Greek workers pay first...

... and the rich keep getting richer!

Read more here.

Bankers get their bonuses, billionaires up the price of artworks and all the while the rest of us get punished... with attacks on jobs, pay and pensions, and of course on vital services such as hospitals and social services..

The Greek workers are first in the firing line. Unfortunately it is a line that will be extended to include us within a very short space of time. However, together we can and will win the fight. This branch calls for solidarity with our Greek brothers and sisters.

3,000% - banks are the new loan sharks

Todays Money Mail reports that state-backed banks are charging more for short-term borrowing than back-street lenders and payday loan companies.

The charges levied can be significantly more than the amount borrowed.

Lloyds Banking Group is the worst offender. LloydsTSB charges an eye-watering £216.32 for someone who goes overdrawn by £150 for ten days without permission

Royal Bank of Scotland, another of the state-backed banks, charges a more reasonable £20.73. HSBC charges only 75p if it is the first time a customer has gone overdrawn in a six-month period. Nationwide Building Society would take £20.78 and Santander £51.06.

Civil Service Compensation Scheme

Dougie Brownlie from the MoD Group Executive Committee attended a very well attended PCS members meeting this morning to update members on the campaign that PCS is conducting in opposition to the planned changes to the CSCS.

If you were unable to make the meeting, you can read Dougie's speakers notes here.

CSCS Members Meeting 9th February

NOTICE OF A MEMBERS MEETING
Block 6 Conference Room 6201A Norcross
TUESDAY 9th of FEBRUARY 2010 at 10:00 AM

CIVIL SERVICE COMPENSATION SCHEME UPDATE
Facility time of 1 ½ hours has been allowed for this meeting

Dougie Brownlie from MoD Group PCS will be speaking to the meeting to give members an update on the latest position of the union’s campaign against the government’s proposed changes to the CSCS.

PCS response to Gus O'Donnell dated 3rd February can be seen here.

The proposals threaten to tear up members’ accrued contractual rights and drastically cut compensation payments in the event of redundancy, whether compulsory or voluntary. They would make job cuts cheaper at a time when we know that all the main political parties are planning huge public spending cuts. All members would be at greater risk of redundancy.

Meetings have taken place with government Ministers to make clear our objections and seek new proposals. We have worked hard in an attempt to secure an acceptable settlement. But, so far, the employer has refused to come to an agreement with us.

These proposals are of even greater significance due to the imminent SPVA Future Contract and the potential for significant parts of the War Pension Scheme to be out sourced.

Hope to see you there, Ian Melvin, VA(NB)Secretary

PCS are holding members meetings across many of the MoD estates. If you cannot make it to the Norcross meeting look out for one held near to you. I am sure you will be welcome.

Removal of Normal Retirement Age in MoD

Normal Retirement Age (effective April 2010)

Prior to April 2010, the MOD, like most employers, applied a Normal Retirement Age. This was the age at which employees were expected to retire, although individuals could apply to work beyond 65 in accordance with the rules set out in the Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006. For MOD purposes, age 65 was termed the Normal Retirement Age – or NRA for short. However, from April 2010, the MOD no longer has an NRA. This means that employees can continue working after 65 and must resign when they decide to retire.

Read the new PRG here.

MoD pays consultant £84k bonus

The Mail reports that a Ministry of Defence consultant has received an £84,000 bonus - as a reward for trying to save the "wasteful" department money.

The 'good performance' payment is, they say, enough to cover a year's pay for five squaddies in Iraq or Afghanistan. We are skeptical of that figure to say the least.

The £84,563 payout was apparently earned last year by a consultant hired by the MoD on a three-year contract to oversee the merger of two of the department's agencies.

The Mail is "outraged" and quotes others as finding this "disgusting". Of course, this pales in comparrison to the multi-million pound bonuses being paid to investment bankers with our money supposedly 'loaned' to support them... at around £45,000 from each of us! (If you want to work out the effect on you of that, estimate your likely lifespan and divide by £45,000 = how much a year you are losing from earnings, savings and pension to ensure that a wealthy minority are able to afford luxury for themselves and priveledge for their children.)

The Mail reports that just five years ago the biggest bonus in MoD was £14,340. The average bonus for senior fixed-term appointees - staff brought in from the private sector or civil servants seconded from other departments - was £31,890 in 2008-09, compared to £7,243 in 2004-05.

Read more: here.

MoD pay update 23

Pay petition

As part of our ongoing pay campaign in the Ministry of Defence, we asked members to sign a petition on the Number10.gov website asking “the Prime Minister to personally intervene to stop the Ministry of Defence from slashing the pay of their lowest paid workers.”

The petition closed on 14 October 2009 by which time over 1500 members had signed the petition. We have noted that it has taken over three months for a response to be delivered from the government, but those members that signed the petition should now have finally received an email response personally from the 10 Downing Street website.

The response (see it here) regrettably does nothing to try to resolve our dispute on pay, and instead merely restates the department’s position regarding the cut in pay and pensions of staff in the E1 and E2 Pay band.

The response is also misleading when it claims that “Everyone above the new pay band maxima has been given pay protection”. This is partly true, but this pay protection is only guaranteed for the duration of the pay award and effectively expires in July next year.

Our pay campaign therefore will now be stepped up and will continue until we have achieved fair pay for all of our members.

We continue to press the department to work with us to resolve the dispute on pay. This week PCS negotiators met with the Minister for the Armed Forces, Bill Rammell. He gave us an assurance that he would look into the ongoing dispute.

We very much welcome this and we have made clear to him that we believe a negotiated settlement is possible if the will exists to find an acceptable way forward. As ever we will keep members informed of any developments through regular updates and briefings.


Grievance Hearings

A number of members have contacted our union regarding the forthcoming pay grievance hearing, over 200 of our members have lodged a grievance and we encourage all members to attend their respective hearing.

We have agreed with the Department that all of the grievance hearings will be held in Main Building, London. They will take place on Friday 29th January 2010 and Tuesday 2nd February 2010. The hearings will be collective and will deal with a number of similar grievances at the same time.

PCS will provide full representation at these meetings by either Chris Dando or KC Jones. Members are not required to make representation but are encouraged to make any points they wish to those responsible for cutting their pay.

