Actions speak louder than words
Action 4 Equality Scotland has led the fight for equal pay for the past 4 years – when the unions were in the driving seat equal pay was dead in the water. It’s clear some employers are hoping the unions will make a comeback – because they regard the unions as a soft touch – but in reality the unions are a busted flush on equal pay.
We have a track record of achieving much better settlements than the unions – and we’ve told people the truth about equal pay from Day 1. We are currently in settlement discussions with various councils including Glasgow, Falkirk and Edinburgh.
Can I switch my equal pay claim to Stefan Cross?
Yes, of course you can – all you need to do is to give written authority to transfer your case – if you need any help ring Action 4 Equality Scotland on 0845 300 3 800 or drop Mark Irvine a note at: markirvine@compuserve.com
The unions say they won’t charge a fee?
Yes, but it’s not the whole story. The unions have sold their members short on many occasions – so you need to think about the overall outcome not just our success fee. Our charges are very reasonable – 10% + VAT = 11.5% in total – and we’ve delivered the goods unlike the trade unions. It’s a false economy to save 10% in fees – but lose 40% or 50% of your potential settlement – penny wise and pound foolish, as they say.
Will I lose out if I transfer my claim to the unions?
Quite possibly – the unions have a poor track record on settling claims - they are seen as a soft touch by the employers compared to Action 4 Equality Scotland and Stefan Cross. The unions are not fighting any cases at all in South Lanarkshire – they’re not challenging council Compromise Agreements (in Glasgow and elsewhere) – and they’re not fighting for the non-bonus earning male workers – whereas we’re working for all these groups.
Will I get a bill from Stefan Cross if I transfer my case to the union?
Yes, of course you will.
Well, the union said I won’t have to pay anything?
The unions say a lot of things – more than their prayers often. Members are told the grass is greener on their side of the street – but that’s a lot of baloney. If Stefan Cross has protected your right to equal pay and pursued your claim with the employment tribunals – then he’s entitled to get paid for the work that’s been done. You wouldn’t call out a plumber to fix your bathroom - then complain about getting a bill for the work that's been done.
Can I change my mind, if I’ve swallowed the union’s propaganda?
Yes, but we can’t have people going back and forward like a ping pong ball. We think that Action 4 Equality Scotland and Stefan Cross will achieve a better result than the unions – that’s our experience right around the country. If you’ve been duped by a lot of union scare stories, you can switch back with relative ease – so long as you don’t make it a habit.
Friday, 10 July 2009
Thursday, 9 July 2009
Male Workers' Claims
The recent breakthrough case male claimants at the Employment Appeal Tribunal – see post dated 25 June 2008 - has understandably generated a great deal of interest.
Lots of readers have been in touch to say “Well done” to Action 4 Equality Scotland - and Stefan Cross Solicitors.
Because when male members raised the issue with their trade unions – they were told to get lost - that they had no chance of success.
But now the worm has turned – and the stance taken by Stefan Cross has been completely vindicated - by the recent landmark case of McAvoy v South Tyneside Borough Council at the Employment Appeal Tribunal.
The underlying issue was always about common sense and the right equal treatment under the law – about treating both men and women fairly – even though the majority of equal pay claimants in Scotland are female.
The key point is that the groups of male workers - who never received bonus payments – always had an argument – so long as female council workers were successful in establishing their own claims.
Once a settlement for the women had been achieved – the employers were in the difficult position of having to justify why the non-bonus earning male group – should be treated any differently to the non-bonus earning female group.
The court was invited to agree that to do so - without good cause - amounted to sex discrimination against the men.
Thankfully the Employment Appeal Tribunal agreed - with the arguments advanced by Stefan Cross.
So, if you’ve been let down by poor union advice – and you want to pursue an equal pay claim via Action 4 Equality Scotland and Stefan Cross – then get in touch.
You can either drop Mark Irvine a note at: markirvine@compuserve.com or ring Action 4 Equality Scotland on 0845 300 3 800
Lots of readers have been in touch to say “Well done” to Action 4 Equality Scotland - and Stefan Cross Solicitors.
Because when male members raised the issue with their trade unions – they were told to get lost - that they had no chance of success.
But now the worm has turned – and the stance taken by Stefan Cross has been completely vindicated - by the recent landmark case of McAvoy v South Tyneside Borough Council at the Employment Appeal Tribunal.
The underlying issue was always about common sense and the right equal treatment under the law – about treating both men and women fairly – even though the majority of equal pay claimants in Scotland are female.
