Democracy Rocks

I know that there is much consternation amongst the new SPVA regime leadership. They believe that staff from the VA side are not MoD enough*. They also dislike the fact that our Branch hadn’t changed its name and had kept the “Veterans Agency” tag.

At our AGM, the BEC put forward a motion to change the Branch name. Surprise! We are a democracy not an autocracy; Democracy rocks!

The members overwhelming rejected a name change and so VANB we remain. Should any of the new caliphs, or their EDS bedfellows, read into this that there is a wave of displeasure at the concept of SPVA and the perceived subjugation of ex-VA, well that is their interpretation… I couldn’t really say…

We are looking at running a competition amongst the Branch membership for an alternate name and our Organiser has sent details out through e-mail distribution, of course that is subject to a 2/3 majority vote at a general meeting also.

Incidentally, as there is an ‘and’ in it, SPVA should be SPAVA, which is Serbo-Croatian for sleep.

*stay tuned for a future article where I will wax lyrical about how keeping a DSS culture in an area that deals with a social security payment is a good thing…

Former Chief Executive Alan Burnham on sickness levels

Former Chief Executive Alan Burnham penned the following comment in response to Dr. Mike Bolton's 'The Last Word....on sickness'. We felt that rather than post his piece as a comment it merited space as an article in its own right.

Note that the views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily correspond to the views or official position of the Branch or the National Union.

So good to hear from a fellow grumpy old retiree who also finds that actually doing what you want when you want beats the hell out of shuffling around with the MOD corporate chains rattling around your ankles. I think we were successful in lowering sick rates in VA for two reasons. One, being active in managing individual cases - this isn't management-speak for putting the boot in - it really did mean trying to find good solutions for people.(But yes it does mean dealing appropriately with people who are just taking the piss). Second reason, and by far the most important was based on the amazingly complicated concept that happy people are less likely to go off sick. I don't know how successful we were - it's for others to judge - but I think that the AMT I worked with were 100%...OK about 94%...genuinely concerned to make the working day as positive as we could. Sad thing is that in the world of MOD our reward for lowering sick absence, improving customer service, hugely positive staff satisfaction rates and a host of business excellence awards was to gain a reputation for being a load of over-funded softies who would probably benefit from a damn good thrashing and a posting en masse to Diego Garcia.

"You don't keep employing a plumber who continually floods your house."

It would seem that, for once, the MoD may have learnt a lesson in the way it awards contracts to private business. The trouble is that it has taken a total of around about 14 years worth of delays and overspends exceeding £3bn. The Nation Audit Office are expected (See this article http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3421309.stm ) to heavily criticise the MoD for significant failures in a number of major projects, 90% of the which involve BAE Systems. MoD look set to respond by awarding the next major defence project to a company other than BAE.

It doesn’t, however, seem that other areas of MoD have learnt anything from similar problems. Readers of this blog will be well aware of the many overspent, failed and high cost government projects involving EDS, most recently our own JPA. Despite this SPVA senior management seem more than happy to forge even closer ties with EDS,

The problem with the massive overspends and the cost associated with correcting failures is that it is more often than not the ordinary civil servants that suffers, or worst still the service personnel risking their lives abroad.

Arguably it is the very fact that the government has been stung by these massive overspends that have left it laughably short of funds for the things that keep soldiers alive.

Quoting from an article from bbc.co.uk

Inadequately equipping troops is "unforgivable and inexcusable", the coroner at the inquest of Captain James Philippson has said - but shortages have become a much-reported reality in military life.

A pre-Iraq war deployment exposed shortcomings with soldiers' boots that melted in the heat, vehicle engines that overheated, and rifles that jammed.

More recently, the chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, Conservative MP Edward Leigh, said: "I think it's well-recognised now that our troops are seriously under-supported, under-provisioned, and as a result our own troops are now being fired at because they can't take stuff in helicopters.

"They're having to use under-protected Land Rovers and people are actually dying directly as a result of this procurement failure," he told BBC's File on Four in October 2006.