It is important to note that each of these grievances has been submitted under the recognised grievance procedure, therefore all travel and subsistence costs fall to the department and members intending to travel should ask their Line Manager to arrange payment of these costs.

In the meantime we are also preparing our test cases for Employment Tribunal (which will proceed if the department rejects our members’ grievances) and a case management discussion was held with a Tribunal chairman this week. Following this positive hearing we anticipate moving quickly to formal legal action once the grievance hearings have been held and the formal legal hearing is likely to be held in the Spring.

Winning justice for every member on pay remains our top priority and our dispute will continue and escalate until this is achieved.

HP Enterprise Preston - Industrial Action 22nd January

Members are advised that PCS members working for HP Enterprise Services, in Fulwood Preston will be taking strike action on Friday 22nd January and shall be picketing their workplace at Ground Floor, Fleming House, EDS Fulwood Court,1-4 Midgery Court, Fulwood, Preston PR2 9ZH.

Full details of the dispute can be seen here.

Alen Clifford, PCS Commercial Sector Organiser has invited any members from our branch able to join them on the picket line or otherwise pass by and show solidarity if possible during the day.

The branch has invited a representative from the Fulwood site to attend and speak at our AGM in February. Hopefully this will give us an opportunity to gain insight into what it is like to be a PCS member working for a multi-national for profit company.

Sickness Reporting in SPVA

The trade unions were informed yesterday that reporting of sickness was to be raised to second line management. Effectively meaning that E1's and E2's will have to report their sickness to their C2's, D's to their C1's. Unless you are certain E1's who have to report to a Director, or PA's who will have to report to the CE!

Anyway, whilst we were not consulted on this, we did suggest that it be trialled in the first instance. It seems that our advice might not have been taken.

Can we ask that you let us know how you feel about this change to sickness reporting either from the perspective of the reportee or from that of a manager having to deal with, potentially, a whole lot more work. You can use the comment function on the blog or contact us directly in the TU office of 63013 or 69081.

Political campaigning - Consultation with branches

Annual Delegate Conference 2009 carried motion A72 on political campaigning. The National executive committee (NEC) was instructed to consult branches on the question of supporting trade union candidates in elections, and on the question of PCS candidates standing in elections, and then report to ADC 2010. This page sets out the issues and asks branches to respond to the consultation.

Motion A72 noted that we had raised our campaigning issues with thousands of candidates in local and national elections through the Make Your Vote Count campaign. Conference went on to recognise the need to develop this approach further, particularly within the context of economic crisis and likely public spending cuts.

The proposal, set out in the motion, is whether we take the fight to defend members’ interests into the political arena by means of direct challenges to politicians who support attacks on public services and workers’ terms and conditions. This would be an extension of our existing campaigning work. The aim would be to make a difference for members, adding to the impact of our campaigns.

This is an important question and branches are urged to ensure it is discussed as widely as possible and then to answer the consultation questions. The responses will be used to inform a motion to ADC 2010 from the NEC. Any decisions taken by conference would be then put to the whole membership in a national ballot.

A. Under what circumstances would we stand or support candidates?

There are three main, broad considerations.

First, the circumstances under which we might stand or support a candidate are not ones which we would seek to manufacture, but are ones which on balance may seem to offer us an opportunity to take forward a particular campaign.

Secondly, we would stand or support a trade union candidate because none of the other candidates would support our campaigning aims over cuts, privatisation or other government policies.

Thirdly, we would look at national rather than local elections, i.e. a Westminster Parliament, European Parliament, Scottish Parliament or Welsh Assembly election. This would allow maximum publicity and resources to be focused on the campaign,particularly if it was a by-election.

B. Will the union stand in national elections in every constituency?

No. We do not envisage PCS standing or supporting candidates across the board, or regardless of the views of other candidates in a particular constituency. Our aim would be, as it is with our existing political work, to raise the profile of our campaigns over PCS members’ jobs, pay and public services and put pressure on politicians.

C. Would Make Your Vote Count continue?

Yes. MYVC has been a successful campaign and will continue to be the major element of our political campaigning, particularly in the 2010 General Election. Standing or supporting candidates would be a limited tactic to be adopted at later elections, a targeted weaponused under certain circumstances where there would be a direct benefit to a campaign or bargaining issue.

D. Would PCS support any political parties?

No. Our strength is based on an inclusive, member-led approach that continues to value our independence above all else. It is that which unites us. It was on that basis that members voted for the setting up of a Political Fund in 2005. Candidates would only be supported astrade unionists campaigning against cuts in jobs, services and working conditions.

Would standing or supporting candidates mean union subscriptions would go up?

No. The costs would be met from our existing Political Fund.

E. What about Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland?

As stated above, we would look at standing or supporting candidates in national elections. These could include elections to the Scottish Parliament, the National Assembly for Wales and the Northern Ireland Assembly. In some of these elections proportional representation is used instead of the ‘first past the post’ voting used in Westminster elections and we would need to consider that in making decisions on when to stand.

Questions for branches

We are asking branches for their views on the principle of standing trade union candidates in elections. Such a tactic would be added to our armoury of campaigning weapons that we could use, when the circumstances were right, to advance that campaigning work.
Please send us your answers to the following questions:

1. Do you agree with the proposal that, to extend our campaigning over jobs, pay and public services, the union should consider supporting or standing trade union candidates in elections?

2. If yes, under what circumstances do you believe we should do so?

Please discuss the issues in your Branch. Then answer the consultation questions and respond but please ensure you are responding directly to the questions above.

You can respond directly to the branch by using the comments facility below,
or by post to PCS Room 6117 Nx. All comments will be correlated and forwarded to PCS headquarters.

Alternatively you can write directly to the General Secretary at the following address;
A72 Consultation, General Secretary’s Office, PCS, 160 Falcon Road, London, SW11 2LN
Or email to: A72consultation@pcs.org.uk

The deadline for receipt of responses is Tuesday 23 February 2010.
Political campaigning - Consultation with branches on ADC 2009 motion A72

Beware the Grimstone Reaper

Dear Colleagues,

Independent review of civilian staff - Beware the Grimstone Reaper

On 11th December 2009 our union issued a members briefing (MoD/MB/95/09) on the review of MoD civil servants announced in a letter to staff from the permanent under secretary, Bill Jeffrey.