The key point is that the groups of male workers - who never received bonus payments – always had an argument – so long as female council workers were successful in establishing their own claims.
Once a settlement for the women had been achieved – the employers were in the difficult position of having to justify why the non-bonus earning male group – should be treated any differently to the non-bonus earning female group.
The court was invited to agree that to do so - without good cause - amounted to sex discrimination against the men.
Thankfully the Employment Appeal Tribunal agreed - with the arguments advanced by Stefan Cross.
So, if you’ve been let down by poor union advice – and you want to pursue an equal pay claim via Action 4 Equality Scotland and Stefan Cross – then get in touch.
You can either drop Mark Irvine a note at: markirvine@compuserve.com or ring Action 4 Equality Scotland on 0845 300 3 800
Edinburgh - New Contracts
A number of readers have been in touch because Edinburgh City Council is about to issue new contracts of employment - presumably on the back of its long awaited job evaluation (JE) scheme.
Council managers have been doing the rounds telling staff that they have to sign the new contracts - or else.
But we've been here before with other councils - and there's nothing to get over excited about.
Remember the council and the trade unions have only been at this malarkey for the past 10 years - so nothing is going to happen overnight.
The key points are:
Stefan Cross Solicitors
Buddle House
Buddle Road
Newcastle-upon-Tyne
NE4 8AW
Meantime sit tight and don't agree to anything - there's no need to at this stage - Stefan Cross will write to people having assessed exactly what the council has to say.
Council managers have been doing the rounds telling staff that they have to sign the new contracts - or else.
But we've been here before with other councils - and there's nothing to get over excited about.
Remember the council and the trade unions have only been at this malarkey for the past 10 years - so nothing is going to happen overnight.
The key points are:
- Don't panic - and don't sign anything without getting proper advice
- And, no you won't get the sack - you won't lose your job - so don't worry
Stefan Cross Solicitors
Buddle House
Buddle Road
Newcastle-upon-Tyne
NE4 8AW
Meantime sit tight and don't agree to anything - there's no need to at this stage - Stefan Cross will write to people having assessed exactly what the council has to say.
Now There's a Thing!
Edinburgh city council’s ongoing dispute with its refuse workers over equal pay proves one thing.
The trade unions don’t hesitate to take tough action to defend the interests of their bonus earning male members.
Nothing wrong with that – that’s what unions are for – albeit they’re not supposed to operate on a selective basis - 'all for one and one for all', etc etc.
If the trade unions believe they need to take industrial action, organise a full-blown strike or run a big high-profile public campaign to defend their members’ interests – well that’s what people expect.
After all - dogs bark, birds fly, and fish swim in the sea.
But – over the past 10 years – guess how many strikes or high profile public campaigns there have been - to defend the rights of women council workers to equal pay?
None – zero – zilch.
Says it all, really.
The trade unions don’t hesitate to take tough action to defend the interests of their bonus earning male members.
Nothing wrong with that – that’s what unions are for – albeit they’re not supposed to operate on a selective basis - 'all for one and one for all', etc etc.
If the trade unions believe they need to take industrial action, organise a full-blown strike or run a big high-profile public campaign to defend their members’ interests – well that’s what people expect.
After all - dogs bark, birds fly, and fish swim in the sea.
But – over the past 10 years – guess how many strikes or high profile public campaigns there have been - to defend the rights of women council workers to equal pay?
None – zero – zilch.
Says it all, really.
Wednesday, 8 July 2009
Making Omelettes and Breaking Eggs
There’s an old saying that you can’t make an omelette without breaking an egg – and that’s just as true when it comes to equal pay.
The point is that you can’t have equal pay – unless you eliminate the unjustified pay differences between men and women’s jobs.
If all you do is just you maintain pay differentials – with smoke and mirrors – then you’re kidding people on – and that’s not a solution, it’s just an old-fashioned con trick.
What the employers and trade unions signed up to in 1999 – was a new deal for thousands of female dominated jobs that had been undervalued and underpaid for years.
What this should have meant – 10 years ago (over a period when council budgets doubled) – was a big pay increase for many of the female dominated jobs – cooks, carers, classroom assistants etc., to name just a few.
If the employers couldn't afford to close the old pay gap all in one year – the solution was simply to phase it in over 2, 3 or even 4 years.
But at the end of that period – the pay of the women’s jobs would have been brought into line with the pay of the male jobs.
Put simply, the women’s jobs have to gain more than the traditional male jobs – until pay parity is achieved – without that you still have a pay gap and, by definition, you can’t have equal pay.
