|
Page updated: 20 July 2004 |
PAY
2004
Notts UNISON members voted 516 to 251 in the consultative ballot to accept the 3 year offer of:
This pattern was repeated nationally and the deal was accepted on 15th July 2004 Negotiation Updates:
You can also visit the National Website pay campaign section. OUR CLAIM: It's time to deliver The 2004 pay claim delivers a serious message to the employers.It's time to deliver on the promises made to the workforce in the Single Status deal in 1997, it's time to deliver on the Local Government Pay Commission recommendations and it's time to deliver better services to the public. We have heard fine words about the need for a well-trained and well-rewarded workforce from government ministers and from employers, but now we need more than words - we need delivery. The ten point claim is:-
You can download the full employers' offer (148KB) in a pdf format. A summary is included in the report from negotiations on 11th March (below). To read Acrobat PDF files you need Acrobat Reader software, which is available free of charge from the Adobe website in both PC and Mac format. NEGOTIATION UPDATES... Pay deal accepted by local government workers UNISON members have voted by a margin of two to one to accept a three-year pay offer for local government staff worth 8.9%. More than 140,000 members took part in the consultation exercise. The offer has also been accepted by members of the other trade unions.The national employers have been notified of the NJC trade union side's acceptance of the pay offer and they have sent official notification to local authorities so that the new salaries can be paid as quickly as possible. Agreement has now been reached on rates of pay applicable from 1 April 2004 to 1 April 2005. Rates of pay and allowances applicable from 1 April 2006 may be subject to the RPI figure at October 2005; those rates will be published nearer that time. This settlement also involves a number of changes to the National Agreement (Green Book). Improved offer made At the end of a difficult day of negotiations, the employers made an improved offer that they insisted represented their final position. The pay element of the offer is for a three year deal, consisting of 2.75% in the first year, 2.95% in the second year and 2.95% with an underpin of RPI in the third year. The ‘strings’ attached to the original offer have been either removed or significantly amended. The offer document is available on the national website.Employers refusing to budge on pay On 7th May the trade union side of the NJC met to review progress in the pay negotiations. The joint unions acknowledged that, despite strenuous efforts by the negotiating team, the employers have refused to improve the inadequate offer they made on 11th March.The press release put out by the employers on 4th May (headed "Employers stand firm") confirms their intransigence. In these circumstances, the joint union side agreed to start preparations for consulting members about formal rejection and possible industrial action. We will, however, be urging the employers to improve the original offer and re-open negotiations urgently. The joint secretaries will be meeting on 12th May and the trade union side of the NJC executive will meet on 20th May. The employers' press release: www.lg-employers.gov.uk/press/2004_news/pay_claim_0405.html Local government pay talks reach crisis point Pay talks involving 1.5 million local government workers stalled on 14th April, when the employers signalled their reluctance to improve on the earlier offer of 7% over three years, "with strings". Their intransigence flies in the face of the positive report from the Local Government Pay Commission, published after the 2002 pay dispute. And it has led UNISON to warn of summer strikes, should there be no progress in the discussions. "After three joint secretaries' meetings, it's absolutely clear that the employers are adopting a tough stance,” said UNISON national secretary Heather Wakefield. “This morning they indicated that the earlier offer, which included more strings than the philharmonic, is unlikely to be improved.” These strings include withholding the third year of any pay deal, if councils have not carried out equal pay reviews before then. “Why should our members be penalised for employers' failures?” said Wakefield. “The employers have a duty under the Equal Pay Act to carry out those reviews. We are not stopping them. Indeed, we are trying our best to get them to carry out their obligations.” The employers’ offer also demands the removal of premium payments for overtime and shift working from the national agreement, a move which would affect already low paid care workers. And it grants an increase of annual leave to 25 days, only if the unions negotiate a reduction in sick pay. “This is an appalling proposal,” said Wakefield. "In the wake of the 2002 dispute and the positive report from the Local Government Pay Commission, we would have expected the employers to recognise the link between fair treatment of the workforce and service improvement. I cannot see a way forward, unless the employers rethink their penny-pinching approach. At this rate we cannot rule out industrial action over the summer.” The trade union side will meet on 7th May to consider further steps Pay talks postponed Following the trade unions' rejection of the employers' initial pay offer at the last National Joint Council meeting, it has been agreed to postpone the next NJC meeting fixed for Thursday 25th March 2004. Informal discussions will take place at joint secretarial level.At a meeting of the NJC on 11th March 2004 the employers responded to the unions' ten point claim. Their offer was for a three year deal covering pay, conditions, grading reviews, training and development, and other items. The offer on the pay spine was for 7% staged over three years. The offer also suggested that there should be a deadline of 31st March 2007 for implementing local pay reviews but that councils should make "proposals for any cost savings or productivity improvements required to offset the cost of implementation" and that "other routes to achieving equal pay should be suspended". The union side rejected the offer as inadequate and insulting. We pointed out that it offered no immediate benefits for low paid workers, given the employers' rejection of any extra money for those on the lower pay points. The improvements which should flow from grading reviews were effectively put off for three years - the offer says only that there should be a requirement for a settlement "by a specific date". The offer responds to our claim for improvements to annual leave and maternity and paternity leave by saying that any changes to part 2 of the Green Book would have to be "self financing". The employers also confirmed that they want to see the end of the part 3 provisions covering premium rates for unsocial hours working and to leave all detailed provision to local agreement. The employers also made detailed proposals for a new training and development agreement to replace the current Green Book provisions, with no additional funding. The offer was condemned in the strongest terms by all three unions. We stated that it was an insult to the workforce, to the Local Government Pay Commission, and to the users of the key services which our members provide. We urged the employers to think again and to return on 25th March with an offer which would provide a real basis for productive negotiations. Chris Tansley, Notts County Branch Secretary and member of the National trade union negotiating side has given us the following personal report from the meeting on 11th March: “This is probably the worst offer we have ever had from the Employers. Not only is the pay element a derisory insult but to make staff suffer further because their Authority refuses or is incompetent in doing job evaluation is outrageous. We will be writing to the Employers making it quite clear that when we meet again on the 25th March we want a serious offer put on the table and not for them to waste all our time again” Unison, along with the other smaller trade unions the TGWU and the GMB totally rejected the Employers pay offer on the 11th March. The Employers failed to respond to the Unions claim for £200 and 4% and instead offered a derisory 7% over three years or 2.33% per year. The Employers said that instead of using the RPI (retail price index) this year they were moving to the CPI (consumer price index) which does not take into account any housing costs and which was 1.5% at present making their offer very generous. They also made it very clear that they would not agree to any additional increases for the lowest paid. To add insult to injury the Employers were also suggesting that Local Authorities that staff in Authorities that do not begin job evaluation exercises by next year won’t get any pay increase next year at all! The Employers also wanted to “review” (meaning worsen) the allowances for overtime and bonus rates and to increase the qualifying period for sick pay along with “reviewing” car allowances. All three Trade Unions totally rejected the offer as insulting and a slap in the face for Local Government workers. They asked if the Employers had learned nothing from the industrial action in 2002 and were intent on ignoring the findings and recommendations of the pay commission. We will keep you posted on developments |