Our union has long called for a sensible review of the work of civilian staff. We hoped that this review could help to put an end to the recent disgusting attacks on our members by discredited politicians in the media and elsewhere. We also hoped it would properly capture the value that every civil servant provides and take a strategic and coherent look at the work that our members do in support of defence.

At the meeting with the MoD finance director which took place shortly before Christmas we were dismayed to learn that Gerry Grimstone had been appointed to lead the review. Mr Grimstone was the Head of Margaret Thatcher’s privatisation unit and is currently the chairman of Standard Life Insurance and Candover Investments, the listed private equity house. Last year Gordon Brown appointed him to look at asset management under the Operational Efficiency Programme (OEP). The decision to privatise the Defence Storage and Distribution Agency (DSDA) was taken after it was ‘reviewed’ by the OEP team.

MoD is now inviting Mr Grimstone to examine the scope for ‘sourcing functions from other providers (such as the private and voluntary sector)’ where that provides ‘better value for money’ and to contractorise work currently done in house.

The Grimstone Reaper will be looking for a minimum of £180 Million of savings through cutting yet more civil service posts, but he is encouraged by MoD to look for additional reductions on top of this. This could equate to as many as 10,000 jobs being cut or privatised.

Whilst the review is also going to look at the distribution of tasks between military and civilian task the department has stated that manpower requirements for the military will be out of scope for the review. We presume this includes the thousands of non-deployable military staff doing jobs that should be done by civilian staff.

Our union therefore believes that this review lacks any credibility because it is starting from the point of seeking to cut our members’ jobs rather than to actually review the contribution and importance of the work that our members do. We believe that the department urgently needs to increase the number of civil servants and that a further significant round of cuts will be a disastrous mistake.

In addition to this we cannot have any confidence in those appointed to carry out the work – including those within MoD. These are the same people who disgracefully leaked the closure of RAF Cottismore to the media, meaning the first that staff knew about the closure announcement was from the radio and TV.

At the same time as MoD yet again seek to make savings by axing the jobs of the lowest paid the Guardian revealed that the Department’s equipment programme is forecast to waste £35 Billion. This is more than the entire annual budget of the department! The entire civil service costs just 9% of the MoD budget.

MoD still cannot tell us how many non-deployable military staff is employs. These employees cost many millions more to employ than civil servants and are doing work that in every other government department in Britain is done by civil servants, such as HR, admin, finance, commercial and clerical.

Our members in the last five years, when we have been fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, have continued to serve and to give of their best – despite MoD civilian numbers falling every single quarter from 109,050 in April 2004 to 80,000 by 2011.

We are dismayed and deeply angry at the plans being drawn up to cut yet more jobs. In a department already cut to the bone, further cuts will very quickly ensure the Ministry of Defence is not fit for purpose. Instead of supporting the front line as our members do so loyally and efficiently on a daily basis, we will no longer be able to give this support.

Our union is meeting the defence teams of both Labour and the Tories this month. We will seek to explain the work that our members do and appeal for a halt to the latest insane plan to cut civilian jobs. MoD could save £180 Million easily through reform of the equipment programme, through replacing military staff with civil servants or from coherent changes to acquisition plans. Instead it plans to throw more loyal staff onto the scrapheap.

Our union will fight to defend every job and respond to every attack on the work our members. We will ask members to consider all forms of action to defend jobs and we will stand up and fight for civilians in MoD and promote the work that they do. We appeal to MoD staff to join with us; help us fight the job slaughter and defend the vital role of MOD civilian staff.

The next period will be difficult and challenging, but standing together we can protect our jobs, our livelihoods and our communities.

Yours sincerely

Paul Barnsley Group Secretary
Chris Dando Group President
KC Jones Vice President

PFI con-trick costs us all

The government and all opposition parties commitment to privatisation is putting schools, hospitals and the care of the vulnerable and elderly at risk—and it is costing us on average £8,400 each. Full details here.

The government’s Private Finance Initiative (PFI) scheme is the main way that it funds the building of new hospitals and schools.
A new study of 641 PFI projects by the GMB union reveals that we are locked into paying out £250 billon on PFI projects that are only worth £64 billion.

The PFI debt is equivalent to £8,400 per person who pays tax.
A regional breakdown shows that Scotland is making the biggest overall loss. It has debts of over £30 billion on PFI assets worth £6 billion. That is equivalent to a PFI bill of £12,000 for every taxpayer in the country.

Wales, meanwhile, has the biggest debt balloon. It owes more than six times the value of its PFI assets.

For the government, a key advantage of this method of privatisation is that the debt resulting from PFI projects does not appear on its public spending balance sheet.

It is obvious who else benefits from PFI—the private sector contractors, their shareholders and investors. Winners include big banks, accountancy firms, construction companies and private equity firms.

The losers are ordinary people.

Waste report - MoD

Members will be aware of a new wave of civilian job cuts being planned by MoD. We believe a minimum of 10,000 jobs are at risk. It is imperative therefore that we all play our part in countering the arguments by the main political parties that justifies their plans to slash our jobs.

The Guardian newspaper on 6 January reported that the MoD Equipment Programme is £35 billion over budget and five years behind schedule. This is the real waste that needs to be cut in MoD and our union believes that MoD can find many ways to make savings that do not involve yet another round of site closures and job cuts.

Our message regarding procurement is clearly having an impact.

Billions of pounds have been wasted by MoD with an over reliance on contracting out and privatising services. The Hadden Cave report released at the end of 2009 directly criticised the department’s obsession with privatisation and cuts. Our union is telling the government loud and clear that we are not prepared to sit back while members' jobs are cut and the vital services provided to the frontline are run into the ground.

We are now looking to build a dossier to support our messages of where savings could be made in the MoD. This will give all members the opportunity to report where they see real waste in the Department. The message we want to continue to get across is that the Government should not be looking to cut jobs and services but should improve efficiency by addressing the waste issue.

Examples might include high costs and delays for services supplied by contractors, expensive consultants and IT failures.

If you have any stories please feed them by email to wastereport@pcs.org.uk. All entries will be treated with the strictest of confidence.

Please help our union build our case and protect our jobs, sites and communities.

PCS pressure forces MoD U turn on sale of Kentigern House

As we go into what could be the most difficult year ever for MoD members, our union starts the New Year by welcoming the news that the department have done a complete U turn regarding the sale of Kentigern House in Glasgow.