Full stop.
Anyone that tells you any different is being dishonest – employers and trade unions alike.
So, to make the omelette – you need to break a few eggs – and eggs cost money, even if they’ve never been known to break any banks.
Edinburgh is now facing a strike – because the council’s refuse workers are losing out over job evaluation (how their jobs are valued and paid) – but who said levelling people down was the solution to equal pay?
The answer is to level up the jobs and the pay of women workers – because that’s what Single Status was all about back in 1999.
Job enrichment is the key – said some council person on the radio today – that is adding bells and whistles onto the (male) refuse workers jobs – so that their pay stays above that of the mainly female cooks, classroom assistants and carers.
But have the employers and unions learned nothing after 10 long years?
Because if only the male jobs get singled out for special treatment – that’s just back to square one – trying to make an omelette without breaking any eggs.
The point is that you can’t have equal pay – unless you eliminate the unjustified pay differences between men and women’s jobs.
If all you do is just you maintain pay differentials – with smoke and mirrors – then you’re kidding people on – and that’s not a solution, it’s just an old-fashioned con trick.
What the employers and trade unions signed up to in 1999 – was a new deal for thousands of female dominated jobs that had been undervalued and underpaid for years.
What this should have meant – 10 years ago (over a period when council budgets doubled) – was a big pay increase for many of the female dominated jobs – cooks, carers, classroom assistants etc., to name just a few.
If the employers couldn't afford to close the old pay gap all in one year – the solution was simply to phase it in over 2, 3 or even 4 years.
But at the end of that period – the pay of the women’s jobs would have been brought into line with the pay of the male jobs.
Put simply, the women’s jobs have to gain more than the traditional male jobs – until pay parity is achieved – without that you still have a pay gap and, by definition, you can’t have equal pay.
Full stop.
Anyone that tells you any different is being dishonest – employers and trade unions alike.
So, to make the omelette – you need to break a few eggs – and eggs cost money, even if they’ve never been known to break any banks.
Edinburgh is now facing a strike – because the council’s refuse workers are losing out over job evaluation (how their jobs are valued and paid) – but who said levelling people down was the solution to equal pay?
The answer is to level up the jobs and the pay of women workers – because that’s what Single Status was all about back in 1999.
Job enrichment is the key – said some council person on the radio today – that is adding bells and whistles onto the (male) refuse workers jobs – so that their pay stays above that of the mainly female cooks, classroom assistants and carers.
But have the employers and unions learned nothing after 10 long years?
Because if only the male jobs get singled out for special treatment – that’s just back to square one – trying to make an omelette without breaking any eggs.
"It's a Load of Old Tripe"
Readers in North Lanarkshire are the latest to report poaching more efforts by the unions – this time the local Unison branch.
According to reports Unison is holding a series of meetings on consecutive Saturdays - and significantly, the council is allowing local schools to be used as venues for these meetings.
Help from the employers always comes at a price – the council is assisting Unison because they see the union as a softer option - than Action 4 Equality Scotland and Stefan Cross.
Curiously, the union’s pitch is that if 100 people transfer their claims from Stefan Cross – then Unison will take them up! Sounds like a third-rate service and the obvious question that springs to mind is – “Why does the local union branch need 100 claims – before it will get off its lazy backside?”
Must be some kind of dodgy deal going on behind the scenes - because remember this is the same Unison branch that tried to sell North Lanarkshire’s original single status package – through joint presentations with senior management in 2006.
But they got booed off the stage – for trying to sell their own members short. So our advice is that you can trust this lot - about as far as you can carry an elephant on your back.
The current position in North Lanarkshire is that there has been a partial settlement of some former manual worker claims – cleaning and catering groups – these individuals have an ongoing claim that’s well underway with Stefan Cross.
So far, the council has refused to recognise other people’s claims. For example, last year the council tried to restrict the claims of Home Carers - but the employment tribunal rejected the council’s argument in favour of the case put forward by Stefan Cross.
The council has wasted further time and public money by appealing that decision – the appeal is due to be heard in September, but we’re confident that the council will lose again.
Falkirk Council is similar to North Lanarkshire – it lost a similar argument at the employment tribunal and appealed the decision – but the council recently asked for a postponement of the case – and now wants to put forward new offers of settlement.
North Lanarkshire faces the same choice – but the truth is that the council has been held to account by Action 4 Equality Scotland and Stefan Cross – not the unions. The unions sold their members out before – and will do so again – without the slightest hesitation.