Sgt Roberts gave his flak jacket to another soldier

Sgt Steven Roberts, 33, of Cornwall, was one of the first casualties in the war when he was shot during a riot in Basra in March 2003.

At his inquest in 2006, it emerged he had been ordered to give up his enhanced body armour three days before his death, due to shortages.

Assistant coroner for Oxfordshire Andrew Walker described the delays in providing body armour to troops as "unforgivable and inexcusable".

Mr Walker said: "I have heard justification and excuse and I put these to one side as I remind myself that Sgt Roberts lost his life because he did not have that basic piece of equipment."

Whilst the effect, on civil servants, of these overspends is not life-threatening they can be life changing. Pay awards have been poor, morale is low and job security is lessening daily.
As reported before staff at Innsworth are being threatened with enforced moves to a different part of the country, which rather perversely, will cost the taxpayer huge amounts of money.

Hilariously more ‘savings’ are planned by out sourcing various areas to the companies already responsible for costing the tax-payer more.

SPVA – Ushering in a new era of industrial and staff relations.

Spare a thought if you will for the SPVA staff at Innsworth. En Masse they have been told that they have to move to Portsmouth (with some to Norcross), but that if they fail to take up this ‘offer’ they will have to make themselves redundant (without any of the associated payments) but not before training their replacements.

Not content with delivering such a distasteful message (not to mention on a subject where there has been no consultation) but have seen to it that the message has been delivered in a bullish and aggressive way. And what makes this all the worse is that it is happening under the rule of a Labour government.

Charter Mark application form anyone?

ACS Cars – update

We formally met management side on Wednesday and were, initially, disappointed with the opening of the meeting as the Agency representatives felt they were unable to move due to this being a CTLB edict.

After some discussion, however, we have achieved a movement in that the Agency have recognised that we wish to discuss the principle of this, in the first instance – rather than the mechanics of removing the scheme. The agreed way forward is thus:

1. We are going to write with our concerns to the decision maker within the CTLB who has removed the Agency authority and open discussions around the principle. We see this opening of discussions as a significant step forward.

2. In the meantime we will put forward ideas to make any future removal of the scheme as fair as humanly possible. This will be without prejudice and there should be no movement until discussions at point 1 have ended. MS have recognised that this is without prejudice and have agreed to act accordingly

We believe this is a pragmatic approach but still fundamentally oppose the removal of the scheme, hence point 1. If we get nowhere with the CTLB (or higher) we still intend to run the personal cases received and chase this as far as we can. We still fundamentally believe that this is a TUPE equivalent term and condition, plus have uncovered evidence that the chosen approach may not be equally applied through the MoD – investigations continue with this.

Update on a welcome victory

You may recall the recent post on this and the fact it was reported that:

“…we did write to a local MP about this issue but, to date, have had no reply. One can only give the benefit of the doubt and assume that they were plugging away, behind the scenes, on behalf of their constituents, and that the reason we have had no reply is because the MP is so busy fighting our corner.”

Well, the benefit of the doubt was justified and that MP recently sent a copy of a letter from Derek Twigg MP, Minister of Veterans, to our Branch Chair – the illustrative jpeg.

The exciting thing about the letter, by a strict interpretation, is that part time term time working is now available, not only to ex-VA staff but, to all staff in the Agency – and we have the Minister’s letter to say so.

THE LAST WORD…on sickness

Here at the Branch we feel satire is good and we are proud to be able to bring you the welcome return of the last word - unfettered and unedited. Note that the views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily correspond to the views or official position of the Branch or the National Union.


Well well, so the Agency’s sickness rates have risen alarmingly. I bet management (the previous incarnation) thought that when they invited me to retire on ill-health grounds that the average sickness rates would plummet, since they made it quite clear that my forced absences were a blot on the sickness rate landscape. They were obviously wrong. Staff members have clearly seen the light. I’ve never perceived myself as a trend-setter, but I’m flattered to accept the role.

