Glasgow City Council Update
Seems like the trade unions in Glasgow now agree that the City Council has, in fact, sought leave to appeal the recent decision of the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT).
The judicial process will now rumble along behind the scenes, but as regular readers know this is not just a dry legal argument for the lawyers.
Because a big part of the reason for A4ES's success in recent years has been the determination to run a high profile campaign which puts these foot-dragging councils in the court of public opinion.
Now that's what happened in both North Lanarkshire and South Lanarkshire Councils, and the challenge now is to do the same with Labour-run Glasgow City Council.
I am perfectly happy to work alongside the trade unions to achieve a fair outcome for the workforce and with Glasgow politicians who agree that the City Council is digging an ever bigger hole for itself by prolonging this fight through the courts.
So if the GMB, Unison and Unite want to discuss how to maximise pressure on the present Glasgow administration, seems to me in's in everyone's interests for us to sit down and talk: markirvine@compuserve.com
**Stop Press** (29/04/16)
The GMB union caused some confusion the other day by issuing the following statement to its members in Glasgow.
Now the GMB is quite simply wrong.
Because Glasgow City Council (GCC) has definitely registered a request for 'leave to appeal' the recent Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) decision which ruled that new pay arrangements, introduced by GCC in 2007, failed to create a level playing field between male and female jobs.
Action 4 Equality Scotland has registered a 'cross appeal' to protect the interests of 5,500 A4ES clients in Glasgow via HBJ Gateley solicitors, who are now working closely with A4ES to bring these cases to a successful conclusion.
Death Wish 2017 (29/04/17)
I've had lots of comments about the political leadership in Glasgow City Council which seems to have developed a 'death wish' in relation to next year's local council elections which are to be held in May 2017.
Time to get Labour out
New leadership needed in Glasgow people why drag this out
If the government can't step in on councils, then how can they impose a pay rise cap on public sector employees?
New leadership needed in Glasgow people why drag this out
If the government can't step in on councils, then how can they impose a pay rise cap on public sector employees?
Totally utter disgrace. pay the people who you've underpaid for all these years. Vote the LABOUR COUNCILLORS OUT
Ive emailed my msp he won't get my vote I hope Glasgow now get these map's out
Labour definitely won't be getting my vote and I've let my colleagues know about this also
All the more reason to turn the heat up on Labour over the coming days and once the outcome of the Scottish Parliament elections is known next week - remember polling day is Thursday 5th May.
Glasgow Update (28/04/16)
My sources inside the City Chambers tell me that Glasgow has decided to appeal the recent decision of the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT).
In which case all bets are now 'off' as the political leadership of Labour-run Glasgow seems to have opted for 'war-war' in the run up to next year's local council elections which are due in May 2017.
So be it, as they say, and the task now is to bring about a change of leadership within the City Council, one which is prepared to face top to its obligations over equal pay.
Glasgow Update (26/04/16)
I said in a recent post that the fight for equal pay in not a 'spectator sport' by which I meant there is plenty that individual claimants can do to help me and the A4ES legal team persuade the City Council to bring this saga to an end.
Now the A4ES campaign in Glasgow was treading water for a long time while the legal fight took precedence in the Employment Tribunal and the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT).
And it's possible that the legal route could take centre stage again, if the City Council decides to drag things out by appealing the EAT decision.
Because that would mean a further round of hearings in the Court of Session (Scotland's highest civil court) and, potentially, the UK Supreme Court.
Sadly, this is the same route chosen by Labour-run South Lanarkshire Council which tried to block my freedom of information (FoI) request about the huge pay differences between male and female council jobs.
But just look where that got South Lanarkshire in the end with the reputation of the Council trashed along with the trade unions who actively discouraged members from pursuing equal pay claims against the local Labour council.
So I would say that if Glasgow City Council decides not to 'sue for peace' and instead opts to fight through the courts, then the challenge it to get rid of the present Labour administration and replace it with one that is prepared to face up to its obligations on equal pay.
Lots of readers in Glasgow are already putting their shoulder to the wheel by raising these issues with their local MPs, councillors and candidates in the Scottish Parliament elections which are being held on Thursday 5th May 2016.
So keep up the good work because Glasgow's politicians must get the message that this issue will not go away and will still be staring them in the face in 12 months time when all Scottish councils face election in May 2017.
Glasgow Update (30/04/16)
Now I've written to John myself on the subject and I was rather taken aback at his response which I would characterise as being more concerned about the impact on the Council which created this situation the first place, of course.
The fact is that the lowest paid women workers in Glasgow were unfairly treated for years, being paid typically £6.00 an hour while comparable male jobs were earning £9.00 or more for every hour they worked.
When Action 4 Equality Scotland came along in 2005 and highlighted the huge differences in pay between male and female dominated jobs, the Council (having previously denied any equal pay problem) rapidly rushed out settlement offers which were worth much less (less than half in many cases) of the true value of people's equal pay claims.