Our union has campaigned from day one to have this sale stopped, as although it would have netted approximately £40m in the short term, the estimated cost to the taxpayer over the 20-year lease would have been in the region of £150m. Our union quite correctly pointed out that this was a complete waste of taxpayer’s money and another example of MoD’s irrational short term thinking.

Although our union was told there was nothing we could do to stop the sale going ahead, we campaigned on a number of fronts:

Members in both the PCS MoD and PCS EDS/Hewlett Packard branches in Kentigern House petitioned their local MP’s to stop the sale.

The PCS Scotland committee lobbied MSP’s, both in writing and in face-to-face meetings
The MoD GEC arranged via the PCS parliamentary group for parliamentary questions to be raised in Westminster concerning Kentigern House.

The MoD GEC members in Defence Estates have brought up the proposed sale at every opportunity in recent months.

The sale of Kentigern House was one of the main topics of discussion at the Make Your Vote Count (MYVC) hustings event for the recent Glasgow North by-election.

Our union is in absolutely no doubt that all of this campaigning work has put pressure on the Ministry of Defence.. Our union will continue to ensure that any further MoD proposals like this have true value for money for the taxpayer; if not, we will fight them vigorously.

In 2010, we face the continued national threat to our redundancy terms; we face £180M of job cuts as a result of the current spending round and plans (PR10)) and we face a general election with all mainstream parties seemingly on a path of public sector destruction and devastation.

Our union will continue to fight all of these threats. As we have seen with the proposed sale of Kentigern House, if members are up for the fight and if we campaign in a co-ordinated, determined manner we can and will win these battles ahead.

PS - The proposed sale of neighbourhood five in Abbeywood has also been cancelled as part of this decision.

Conference Season?

I know it is only January and the PCS Group and National Conferences take place in May, however, motions need to be written and members standing for the Group elections need to ensure their nominations and election statements are prepared in advance.

Full details of this and a timetable for MoD Group Elections and Conference can be seen at this link.

Kevan Jones responds over Kentigern House

Kevan Jones has responded to our concerns over the future of Kentigern House.

You can read his response by downloading the PDF scan of his letter here.

This particular response was sent via Dr Liam Fox, who as Shadow for Defence was the first to gain a reply on the issue. Closely followed by Brian Simpson MEP for the North West.

Fylde defence jobs fear

In 'The Gazette' Thursday 17th December, an MoD spokesman confirmed that the number of civilian personnel would be reducing in the Fylde.

Interestingly there was no official denial that more than 400 SPVA jobs could be under threat following Defence Secretary's Bob Ainsworth's announcement of a further 10,000 job cuts in the civilian workforce. The MoD say that, "There are no plans for any compulsory redundancies", but as we know, that is a meaningless statement especially given the recent attack on the Principal Civil Service Compensation Scheme, that has been engineered precisely in order to reduce the cost of making redundancies.

The Branch will actively campaign against any arbitrary staffing cuts.

Mark Serwotka Re-elected as PCS General Secretary

Mark has won a clear victory in the GS election with 63.4% of the vote.

Mark's response to the result:

"PCS members had a clear choice about whether they wanted a union which would stand up for them and fight back against attacks on their jobs, pay and terms and conditions, or a union that would hold its hands up and say nothing could be done. Through this overwhelming show of support for me, members have shown that they want a union that will campaign and organise against the damaging consensus amongst the main political parties, which champions public sector cuts, pay freezes and privatisation. There are massive challenges facing PCS and its members in the year ahead. PCS will remain united in rising to them and PCS members can be confident that their union continue to stand up for them and the public services they care passionately about.”

Thanks go to everyone who helped in whatever way in the election campaign. This is a victory not just for Mark as General Secretary, but for all those in PCS, and across the union movement, who believe that ordinary people should not have to pay for the greed of bankers and corporate executives, that we must build fighting, democratic unions to defend working people, and that a better world is possible.

General Secretary Election 2009

Members are reminded that the branch has nominated Mark Serwotka for the position of General Secretary of PCS.


Ballot papers and members statements have been sent out from head office and should be arriving to your election address shortly. If you have not received yours please contact a branch officer a.s.a.p. as the ballot closes 17th December 2009.


Please remember to vote...and to vote Mark Serwotka.

PCS responds to the Daily Telegraph

12 November 2009

PCS general secretary wrote to the Daily Telegraph in response to its story about bonus payments in the Ministry of Defence.

Dear sir,

If civilian staff in the MoD were receiving huge bonuses, the anger expressed by families of soldiers on the frontline would be understandable, but it’s not true.
Recently over 1,000 MoD civilian staff had to receive an emergency payment because their pay had fallen below the national minimum wage and the department have this year cut the pay and pension of the lowest paid staff.
Most of our 16,000 members earn less than £20,000 per year. After years of pay restraint, the current system means that these low paid civil servants receive paltry, non-pensionable, one-off 'bonuses' of between £300 and £400 instead of fair annual pay rises.
No one is more angry than our members about the mismanagement of defence by politicians, private consultants and senior management.
Our members work directly on the frontline alongside the military providing training, security, procurement, storage, distribution and critical support.
MoD civil servants are working around the clock to support the military and will continue to do so despite the impact of the 25,000 arbitrary job cuts imposed by the government over the last six years.
Instead of disgraceful and misleading attacks on low paid staff the focus should instead be on the real waste.
For example the billions of pounds wasted in the MoD equipment programme every year, on the myriad failed privatisation projects and on the employment of thousands on non-deployable military personnel. This is the real scandal in MoD.

Yours sincerely,


Mark SerwotkaPCS general secretary

Brian Simpson MEP answers our call.

Labour MEP for our region Brian Simpson has written on our behalf to Bob Ainsworth at the MoD to protest the selling of Kentigern House.

You can see a copy of his letter here.

Conservative MEP Jacqueline Foster like Brian points out that it is a national rather than European matter, but she has suggested we refer the matter the Dr Liam Fox, Shadow Defence, which we have done.

We will keep you informed of further developments.

Update: The UKIP MEP Paul Nuttall's agent wrote "This is clearly a domestic matter for the British Government to sort out and as such it does not fall within the remit of Paul Nuttall as an MEP. However, UKIP do support the efforts to sustain your jobs in these difficult times, much of it made worse by the financial mismanagement by the Labour Government.