Speaking of management, the photomontage of the current management team in the last @SPVA I received contained more forced grins than the inmates of the dock at Nuremburg. Not that I’m suggesting that the management team are guilty of any crimes against humanity, it’s just the look. I was recently part of a group photograph of Accrington magistrates, and that’s even worse – and the comparison, I can assure you, is even more appropriate, as the pond life of Accrington will aver.

In fact, since I retired, I tell anyone who will listen that I haven’t felt this good in years. So management were right – work was making me worse. I should sue. Mind you, I only look this good with make-up and Botox. It’s not that I didn’t enjoy working; I just enjoy not working better. (I would enjoy not working more if I didn’t have to pay accommodation fees for sprog at University, but that’s my fault.) I’ve now got a season ticket at Old Trafford (cricket, not the overpaid prima donnas down the road) so I just amble round to the station, get off the train at Manchester Victoria, get the tram to Old Trafford, grab a pint of Lancaster Bomber and sit and watch a riveting day’s play, thinking all the while of the poor sods working away at Norcross. As if. It’s impossible to miss the stop for Old Trafford – apart from the Tram telling you the stop, as the stop approaches dozens of men with panama hats and bags containing flasks and butty boxes get up and shuffle to the doors. Yes, me as well. You have to conform in the member’s enclosure. (That’s an area of seating in font of the pavilion, not an article of clothing.)

.Anyway, back to sickness rates. It must be blatantly obvious to management that some people prefer to get better at home rather than get better at work and quite right too. The current epidemic of Norovirus, or Winter Vomiting Disease, has been caused by people not realising the infectivity period. Yes, the symptoms only last a couple of days – and what a couple of days – but you are still infectious for two days after. If you go back to work as soon as you feel normal, you spread the illness to all your mates, who will not be eternally grateful. It’s a classic case of presenteeism causing more illness. Mind you, as a quick route to weight loss, I can’t recommend the bug more highly, though I’m told amoebic dysentery does a more thorough job. And it keeps you off work longer.

The reason for the rise in sickness rates is obvious – an unhappy workforce. It strikes me that one of the causes of any unhappiness is fear. The staff magazine, @SPVA, looks more like a notice board for site closures than anything else. Who’s next? The other thing about the magazine is that it is terminally dull, totally humourless, and more boring than basketball, and that is going some. So how do you cheer up the good folk of Norcross? For a start, managers can stop banging on about sickness rates – that only makes things worse (speaking from experience). Second thing; get someone with a sense of humour to brighten up the staff magazine. Third thing, put wads of finest Moroccan kif into the filters of all the water machines. It won’t improve sickness rates any, but at least nobody will give a toss.

And the smiles on the faces of the managers will be genuine.

Mike Bolton

This isn’t consultation – it’s a mess

So, we discovered that the Staff questionnaire was to go live and yet, despite assurance from the Chief Executive, we were not consulted. We were told that consultation is “a learning curve” for our new overlords. Think about it for a second… Consultation is a primary part of the Department’s rules… and it’s a learning curve?!?

Anyway, after some complaining we were given a consultation of 5 days… rules state 30.

The law of consultation states that a full formal response to any point must be given if it is not accepted. I would actually quote rule here but the legacy IR intranet page has mysteriously vanished and the MoD one is so well hidden (at least on the off line version) that it just can’t be found. None the less that is the rule and it should be issued before “go live”. We have had no formal response… simply a call to say some of our points have been adopted… Having got the metaphoric microscope out, having got the new version of the questionnaire from a source other than the team involved, I actually found these “changes”…

We raised the issue of outsourcing the questionnaire when VA had an in-house team, without consultation, because EDS wanted it. We have had no response.

We raised the posters on site. We pointed out that one particularly was offensive and that the in-house design team had not been utilised. We have had no response.

We raised the fact that we have not been told the mechanism for accessing this without it recording your details (though there is an anonymity disclaimer) and that the specific question regarding time in the Agency can, when cross referenced, allow some individuals to be identified. We have had no response.

We asked that no response be edited out without consultation as we do not trust the judgement call system they mention on whether something is derogatory. We have been ignored.