So the largely female workforce in the City Council has good reason to be very angry at the behaviour of Glasgow's political leaders and senior officials, and if you ask me, women workers are the victims of the Council's behaviour - they are not the cause of its financial problems.
And that's the message to get across to Glasgow's politicians both before and after next week's Scottish Parliament elections.
Thanks Claire for your latest email.
I would be happy to write to the Council about your case if I am re-elected next Thursday.
In order to do that, I would need your address, job and department in the Council, how much you were paid and how much you lost out.
The wider question of councils not settling equal pay claims is regularly raised in parliament and if I am there again I would be supportive of any attempts to get settlements.
My understanding was that Glasgow did not have money set aside for this. If they have to borrow more, that would still mean cuts and possible job losses in future so it could become your problem if you or colleagues lost jobs.
Let me know if you want me to take this further if I am re-elected.
Yours sincerely
John
Glasgow Update (25/03/16)
I wrote the other day about my letter to all Glasgow MSPs regarding the fight for which was sent before the dissolution of the Scottish Parliament on Wednesday.
I had a quick response from John Mason MSP which I found very disappointing, I have to say, because John's initial response was to raise concerns about how the Council would meet its equal pay obligations rather than looking at things from the point of view of his constituents who have been getting short-changed for many years.
So I replied to John by pointing out that Glasgow City Council has been aware of the position for years, that additional borrowing has been made available by the Scottish Government and that the rights of low paid women to equal pay cannot be set aside because of the Council's mismanagement of its pay arrangements over the years.
Now the SNP leader of the opposition group in Glasgow, Cllr Susan Aitken, had the right attitude if you ask me, so let's hope that all of Glasgow's SNP politicians are singing from the same hymn sheet soon.
Particularly as Humza Yousaf, another SNP MSP in Glasgow, responded by congratulating me for 'continuing this important fight'.
John Mason MSP
-----Original Message-----
From: Mason J (John), MSP
To: markirvine
Sent: Tue, Mar 22, 2016 9:48 am
Subject: RE: Glasgow and Equal Pay
To: markirvine
Sent: Tue, Mar 22, 2016 9:48 am
Subject: RE: Glasgow and Equal Pay
Thanks Mark
Today’s Herald suggested that Glasgow might have to pay out £100 million because of this. However, I am not sure Glasgow has that kind of money lying around. Would they have to close schools and leisure centres, reduce waste collection, or sack staff?
Regards
John
-----Original Message-----
From: markirvine
To: John.Mason.msp
Sent: Tue, Mar 22, 2016 9:56 am
Subject: Re: Glasgow and Equal Pay
Dear John
No, because the Council has been aware of this ongoing legal case for several years and have been planning for just such a contingency, as you would expect.
Not only that the Scottish Government has previously offered to increase council 'borrowing consents' to assist Scottish councils meet their obligations in respect of equal pay.
And at the end of the day, the rights of low paid women workers to equal pay cannot be set aside or qualified because of the Council's mismanagement over the years, as I'm sure you would agree.
Kind regards
Mark Irvine
Humza Yousaf MSP
-----Original Message-----
From: Yousaf H (Humza), MSP
To: markirvine
Sent: Tue, Mar 22, 2016 11:58 am
Subject: RE: Glasgow and Equal Pay
Dear Mark,
Many thanks for this very helpful update and well done to you and campaigners for continuing this important fight.
Best wishes,
Humza
Humza Yousaf MSP
MSP for Glasgow
Minister for Europe and International Development
I wrote to all Glasgow MSPs with news about the long-awaited Employment Appeal Tribunal decision and its implications for City Council employees.
I've already had a number of responses which I'll share on the blog site in the next day or so.
But even though the current batch of Glasgow MSPs is standing down there is, of course, nothing to stop those seeking re-election from making clear where they stand on this issue.
So if you ask me, the Glasgow candidates should all be put on the spot to explain their views in the run-up to the Scottish Parliament elections which are due to take place on Thursday 5th May 2016.
The most helpful comment I've seen, so far, came from the SNP leader of the opposition in Glasgow, Cllr Susan Aitken, who told The Herald that the Council should "come clean" about its responsibilities and settle the claims.
Councillor Aitken went on to add:
"The Council should have sought to do the right thing by these women when it emerged that the original claims may not have been adequately settled.
"The Council should have sought to do the right thing by these women when it emerged that the original claims may not have been adequately settled.
"Instead it may well have opened itself up to increased liability at a time when public finances are already under enormous pressure."
Well said, if you ask me.
Well said, if you ask me.
Dear MSP
Glasgow and Equal Pay
Great news for the 5,500 Action 4 Equality Scotland (A4ES) clients still fighting for equal pay with Glasgow City Council.
The long running case which went to the Employment Appeal Tribunal has finally released its decision (from a hearing which concluded in May 2015) and the result is a huge victory for the claimants.