The Government has a poor track record when it comes to public spending and has wasted billions of pounds of taxpayers money. UKIP would seek to reform Government, introducing a lighter touch and reducing waste (on projects such as the E.U. or the Millenium Dome). This would allow proper funding of jobs for workers in this country."

So, no joy from them, we are offered is the usual meaningless rattle... I mean, the Millenium Dome? Please, that was 9 years ago!

MoD Bonuses: Part Deux

Government defends bonuses for MoD civil servants

Indeed, our esteemed Home Secretary has waded in to defend us against accusations that we are given bonuses willy-nilly, with, and I kid you not, the following explanation:

Alan Johnson told GMTV: "I think we need to find more detail about what MoD civil servants do, what they get the bonuses for, before you say this is unjustified.

"Our priority always has to be the soldiers at the frontline for equipment, for pay, for conditions." But, he said, civil servants had to go "into the frontline" to, for example, develop mechanisms to protect troops from improvised explosive devices.

"When they do that my understanding is they work 17, 18 hours in Afghanistan. They don't get overtime for that – they get a bonus to compensate."

Some are born great, some have greatness thrust upon them, and sometimes, dumb just happens.

Ministry of Defence civil servants paid £47 million in bonuses

According to the Telegraph today "civil servants at the Ministry of Defence have been paid £47 million in performance bonuses so far this year despite claims that troops in Afghanistan lack essential equipment.

There are 85,000 civil servants at the MoD — one for every two active soldiers, the highest level among the Allied nations — and about 50,000 will get a performance bonus this year.

The bonus figure covers just the first seven months of the financial year. The MoD said yesterday that the bonuses would average less than £1,000, but a senior civil servant could pick up £8,000. Last year, the department had 95 employees who were on a salary of more than £100,000. A private in the Army can be paid as little as £16,681 a year, with a bonus of £13 a day for serving in Afghanistan. "

PCS say the answer is simple... scrap the bonus scheme which is unfair and unweildy and roll the pot back into main MoD pay from whence it came and where it rightly belongs.

We will remember them.

They shall grow not old, as we that are left grow old;

Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn.

At the going down of the sun and in the morning.

We will remember them.

Unlucky for some?

On this Friday, the 13th, to 'celebrate' the start of the HP SPVA Interim Contract, HP have arranged a complimentary breakfast for all SPVA staff. (Unless of course you aren't at core sites... sorry IPPH and VWS!)

We think that this scheme smacks of corporate hospitality. (Should we enter it in the gift book?)

We also believe that we, the taxpayer, will pay for it (indirectly) if we haven't paid for it already.

We think this idea is nuts, and that there are easier and more ethical ways of getting a breakfast.

What do you think?

Kentigern House Sale

The sale of Kentigern House in Glasgow is going ahead. A 20 year lease is being sought in exchange for £47 million pounds. (We understand an offer in excess of £50 million has already been received.)

The actual cost to the taxpayer however over the 20 year lease period will be in the region of £140 million when rent and maintenance costs are calculated. We believe this to be entirely unacceptable and have sent letters to our Parliamentary representatives in protest and urge all members wherever they are based to do so.

It was stated at a PCS MoD all members meeting in Kentigern House recently that senior officials within Defence Estates and Land Forces areas have already admitted that it does not make financial sense, but such is the perilous financial situation in the MoD, they need to raise income quickly. If this is the case, there has been severe financial mismanagement across the MoD and this is not something ordinary workers or indeed the taxpayer should suffer.

The sale of the building will also threaten the security of 400 jobs in Hewlett Packard (EDS) who is a tenant within Kentigern House and SPVA’s ‘business partner’, who, if faced with a massive increase in rental costs, may look to relocate their work elsewhere. This is particularly likely to happen if the rumours are true, and it is the case that HP (EDS) currently only pay a peppercorn rent for their occupancy of Kentigern House. This fact in itself is something of a scandal, if true, as it would allow HP(EDS) an unfair advantage in bidding for contract work, undercutting civil service employees and other commercial suppliers alike, and is singularly deserving of clarification from the Minister.

The MoD has failed to properly consult with PCS, the recognised Trade Union, and seem driven by short term desperation to plug a funding gap. This is unacceptable and urgent action is needed to halt the plans which are at a very advanced stage. The existing MoD budget must be utilised more efficiently as an alternative to wasting taxpayer’s money.

The Veterans Agency branch have written to MPs, MSPs and MEPs and urge all members to do so. A draft letter can be viewed and retrieved here. Please ammend and personalize for your particular location. You can easily send your representatives an electronic letter through writetothem .

The Freeze just got colder.

On top of the expected pay and pension freezes we now have an even bleaker prospect in the guise of a massive EU climate tax.

As reported in todays Daily Express, Families face a £541-a-year rise in household bills under EU plans to fund its budget through “eco taxes”.

Campaigners warn that both householders and industry would be hit by soaring energy costs as a result of Brussels levying a controversial tax on carbon emissions.
Researchers have discovered that the cost of the EU’s Emissions Trading Scheme, introduced to reduce greenhouse gases, already costs every family in Britain £117.

But according to leaked EU Commission documents seen by the Daily Express, Brussels chiefs are planning to turn the ETS into a direct tax to fund the EU’s £110 billion-a-year budget.
To raise the UK’s current £16.4billion contribution to the EU budget through the ETS would mean increasing the burden on British families from £117 to £658 – an increase of £541. Public spending campaigners warned that even if the EU raised only part of its bloated budget from ETS, it would still prompt large increases in household energy bills.

Matthew Elliott, chief executive of the TaxPayers’ Alliance, said: “The EU’s Emissions Trading Scheme is a stealth tax that already imposes large costs on ordinary consumers.

BNP candidate arrested on explosive charge.

"A BNP candidate who built hangman's gallows for export to corrupt regimes has been charged with possessing explosives in suspicious circumstances. David Lucas has also been charged with owning an illegal weapon and ammunition with intent to endanger life.

The 49-year-old, who stood for the far-right party in this year's European elections, was arrested when police swooped on addresses in East Anglia in April.

Lucas hit the headlines in May 2006 when he revealed that he was sending his gallows and £100,000 execution systems to countries such as Zimbabwe.