With the questions:

*(note that on the doi version, the live numbering has been changed. This numbering is based on the version we were issued with. Sorry if it makes little sense, as you will not be able to cross reference the numbering, but the following serves to illustrate)

We asked for Question 1E to be removed. It is still there.

We asked for Question 2A to be split into two questions, re management and staff. It has not been changed.

We asked for a change of wording to question 3G. Our suggestion was ignored.

We asked for a change of wording to Question 4C. Our suggestion was ignored.

We asked for a change of wording to Question 4E. Our suggestion was adopted (1).

We asked that an additional question was added in the question 10 range with regard merger and business impact. This was not adopted.

We asked that a change was made to the responses for question 10E. This was partially done (1.5).

We also asked, with regard question 10E that an additional question was asked to identify types of discrimination. Our suggestion was ignored, however an additional question was added that could be seen as a “blame the individual for not doing anything” question.

We asked that the wording of Question 11B be rewritten in plain English rather than management doublespeak. Our suggestion was ignored.

On Question 11C, we asked for clarification of exactly which goal they were referring to. We received no response.

Finally we asked for a change of wording to Question 13a, from people to management in a question in a management style section. Our suggestion was ignored.

Now let us be clear and repeat that consultation is not completed until we have been answered (which may not be the end of consultation in itself). There has been mention of speaking before a formal response is given but it has already gone live. Barn doors and bolting horses spring to mind. Despite the timeframes we got our paper to management that allowed them 2 more days to answer us (and remember the short, against policy timescales were impossed by MS). They have only adopted 1.5 changes and yet the damn thing has gone live.

What should you do?

We do encourage you to fill in the questionnaire. It is flawed, perhaps fatally so, but we think your voice should be heard and we hope that it won’t be filed and ignored as it was in a previous Agency for all intents and purposes. We have asked for consultation on remedial work falling out of the questionnaire – we have had no response but this entire issue is going to be a major point of discussion with CE at the next Whitley.

If you are worried that you can be identified by filling in the “how long have you worked here” question, cross referenced with the other identifying markers we would suggest that you refuse to fill that specific question in – though as we haven’t had real consultation we don’t know if you can ignore a question.

Democracy in Action

Members are aware that, at the AGM each year, we consider various motions. This is the first step in bottom up democracy. Those motions, if passed, form the policy of the Branch and are passed to the respective Conference depending on the motion – either National or Group.

The Branch delegates to conference move our motions and, if carried, become the policy of the respective level of the Union. For instance PCS, as a National Union, have a stance opposing National ID cards. This is through a motion our Branch took to National Conference and successfully moved.

Of course, the progress of the motions are then dependent on other factors. In the case of Group level motions these depends on the willingness of our employer (oops who said Draconian) to accept progressive policy and the willingness of Group officers to do any work. Over the last few years the Group has been, politically, more and more under the control of the Left. What this means in real terms is that Group Officers are actually progressing motions for the Branch.

I have received a mail on the progress of two of our Motions, the responses are not perfect by a long shot but there are glimmers of hope:

Surrogacy Leave. The Branch AGM decided that offering Surrogacy Leave was a progressive policy. The Group have worked long and hard trying to get the employer to accept this. Whilst the employer will not introduce the Leave, as such, they have stated that each case will be looked at by the diversity team on a case by case basis.

Upshot: if you are looking at surrogacy as an option do not, in the first instance go to your line manager. Go to the Union and we will ensure that the correct persons in the centre look at it.

Male Mental Health Problems: We again decided that the employer should offer gender specific guidance on mental health issues as such issues can be very different depending on gender.

The GEC did issue guidance to members but the employer has not gone that far. However they have agreed to have a Men’s Health Week in 2008 to highlight all male specific health issues, including mental health issues.

Upshot: The members who attended the AGM have made a real difference.

So, what is the message?

1. Vote left – the Branch always issues a list of preferred candidates and they are on the Left Unity faction slate. Please follow Branch advice in the upcoming Group and National elections - that way senior Union Officers will actually make a difference for you.

2. Attend the AGM, it really does make a difference. This years AGM is on Wednesday 27th February – full details will be mailed to distro reps later.