In essence the tribunal agreed that Glasgow City Council failed to create a level playing field between its traditional male and female jobs before introducing new pay arrangements in 2007.
As regular readers know, traditional male jobs received significant bonus payments on top their basic pay which were highly discriminatory because these lucrative bonus schemes were not available to female dominated jobs.
So 11 years or 12 years ago, a Glasgow Home Care worker was earning around only £6.00 an hour, whereas a male refuse worker or gardener (on the same or even a lower grade) was being paid significantly more, around £9.00 a hour because of these 'male only' bonus schemes.
Now these big bonuses were negotiated between council management and the trade unions (GMB, Unison and Unite), but the size of the pay gap between traditional male and female jobs was kept hidden from the wider workforce - until Action 4 Equality Scotland came along in 2005 and let the cat out of the bag..
The claimants case is that Glasgow City Council had a clear duty to tackle this pay discrimination and create a level playing field between male and female jobs before introducing new pay arrangements in 2007 - and this argument has been upheld by the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT).
In plain language the pay of women's jobs should have increased to the same level as the higher (bonus related) pay of men's jobs, otherwise the Council continued to treat its male workers much more favourably than their female colleagues.
Which is exactly what happened in Glasgow because the City Council protected the higher (bonus related) earnings of its traditional male jobs going forward (from 2007) and this 'more favourable treatment' forms the basis of another equal pay claim for the 5,500 A4ES clients.
The $64,000 dollar question is whether Glasgow City Council will accept the game is now up and negotiate a settlement to all of the outstanding claims.
Because if not, then the fight for equal pay in Glasgow is bound to be be a big issue in the Scottish Parliament elections in May 2016 and will also run all the way to the next round of Scottish council elections due in May 2017.
So I will be making contact with the leadership of Glasgow City Council in the days ahead to discover whether it is to be a case of 'jaw jaw' or 'war war'.
I circulated all Glasgow MSPs yesterday (Monday) with the latest post from my blog site regarding the long-running fight for equal pay in Glasgow City Council.
I am conscious that all existing Glasgow MSPs will be standing down later this week and that many, if not all, of you will be contesting the forthcoming Scottish Parliament elections.
If you are standing as a candidate in the Holyrood elections and would like to make your views known regarding the equal pay position in Glasgow, please drop me a note as I am certain that the thousands of Glasgow-based readers of the blog site will be interested in what their candidate MSPs have to say.
I can contacted at the following email address - markirvine@compuserve.com - and I am happy to keep candidates in Scottish Parliament elections briefed on further developments in the run up to 5 May 2016.
My blog site can be found at: www.action4equalityscotland.blogspot.com
Kind regards
Mark Irvine
Glasgow Update (21/03/16)
Great news for the 5,500 Action 4 Equality Scotland (A4ES) clients still fighting for equal pay with Glasgow City Council.
The long running case which went to the Employment Appeal Tribunal has finally released its decision (from a hearing which concluded in May 2015) and the result is a huge victory for the claimants.
In essence the tribunal agreed that Glasgow City Council failed to create a level playing field between its traditional male and female jobs before introducing new pay arrangements in 2007.
As regular readers know, traditional male jobs received significant bonus payments on top their basic pay which were highly discriminatory because these lucrative bonus schemes were not available to female dominated jobs.
So 11 years or 12 years ago, a Glasgow Home Care worker was earning around only £6.00 an hour, whereas a male refuse worker or gardener (on the same or even a lower grade) was being paid significantly more, around £9.00 a hour because of these 'male only' bonus schemes.
Now these big bonuses were negotiated between council management and the trade unions (GMB, Unison and Unite), but the size of the pay gap between traditional male and female jobs was kept hidden from the wider workforce - until Action 4 Equality Scotland came along in 2005 and let the cat out of the bag..
The claimants case is that Glasgow City Council had a clear duty to tackle this pay discrimination and create a level playing field between male and female jobs before introducing new pay arrangements in 2007 - and this argument has been upheld by the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT).
In plain language the pay of women's jobs should have increased to the same level as the higher (bonus related) pay of men's jobs, otherwise the Council continued to treat its male workers much more favourably than their female colleagues.
Which is exactly what happened in Glasgow because the City Council protected the higher (bonus related) earnings of its traditional male jobs going forward (from 2007) and this 'more favourable treatment' forms the basis of another equal pay claim for the 5,500 A4ES clients.
The $64,000 dollar question is whether Glasgow City Council will accept the game is now up and negotiate a settlement to all of the outstanding claims.
Because if not, then the fight for equal pay in Glasgow is bound to be be a big issue in the Scottish Parliament elections in May 2016 and will also run all the way to the next round of Scottish council elections due in May 2017.
So I will be making contact with the leadership of Glasgow City Council in the days ahead to discover whether it is to be a case of 'jaw jaw' or 'war war'.