He said he stopped making them in July 2006 after the export of hangman's equipment was made illegal by an EU directive. But the death penalty campaigner still has a gallows complete with noose on show at his farm in Lakenheath, Suffolk."
as reported in todays Metro

You could not make this stuff up about the BNP.

Questionable Times

Jacqui 'Lightfingered' Smith appeared last night on the BBC's Question Time. (I will let you decide if this is more or less controversial than having the BNP on.)

Anyway, she was asked whether MP's disgraced by the expenses fiasco should be elevated to the House of Lords (as she will be next May, believe it or not!). Obviously she barely attempted to answer the question and what she did say was quite unsatisfactory. Then an audience member challenged her about the £116,000 she claimed wrongly for 'not' living in her sisters bedsit. When asked if she would pay this back, she said that the committee investigating the matter, decided that although she had done wrong, it would have cost the taxpayer the same amount if she had, actually claimed correctly for a second home, therefore, she said, she would not have to pay it back as she had not benefited from it.

Excuse me? She claimed quite wrongly, indeed some might argue fraudulently, a total of £116,000 of taxpayers money as a second home allowance for a home she neither had nor lived in, or payed any pay rent or mortgage on... and she claims now that she did not benefit from this money? If that is the case, where exactly did this £116,000 go to?

Cluster bomb trade funded by world's biggest banks

Not only do they bring the world to the brink of financial crisis, and then make massive profits from the carnage they caused...
the worlds biggest banks also make massive profits from the engines of death.

The deadly trade in cluster bombs is funded by the world's biggest banks who have loaned or arranged finance worth $20bn (£12.5bn) to firms producing the controversial weapons, despite growing international efforts to ban them, reports the Guardian.

MPs' expenses: Tony McNulty faces rebuke over second home claims

Tony McNulty, a former home office minister, will be censured by the committee on standards and privileges for claiming £60,000 of Commons expenses on the home where his parents live, according to the Guardian.

He had claimed for a second home in his Harrow East constituency in London and is expected to be asked to repay £13,000 of the claim.

He will also be asked to apologise to his fellow MPs immediately.

So he will be 'asked' to apologise and pay back £13,000? We guess he gets to keep the other £47,000, and his job, and his pension and his perks and his severance pay when he gets booted out of parliament next year.

Any of us could have been sacked for a basic mistake on a travel expense claim amounting to nothing more than a few pounds, even pence.

Nick Griffin's mother-in-law says the BNP leader is a 'racist'

The mother-in-law of Nick Griffin has said the BNP leader is a “racist”.

In the Telegraph today Muriel Cook, 72, the mother of Griffin’s wife Jackie, described her son-in-law as a “work-shy pretender” who put his politics ahead of his family.
She said: “Nick is still a racist. He still holds those views – always has. He wants to see an all-white Britain, but that will never happen... he’s living in the Dark Ages."

Seems like things are just going from bad to worst for the BNP.

(Thanks to the late Les Dawson for the visual MiL joke.)

After the Party's over...

...and barely had the glasses been cleared than the BNP's own began to attack their leader... for being untrue to the parties true nature.

As reported in todays Observer, here ;

'Lee Barnes, the BNP's legal officer, accused Griffin of "failing to press the attack" during the televised debate, which was watched by a record 8 million people. Barnes complained on his personal website that Griffin "should have stood up to these whining, middle-class hypocrites that use the race card for self-enrichment – and thrown the truth right back into their fat, sanctimonious, hypocritical, self-serving faces". He accused his party's leader of "failing to press the attack" on the "ethnic middle class" for "taking up the best jobs while still playing the bogus race card for every opportunity". And in a move that is likely to reinforce concerns that Griffin's appearance will spark violence, Barnes used his personal website to suggest that "perhaps there needs to be a few 'white riots' around the country a la the Brixton riots of the 1980s before the idiot white liberal middle class and their ethnic middle-class fellow travellers wake up".

A spokesman for the anti-fascist organisation Searchlight said: "This strips away once and for all Nick Griffin's pretence that the BNP is a non-violent organisation. Lee Barnes is not just another BNP member, he is the organisation's legal officer, and here he is talking about riots in the streets. The BNP hoped the Question Time appearance would mark their entry to the political mainstream, but instead they have pushed themselves back to the violent, extremist political fringe where they belong."

Because they're worth it?

In todays Times Bankers and their camp followers defend their right to massive bonuses. We pick out one for your education, delectation and outrage:

The Wife
“I know some people look at our lifestyle and cringe and it does sometimes embarrass me. We have the obligatory double-fronted house in a communal garden in Notting Hill, with a gardener, a housekeeper/cook, a cleaner, a chauffeur, a nanny and a tutor. But it has come at a huge price. Most of the time I feel like a single mother — my husband comes home now and again, repacks his suitcase and is off to another European city. We do use Netjet for our Ibiza summer holidays but that is because he gets only one holiday a year, and even then he spends most of the time pacing up and down the beach on his BlackBerry in his Vilebrequins. He can never make our son’s parents’ evenings and missed our daughter playing the lead in the school play. I don’t think he has ever swum with the children in our pool. Even they sometimes wonder whether all the quad bikes, Nintendo Wiis and skiing weekends are worth it. I had to give up my career to keep the family together and he now looks 20 years older than I do. We make a huge effort to go to charitable events and are continually entertaining clients. But he missed my surprise 40th birthday party because he was on a conference call. If it wasn’t for the bonus, it wouldn’t be worth it.”

There, there. I am sure we are all happy to go on making it worth it for you.

£3K PAY HIKE FOR MPS AFTER EXPENSES CUT

GORDON Brown is planning to buy off MPs angry at having their expenses slashed by offering them a £3,000 pay rise, it emerged last night. read the article here

This is the same man who is offering pensioners a measley £124 a year increase on their state pension next year!

The same man who suggests we should forego pay increases and settle for a pay freeze (an effective pay cut!)!

The same man that wants to cut our civil service compensation scheme to allow our employers the option to offer only basic statutory redundancy terms when they come to sacking us!

The same man who wants to cut the Mod civil service by nearly 30,000 posts.

The same man who gave all our money to the bankers that we will never see back!

We woner if he drives a Volkswagon?

Our trust and hopes totally Fredding shredded?

We were promised that the money was a loan. That it would be paid back. But then they all started talking the need for pay freezes, pension cuts, job losses.

