Kettle of Fish

I posted a letter from a Unison member in South Lanarkshire last week - who is very  unhappy at the behaviour of the union in the ongoing fight for equal pay - see post dated 10 July 2012: 'Bold, Free and Truthful'.

The same person has sent me a further exchange of e-mails with Unison which I also thought I'd share with readers as well - not just in the interests of encouraging an open and healthy debate - but also because I think the union sounds terribly weak and unconvincing.

Now Unison appears to concede (finally) that pay discrimination may exist in South Lanarkshire - which we have been saying all along of course - and that the way to determine this is to compare the actual jobs and pay of traditional male and female jobs within South Lanarkshire Council.

Which is exactly what Action 4 Equality Scotland has been campaigning for - for years - from 2005 in fact.

For most of this period the trade unions have acted largely as bystanders - it has to be said - or worse still cheerleaders for the council. 

Action 4 Equality Scotland - on the other hand - has been calling on the council to release this pay information - so that local people can see for themselves what traditional male jobs within the council are actually paid.

The irony is that the unions already know these details - because they negotiated new pay arrangements with South Lanarkshire Council in 2004 - using an in-house job evaluation scheme (JES) which has now effectively been struck down by the Employment Tribunals.

The in-house JES has been declared 'not fit to be relied upon' - yet this JES is what was used by the council and the trade unions locally all those years ago - to determine the pay and grades of all council employees.

A local JES was used in South Lanarkshire against the advice of the Scottish employers (COSLA) and national trade unions - who urged all councils to use a tried and tested scheme which had been specifically developed for use by councils in Scotland - with national trade union support.       

Now this is a fine kettle of fish, if you ask me - because if you listen to the public statements of the unions, you would be forgiven for thinking - that a great breakthrough had not recently been achieved at the Employment Tribunals. 

But this is the first time in Scotland that a major JES has been declared unsafe or 'not fit to be relied upon' - and that opens the door for the succesful prosecution of people's equal pay claims.

The reality is that this breakthrough has been achieved by Action 4 Equality Scotland - because had things been left up to the unions - there would be no equal pay campaign in South Lanarkshire and no equal pay claims against South Lanarkshire Council. 

Dear Stephen,

Thanks for your reply I appreciate you taking time to give me your comments.

Unfortunately I see you are still saying the same negative comments regarding the pay dispute.

I do understand the findings of the employment tribunal hearing and it seems that both SLC and UNISON seem to be saying almost the same thing but in a slightly different way?

If UNISON were really representing the women (and men) in their fight for equal pay, against South Lanarkshire council, why would you not give your support to Fox Cross, who do have the faith of the women?

Surely if you both are fighting the same cause it would be more successful if you worked together instead of you trying to speak against Fox Cross.

As I said in my letter, the 2400 women have made their own decision to employ the services of Fox Cross solicitors, because unlike UNISON, they talk positively about the chances of success, in the battle against discrimination, as they know it exists. But UNISON seem on keep saying that your not wanting to give anyone any false hope or guarantee that the case will win.

Fox Cross solicitors are not giving any guarantee either, but they are at least talking positively and giving the women the hope and respect they deserve.

We all know the truth in this dispute, it's just a matter of time before it's confrmed?

So hopefully you will see that you should be trying as hard as the team at Fox Cross solicitors, especially Mark Irvine, who has kept us all updated on all the ongoings in this case.

I've copied Mark on this mail as I think our comments are as much his concern as they are ours?

I hope that you could give a positive reply?

Regards,

A Member


Dear Colleague

I thank you for your letter. I am disappointed that you do not give a name since there is no question what so ever of UNISON discriminating against you.

To clarify a couple of issues. The statement that the Council’s scheme does not discriminate on a gender basis is taken from the ET judgement. This is important to understand. This however does not mean that no-one was discriminated against, That can only be judged once full hearings are held and a woman’s job and pay is compared to a man’s job and pay. Discrimination could still have taken place (for example through mis-application, or by protecting other earnings in a way that discriminates) but the ET ruled that the job Evaluation Scheme they used does not itself discriminate.

Both UNISON and Fox Cross are representing men as well as women. This is because if a female in a female dominated job wins a case of discrimination using a comparison of a male worker in a male dominated job then a man doing the same job as the woman can claim to also have been discriminated against. I can’t give you numbers but they are far fewer than the women who are being represented.

You are entitled to your opinion and we are happy to discuss these with you. A series of meetings are being arranged to give a full report to any interested member and you should receive a letter with details of these soon. Please come along. We will hope to clarify some issues as well as listen to your views.

In regard to 10% or 0% it is still possible for you to ask UNISON to take on your case, at no cost. We cannot guarantee that your case will win. To do so would be irresponsible, but our Legal Team will take it forward for assessment.


Stephen Smellie