As one of our readers said: “Unison has done nothing about equal pay for years – then they come along badmouthing Stefan Cross and spreading their scare stories – it’s a load of old tripe!”
According to reports Unison is holding a series of meetings on consecutive Saturdays - and significantly, the council is allowing local schools to be used as venues for these meetings.
Help from the employers always comes at a price – the council is assisting Unison because they see the union as a softer option - than Action 4 Equality Scotland and Stefan Cross.
Curiously, the union’s pitch is that if 100 people transfer their claims from Stefan Cross – then Unison will take them up! Sounds like a third-rate service and the obvious question that springs to mind is – “Why does the local union branch need 100 claims – before it will get off its lazy backside?”
Must be some kind of dodgy deal going on behind the scenes - because remember this is the same Unison branch that tried to sell North Lanarkshire’s original single status package – through joint presentations with senior management in 2006.
But they got booed off the stage – for trying to sell their own members short. So our advice is that you can trust this lot - about as far as you can carry an elephant on your back.
The current position in North Lanarkshire is that there has been a partial settlement of some former manual worker claims – cleaning and catering groups – these individuals have an ongoing claim that’s well underway with Stefan Cross.
So far, the council has refused to recognise other people’s claims. For example, last year the council tried to restrict the claims of Home Carers - but the employment tribunal rejected the council’s argument in favour of the case put forward by Stefan Cross.
The council has wasted further time and public money by appealing that decision – the appeal is due to be heard in September, but we’re confident that the council will lose again.
Falkirk Council is similar to North Lanarkshire – it lost a similar argument at the employment tribunal and appealed the decision – but the council recently asked for a postponement of the case – and now wants to put forward new offers of settlement.
North Lanarkshire faces the same choice – but the truth is that the council has been held to account by Action 4 Equality Scotland and Stefan Cross – not the unions. The unions sold their members out before – and will do so again – without the slightest hesitation.
As one of our readers said: “Unison has done nothing about equal pay for years – then they come along badmouthing Stefan Cross and spreading their scare stories – it’s a load of old tripe!”
Tuesday, 7 July 2009
False Dates and Deadlines
A number of readers from Glasgow have been in touch about the GMB’s ongoing poaching campaign.
According to reports local union stewards are telling union members who are pursuing equal pay claims with Stefan Cross – that they should transfer their claim to the GMB by 18 July 2009 – otherwise they risk losing out on their right to bring a claim altogether.
But like so much union advice – this is complete baloney – the story is nonsense and has been made up from beginning to end.
The truth is that anyone pursuing an equal pay claim with Stefan Cross should just tight – because we’re well ahead in the game.
Your claim is already well advanced – there’s nothing that you need to do while your case is being resolved – and anyone that’s says differently is winding you up, for their own purposes.
In fact, it’s the people who have taken up claims with the GMB that should be really worried – because the union is not even part of the important GMF test case in Glasgow that recently adjourned – and will start again in August.
Nor is the GMB acting for the thousands of worker workers who signed the council’s Compromise Agreement – whereas Stefan Cross is challenging these agreements.
So the union as usual is well behind the curve – but has the brass neck to pretend otherwise.
The reality is that if you’re a union member – you should consider transferring your case to Stefan Cross.
Because we’re likely to get it settled sooner than the GMB - and on past performance we’ll achieve a better outcome into the bargain.
According to reports local union stewards are telling union members who are pursuing equal pay claims with Stefan Cross – that they should transfer their claim to the GMB by 18 July 2009 – otherwise they risk losing out on their right to bring a claim altogether.
But like so much union advice – this is complete baloney – the story is nonsense and has been made up from beginning to end.
The truth is that anyone pursuing an equal pay claim with Stefan Cross should just tight – because we’re well ahead in the game.
Your claim is already well advanced – there’s nothing that you need to do while your case is being resolved – and anyone that’s says differently is winding you up, for their own purposes.
In fact, it’s the people who have taken up claims with the GMB that should be really worried – because the union is not even part of the important GMF test case in Glasgow that recently adjourned – and will start again in August.
Nor is the GMB acting for the thousands of worker workers who signed the council’s Compromise Agreement – whereas Stefan Cross is challenging these agreements.
So the union as usual is well behind the curve – but has the brass neck to pretend otherwise.
The reality is that if you’re a union member – you should consider transferring your case to Stefan Cross.
Because we’re likely to get it settled sooner than the GMB - and on past performance we’ll achieve a better outcome into the bargain.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