Yet hadn't they, all of them, promised to ensure that excessive bonuses would be a thing of the past?

And now RBS of all banks plan to give up to, and I exaggerate not... £5 Million pounds in individual bonuses!

A total bonus pot of £4 Billion Pounds! Thats right, £4 Billion Pounds of our money is going to be paid to champagne swilling public school associates of Messrs. Osborne, Cameron, Blair and Darling.

Thats a Billion from our salaries.

A billion from our pensions.

A billion from our services.

And a billion from our jobs.

And for what? Well, for making a massive profit with our money that they have used to defraud us all by writing off their bad debts, trousering our cash, then selling off the residue to loan collection companies, defaulted mortgages etc. at say 20% face value, which they also trousered. Oh yes, they also made profits on the 'bad mortgages' by selling the property secured against the original loan. Another tasty little profit.

Read the article here.

Inside view on the BNP

The Fleetwwod Weekly news have published an excellent account of one of their reporters experience of the BNP meeting held at the Frank Townend Centre in Cleveleys. You can read the article here .

Just a year on from the financial crisis...

....and the big banks, Goldman Sachs preeminent amongst them, are already stacking up huge amounts of cash in bonus pots ready to award their hard working bankers with millions and billions of bucks and pounds and yens.

How can this be, you ask? The government, the Tories, even the Liberals say we must all take either/or a pay freeze (actually a pay cut), compensations scheme cuts, pension cuts, job cuts, service cuts... and why? To maintain and reduce the public debt, they say. But wait, aren't we in such bad debt because we had to borrow loads of money to support failing banks? And isn't this money supposed to be paid back to us by those very financial institutions that caused the mess in the first place?

Then how is it that those very financial institutions that caused the crisis are already making massive profits and preparing to pay out the biggest bonus pot in history?

The truth is that the banks are using our money, paid for with our future pay, pensions, jobs and services to make their profits and to reward their staff. Neither the government nor the opposition parties propose anything substantial to halt or control this obscene fraud that is being conducted before our eyes.

Those politicians that understand what is happening do nothing because they have their snouts and trotters firmly buried in the same trough... and those that don't understand it go along with the game as a bunch of useful idiots, blinded by the baubles offered to them in the forms of floating duck houses, pornographic movies and mortgage payments on second, third and even fourth properties.

Perhaps once the veil of avarice has been removed from their eyes, the bulk of our representatives will begin to see the wider world and try to grasp just what is being done to the vast majority of us by a small and very wealthy and powerful minority.

This isn't about class, as it was back in days of Wilson and Heath. No, what is happening today is that an increasingly powerful oligarchy is dictating the economy of the world through fraud, deception and political patronage.

BNP forced to end policy for ‘whites only’ membership

The BNP will be forced to admit black and Asian members after a legal victory for the Government's Equality and Human Rights Commission which will end the party's “white only” policy.

In a court order issued today, the party agreed to amend its constitution to ensure that its membership rules no longer discriminate on grounds of race, religion or any other “protected characteristic” specified under equality legislation.

The commitment means the party, which previously allowed only “indigenous Caucasians” and those from connected ethnic groups to become members, will now be required to admit any person who wishes to join its ranks. The policy change was announced today at the Central London county court after the BNP decided to admit defeat in a legal battle with the Equality and Human Rights Commission over its membership rules.

More

Were all in this together? Again?

No Tory action on MP’s £100k claims

David "Call Me Dave" Cameron today took no action against a Conservative MP who is accused of paying £100,000 of public money into his own company.

David Wilshire, 66, set up the business with his girlfriend and then paid it with his Commons allowances for office assistance and other services.

Mr Wilshire, the MP for Spelthorne, Surrey, admits that he and his partner Ann Palmer were the sole owners of Moorlands Research Services, which was not a registered company. For three years between 2005 and 2008, Mr Wilshire paid up to £3,250 a month into it. Along with extra invoices submitted, the total paid was £105,500.

Parliamentary expenses rules forbid MPs from entering into arrangements that “may give rise to an accusation“ of profiteering from taxpayers' money. According to the Daily Telegraph, parliamentary officials did not check how the money was spent and Mr Wilshire did not provide a breakdown.

Perhaps Mr Wilshire and Dave went to the same school or something?

Addendum: Last night Mr Wilshire said he will not stand at the next election? Is this so he does not have to pay back that which he has appropriated?

First come, first served

The Government has ordered a fire sale of assets worth £16 billion – including a stake in a uranium enrichment firm – as the first steps towards tackling the deficit, reports the Telegraph, today .

"The Government also plans to auction off surplus real estate, part of a £220 billion portfolio owned by departments and quangos."

That would include Kentigern House then?

If this is the "first steps", what on earth will be steps two, three and four? Your guess is as good as ours!

Whatever, we're all in this together?

From Rod Liddle in todays Times:

A survey out last week revealed that “whatever” and “at the end of the day” were two of the most loathed words or phrases in America. Maybe we should offer a contender from the UK: “We’re all in this together.” Especially when uttered by a millionaire politician — who therefore isn’t really in it — to excuse freezing the wages of poorly paid public sector workers who truly are in it, a consequence of the behaviour of very rich bankers who put us in it but who are not themselves in it because the millionaire politician who talked about us all being in this together doesn’t think they should be in it and won’t raise their taxes or clobber them with a windfall tax. At the end of the day or whatever.

(Pictured left is Boy George "We're All In This Together [unless you're wadded]" Osborne, Tory toff, millionaire associate of Russian billionaire oligarchs, sometime Shadow Chancellor and chumster of David "Call me Dave" Cameron)

Tories to cut MoD civillian jobs by 25%!

As reported yesterday (and see new PCS circular here) the Tories are to cut MoD costs by 25%, and entirely from the civillian staff. As Tory Shadow Defence Secretary Liam 'Sly Old Fox' Fox puts it, (BBC) when "Frederick Duke of York was preparing for the Napoleonic threat between 1792 and 1804 he increased the size of the Army from 50,000 to nearly 500,000 - and he did it with 38 staff at Horse Guards."

That is as may be, but of course, what he fails to realize, being an out of touch Tory Toff is that the clerical, logistical and support functions for the Army were done then by uniformed staff in the regiments... something that has changed in modern times as more and more civillian staff, like us, have taken on roles once the preserve of regimental clerks and quartermasters, such as making the payroll, procuring and delivering supplies, and a myriad of ancillary support and clerical functions. Moreover, civillian staff perform those jobs at a fraction of the cost and across the three services.

