiterate that I wouldn't have struck if it wasn't for the imposition of the pay deal, but I'm glad that I did.










Especially as they didn't deduct the two days' wages from my salary. Nor that of my colleague. Despite us being the only two people in my office striking, and making our feelings very clear to our manager.

[Douglas]

Nice outcome, Alastair. Or probably better expressed as the best you could hope for.

Out of interest, from your experience, does the treasury backdate the pay award?

[Alastair]

Originally Posted by Douglas

Nice outcome, Alastair. Or probably better expressed as the best you could hope for.

Out of interest, from your experience, does the treasury backdate the pay award?

Cheers.

Yes, back to August 1. Although you could argue that they've had the interest on 13,000 staff members' increases for two/three months, which adds up to a bit.

[Nathaniel Catchpole]

No hair pulled out, although I'm disappointed Moné didn't use the word anarchism, and used the word molotov. Haven't you been listening to me for the past three years?
from the BBC:
"One out of every four civil servants earned just £13,750 a year and some of those on strike were earning less than £10,000, the PCS said."

Ouch, that's worse than the NHS I think (including NHS london weighting, I was on about £13450 or something when I worked for them, just about the least you can earn working for the NHS if you live in inner-london, part-time excluded).

"it didn't address the point of having my right to negotiate taken away from me" - Sounds very dodgy to me.

Since you've had a strike, you might like this:

http://tintinrevolution.free.fr/pages/image001.html

And since GoodSpeak is a union rep, he won't!

[Richardo Caerleoni]

The workers united will never be defeated...well, yes they will...but next time?!!!

[Deke]

Nice one, Alastair. Don't let the b@$#@rds grind you down!

You know I just can't think why that nice Mr. Blair didn't undo the Thatcher's anti-union legislation.

Oh wait a minute. Yes I can.

He's another of those Tory bastards...

[Alastair]

Originally Posted by Nathaniel Catchpole

No hair pulled out, although I'm disappointed Moné didn't use the word anarchism, and used the word molotov. Haven't you been listening to me for the past three years?
from the BBC:
"One out of every four civil servants earned just £13,750 a year and some of those on strike were earning less than £10,000, the PCS said."

Ouch, that's worse than the NHS I think (including NHS london weighting, I was on about £13450 or something when I worked for them, just about the least you can earn working for the NHS if you live in inner-london, part-time excluded).

"it didn't address the point of having my right to negotiate taken away from me" - Sounds very dodgy to me.

I know roughly where your politics lie, Nat, but I was under the impression you thought that all us civil service desk jockeys did was drink tea and surf the internet. It may even have been me who gave you that impression

The right to negotiate has been reinstated. Until they try to take it away again. We shall see.

Originally Posted by Nathaniel Catchpole

Since you've had a strike, you might like this:

http://tintinrevolution.free.fr/pages/image001.html

And since GoodSpeak is a union rep, he won't!

I have that book! Bought it in the early nineties and reread it just the other month. It's very good but gets a bit ridiculous towards the end.

[Gentle Giant]

Having been in one once, I have mixed feelings about unions. Before I was in one I was a solid supporter based on the history of worker exploitation during the industrial revolution and all thast jazz. But when I worked in public television, I was in a small union and while I was happy to get certain uncalled-for benefits (such as two automatic pay increases each year regardless of merit), I was also concerned because my employer was a non-profit and it didn't seem right to wrangle them. Furthermore, the attitudes and language that went backk and forth between the union and management was quite distasteful. In this situation, the very delineation of labor and management created an adversarial relationship that may not have happened otherwise. And both sides fed into it eagerly.

I also feel that certain professions, even if they are unionized, should not be permitted to strike. These include public safety, sanitation, and teaching.

I ws impressed, however, with the solidarity of the union movement. We never striked, but we had the occasional informational picket, and you'd see truck drivers, electricians, and other union folk come and stand with us. They didn't know who I was or what I did, but they were willing to fight for my rights.

I guess I'd prefer to channel that energy elsewhere than in workplace disputes.

[claude]

I support the right to unionize and I understand that sometimes you have to play hardball or you get trampled. However, I have witnessed many cases where unions have been their own worst enemies. Mostly this is due to politics within the unions (you aint seen politics til you've been involved in union politics). The other thing that annoys me is the "everyone is equal" BS that unions spout. That usually means that barely marginal employees get the same treatment as the exceptional ones.

I am glad to be out of the unionized environment I was in several years ago for many of the above reasons, but I still see where they have a purpose. Now that I am an employer, I try to treat my (non-unionized) employees in such a way that a union wouldn't be an improvement.

Congrats Alastair on a successful result.

[Nathaniel Catchpole]

I know roughly where your politics lie, Nat, but I was under the impression you thought that all us civil service desk jockeys did was drink tea and surf the internet. It may even have been me who gave you that impression

Well yeah, just about. As you know I've worked for the State before and it wasn't very pleasant, maybe a couple of hours a week that benefitted anyone at all. Point is, as I said on Bags, the State has a monopoly on a whole range of necessary services, and in the current system, people are obliged to work for an employer in order to live. So I don't have a problem with people working for the State or anyone else, with the possible exception of a few very nasty industries. Doesn't mean I don't want to see that system replaced and those jobs disappear. But in the system I'd like to see, it wouldn't be necessary to take any job in order to earn enough to live on. Distribution would be based on need, work on aptitude and desire. So it's not like I want to cast civil servants as people out into the cold, just make it unnecessary for anyone to work in that capacity in order to satisfy their wants/needs.

Obviously people can be slackers or arseholes, but that's possible in any job, and you haven't presented yourself as either of those yet.

[GoodSpeak]

Originally Posted by Nathaniel Catchpole

Since you've had a strike, you might like this:

http://tintinrevolution.free.fr/pages/image001.html

And since GoodSpeak is a union rep, he won't!

Such a terrible assumption, Nat.


I suppose, that in your world, things are either black or white.

[GoodSpeak]

Originally Posted by Alastair

Cheers.

Yes, back to August 1. Although you could argue that they've had the interest on 13,000 staff members' increases for two/three months, which adds up to a bit.

Glad you're back to work, my friend.


I hope all is well for you now in the UK.

[Nathaniel Catchpole]

Did you read it GoodSpeak? It's explicitly critical of unions from a (roughly) anarcho-syndicalist perspective. Still think you'll like it? Plenty of anarchists in unions, and even shop stewards, but anyway, take a look, its well done, even if it's dated after 20 years, and yes, it is in black and white.

Alastair, pretty funny you actually own it, a look at most of the revolutions of the past 200 years suggests the end of the book isn't that ridiculous though.