|
Pay inquest
to learn lessons for the future
Learn the lessons
of the pay dispute
Now that the pay dispute
is over, lessons must be learned both in the branch and at Scottish
level. This was the unanimous call from the Branch AGM on 8 March
which backed a review of the dispute.
Moved by John Stevenson
and Kevin Duguid, the motion called for a branch working party to
report within three months on how the dispute was handled in the branch
It also called for a Scotland-wide review (see this page).
Branch Secretary John Stevenson
took that argument to the union's Scottish Council which backed
the call to examine a range of issues including:
- The role of the 32 branch
Local Government Forum, in particular the decision to depart from
the original action outlined in the ballot
- How to address the varying
support across Scotland l Negative, unofficial and misleading press
briefings
- Clarity on the roles
of full time and lay officials.
"A huge amount of
work was put into this dispute by members officers and staff. "The
work-rate cannot be faulted but there are always lessons to be learned",
John had told the Branch AGM.
"While there were
many positive things, we must never again get ourselves into a position
where there are two conflicting recommendations on a ballot paper",
he added.
Seconding the AGM motion,
Service Conditions Officer Kevin Duguid appealed for the review to
be allowed to do its job. The level of detail needed could not be
adequately discussed at an AGM.
Steve Coulson (Social Work)
called for the political as well as organisational issues to be addressed.
Branch President Joe Galletta
congratulated members who gave great backing to the one day strikes,
with a special word for those who were out so long on selective strike.
He slammed the tactics of the employers and pledged the union would
resist any victimisation.
Building a Blueprint
for the Future
Scottish Local Government
Chair and Edinburgh Branch Chair Dougie Black is upbeat about the
lessons to be learned from the pay strikes.
"Whilst recognising
the deficiencies of the campaign, ultimately it was its success that
delivered the new offer.
"We hope this review
will bring a blueprint for the future on how the union runs action
on this scale" he said.
The review analyses the
campaign step by step from lodging the claim in December 2000. It
notes the poor return in the original ballot but the view that it
had to be taken as a mandate for action.
Not all branches responded
to the consultation on the first 'final' offer and the report
proposes full ballots alongside workplace meetings in the future.
Role of other unions
The problems stemming from
the split in the other unions' positions meant that the 'staff
side' could not function and issues like arbitration could not
be progressed.
The report calls for new
dialogue with the other unions to look at issues like common ballot
questions. The role of full time officers and the problems with advice
given at different stages of the dispute is also raised and the Scottish
Secretary is asked to comment.
Action strategy
The role of the 'Forum'
of branches is also reviewed, especially its shift in role from a
'sounding board' to taking decisions on tactics, like the
change from the planned 1, 2 and 3 days of action.
While backing this change,
the report notes that it exposed serious concerns in some branches
about the ability to sustain the dispute and that some issues highlighted
the lack of a long term plan to win the dispute.
There should have been
more examination of the use of selective action and more central control
and co-ordination since this was a national dispute.
The report notes the issue
of staff side members also being on the Forum when the staff side
and branch views conflicted. It recommends a separation of the chair
of the staff side and the Forum.
Press problems
The Communications Officer
role is praised (the Communications & Campaigns Committee have also
tabled a review). The report outlines a long list of bulletins and
briefings that were produced and discusses the change from quite positive
to very negative media coverage.
The link is made between
that and the move to selective action hitting the public harder and
calls for more cohesive co-ordination of local action.
But there were also other
factors leading to negative coverage. Concern is raised about anonymous
briefings to the press during the dispute, especially after Forum
meetings and the report calls for delegates to maintain 'collective
responsibility'.
National Committee
The National Industrial
Action Committee escapes criticism with the report noting that it
was supportive and acted in line with representations made by Scotland
delegates.
After a year of dispute
and six months of strikes, the final offer was accepted on a ballot
vote of a 83% to 17% on a 46% return.
The Branch is setting up
structures to respond to the review.
Back
to Headlines
|