Even the Liberals claim they will reduce MoD civillian staff by 10,000!

So what will go? The staff supporting service personnels families? Maybe civillians making sure soldiers are paid on time? Or perhaps those delivering the food and weaponry to the conflicts? Your guess is as good as ours.

What we do know for sure is the cuts will be unwarranted, driven by political dogma and damaging to the economy and the MoD and the services it supports. We also now know for sure a vote for either is to vote to end support for front line military personnel and/or support given to veterans.

Unite against the BNP in Cleveleys

It has been brought to our attention that the BNP are holding a meeting (invite only as far as we are aware, although rumours have been heard that it is to be a public meeting) in the Frank Townend Community Centre in Cleveleys which is owned by Wyre Borough Council.

The meeting is taking place on 13th October 2009.

You are all urged to complain to Wyre Borough Council on 01253 891000 or by email and The Frank Townend Community Centre on 01253 863369.

The BNP is an extremist racist organisation that seeks to divide the community, and as such we feel that a community centre (especially a council owned one) that is supposed to serve the needs of the whole community is not the place for such a group to hold a meeting.

Please phone/email and ask them to cancel this meeting on the grounds that a community centre should be there to serve the whole community, and not to promote a group that seeks to divide and alienate whole sectors of the community.

If they do not cancel the meeting then the UAF will be arranging a demo outside the building.

We are all in this together...

...Yeah, right!

'Tory Boy' George Osborne claimed 7 times at the Tory conference that "we are all in this together." He gave the very real impression that merely a pay freeze, a longer working life and piffling attacks on our pensions would be THE price's we will pay to support the bankers, Old Etonians and dying millionaire's heirs. Yes we are all in this together, unless, it seems, we are in the MoD.

Todays Times reports that the Tory's plan to make 25% cuts in the costs of running the MoD, with no plans to cut uniformed personnel; "instead sweeping cuts would be applied to the 89,300-strong workforce of civilian staff employed. "

By my reackoning thats around 22,325 civillian jobs to be disposed of in the MoD.

So who, exactly, is in this together?

Hooray! What they don't steal...

... they can pay for?

Tory member is arrested at party conference for 'stealing £150 bottle of champagne', reports the Daily Mail.

Apparently is was all a big mistake and the Tory member intended to pay the £150 for the bottle! The toffs had probably been on it all night anyway, celebrating being "all in this together" with the rest of us? Yah!

MoD pay update 21

Pay grievances

Our union has seen the letter that MoD has now issued to PCS members who have lodged grievances in respect of the reduced pay band maxima at E1 and E2.

We are asking all members to:

1. Attend the grievance hearing – this is your opportunity to tell the department what you think about the decision to cut your pay and pension.
2. MoD has asked all members to set out the remedy that they seek from the grievance process. We advise members to use the following form of words: "that MoD reinstitute the pay band maxima for my grade (specify E1/E2) to the figure as at April 2009"
3. We also ask members to set out what the imposed cut means for you in terms of the pay award that you will receive and also any other relevant information.

PCS will provide all members with representation at the grievance hearing.

Update on MoD pay negotiations

After Susan Scholefield, the MoD director of civilian personnel refused to meet with PCS members impacted by pay and pension cuts, we have now written to Bob Ainsworth, the secretary of state for defence with a request that he meet our members.

We are suggesting that he directly intervenes in this dispute and helps address the concerns of PCS members. Unfortunately as yet, he has not responded to our letter.

We will now ask John McDonnell, the chair of the PCS parliamentary group to write to Mr Ainsworth asking him to intervene and to try and resolve an issue that threatens the pay of thousands of his employees.

National pay update

Civil service pay continues to be unfair, unequal and irrational. Staff continue to be paid different rates for work of equal value.

In comparison to the rest of the public sector our pay has progression up the pay scale funded from the pay allocated. Every other part of the public sector funds progression/advancement separately to the basic pay award. This is wholly unfair.

Our union continues to put pressure on the Treasury and the government and we are determined to win on our objectives on pay which are:

· A reduction in the number of bargaining units
· Eradication of the huge pay differences, of up to 25% or more, for work of equal value
· Common conditions of service package
· Abolition of performance pay and bonus payments (putting less money into non-consolidated pay and more into consolidated pay rates).
· A return to national pay bargaining across all civil service organisations.

Defend jobs – Defend the CSCS

Not only is the MoD job slaughter continuing, but it is clear that developing plans being drawn up by our employer and the government will see the attack intensify. NO JOB in MoD is safe.

The media is full of quotes from discredited politicians engaged in a grotesque auction of promised job cuts. Our members are not the cause of the economic crisis – but are being asked to pay for it with their jobs and pay.

If that were not bad enough we are also attacked with disgraceful lies. For example Liam Fox, the Conservative shadow defence secretary claims: “the military seems consistently to shrink while the civil service keeps growing?” (strange, when 36,500 MOD civil servant jobs have been lost since 1997 compared to only 19.000 service posts), as well threats of a pay freeze and attack on pensions from the Liberal Democrats.

As for the current Government, the less said about New Labour the better!

The current proposals to slash the entitlements in the civil service compensation scheme (CSCS) must be seen for what they are.

The government proposals can only save money once civil servants are made redundant – and therefore the proposed cuts represent a clearing of the ground to begin a savage attack on our jobs which will allow the next government to cut tens of thousands of posts in the future on the cheap.

In 2005, the government agreed a deal with our union to honour our existing pensions with a new scheme (the best in the public service) put in place for new entrants. At the very least, the same should happen with the CSCS.

Yours sincerely,
Paul Barnsley Group Secretary
Chris Dando Group President
KC Jones Group Vice President

Members under the age of 27

Regional Young Members Network Meeting

The young member’s network aims to:

Provide an easily accessible platform for young members to develop their skills as a union representative
Get involved in young member specific campaigning and
Share experience with other young members.
The young member’s network has successfully built up a network of nearly 500 young members in different workplaces and regions and we are continuing to build links with other trade unions and youth organisations.

There will young members meeting 0n Monday 19th October 13.00 at Trinity Bridge House 2 Dearmans place Salford M3 5BA.

For further details click here