'Loadsamoney' in Lanarkshire
Do any readers know what happened to the consultation exercise in South Lanarkshire in which the local Unison branch made proposals to spend some of the £700,000 war chest that's been built up in recent years, thanks to an extra local levy?
If so, let me know as is a great story, especially as the union failed to put this giant money mountain to use during the long fight for equal pay during which branch officials actively advised their own members not to pursue equal pay claims against the local Labour-run council.
'Loadsamoney' (26/11/15)
As the Unison branch in South Lanarkshire ponders what to do with its £700,000 'war chest' of its members' money, said union members must be scratching their heads at the idea of employing a special Caseworker to help with local disciplinary and grievance hearings.
Now leaving aside the fact that unions stewards and branch officers are entitled to paid time off to represent members who get caught up in these procedures, there are some rather obvious questions to ask including:
- What is the level of demand?
- How has demand been measured?
- How would such a post be advertised?
- Who would draw up a suitable job description?
- How would the pay of such a post be determined?
- Who would be on the interview panel and how would they be selected?
- To whom would a Caseworker report and how would this person be managed?
- Does the Unison branch have the required employer's liability insurance in place and if not, what is the cost?
- What qualifications and experience and expertise do Unison branch officials possess to oversee such a process?
- What safeguards would be put in place to ensure that the successful candidate is not drawn from the existing branch leadership?
- What safeguards would be put in place to ensure that the successful candidate is not just a 'chum' of the local branch leadership?
South Lanarkshire (21/11/15)
Now it is the members' money after all and I imagine that's a good an idea as any that might emerge from some local branch committee.
Other readers have been in touch with their comments about recruiting a branch 'Caseworker' (see post below) and I'll have more to say on this issue in the next day or two.
Other readers have been in touch with their comments about recruiting a branch 'Caseworker' (see post below) and I'll have more to say on this issue in the next day or two.
South Lanarkshire (20/11/15)
I've been sent an interesting exchange of posts from a reader in South Lanarkshire featuring the Facebook page of the local Unison branch.
SCH Whilst I'm glad that the fund has a surplus and would want to see every member represented at disciplinary and grievances; wouldn't the money be better spent in seeking quality independent legal advice when disputes arise? Whilst branch officials and stewards do their best - quality legal advice at the start of the equal pay dispute would have prevented many women members suffering hardship while waiting for a settlement. I'm not affected by the equal pay dispute myself but like other members, want to ensure that the situation never happens again.
Reply · November 15 at 11:59pm · Edited
Unison South Lanarkshire Legal advice is available and was at the start of the the equal pay saga. The advice we received at the time was consistent with the advice received by other unions. The legal advice changed in light of the development of case law. If you could turn the clock back and get new advice based on what we know now we would do a lit of things differently in life as well as in union issues.
Reply · November 15 at 11:59pm · Edited
Unison South Lanarkshire Legal advice is available and was at the start of the the equal pay saga. The advice we received at the time was consistent with the advice received by other unions. The legal advice changed in light of the development of case law. If you could turn the clock back and get new advice based on what we know now we would do a lit of things differently in life as well as in union issues.
Now this comes hot on the heels of the news that the union has a huge local fund worth £700,000 which members have built up over the years by paying an additional levy on top of their normal Unison membership fees.
I can't imagine that Unison at national level are happy about this because it raises big questions about accountability and standards - the management of these funds and purpose to which they are being put.
But for the moment I'll restrict myself to Unison's comments in relation to legal advice in which the union suggests that the legal position changed in response to developments in case law.
Now this is complete drivel if you ask me, because Action 4 Equality Scotland launched the fight for equal pay back in 2005 and the case was made on the basis of huge differences in pay between male and female jobs which existed at the time - the Council's position did not weaken and ultimately collapse because of 'developments in case law'.
So if I were a Unison member in South Lanarkshire I'd be asking to see this legal advice and the advice of the QC whom branch officials met back in 2009 - did Unison organise and pay for this advice at a national level or did local branch officials set this up themselves and pay the bill out of their South Lanarkshire levy?
More to follow.
South Lanarkshire (17/11/15)
A kind reader has sent me this post which appears on the Facebook page of the local Unison branch in South Lanarkshire Council.
Now if I were a Unison member in South Lanarkshire I'd be asking how this local fund has been managed and spent over the years, because £700,000 is a awful lot of the members' money.
From the information posted on Facebook Unison members in South Lanarkshire seem to be paying an extra 5% on top of their normal fees which get paid into this local fund, rather than handed over to the union at national level.
If so, what explanation do new members get about this higher membership rates operating in South Lanarkshire and are members told that they can pay a lower rate if they wish?
All seems rather odd if you ask me, as does the proposal to employ someone as a 'Caseworker' when union reps have a legal right to time off, with pay, to represent members involved in disciplinary or grievance procedures.
More to follow.
November 15
BRANCH DISPUTES FUND – PROPOSALS TO ALTER ITS USE
Members in South Lanarkshire will receive a ballot paper in the next few days. It will be distributed with the latest edition of our branch newsletter, BRANCHLINE. Please read it and return it in the envelope enclosed.
The ballot concerns our branch ‘disputes fund.’ This fund was established many years ago by a ballot of members who agreed by a huge majority to set up this fund. It is funded by a small levy paid by branch members. This is 5% of your dues. Therefore if you currently earn £17,000 your contribution to the levy is 47p every 4 weeks.
This local levy belongs to the branch and cannot be used to fund any activities of the union at Scottish or UK level. It can only be used locally. The stipulation when we set it up was that it would be used to assist members when we are in disputes and take strike action. Over the years therefore we have used it to assist members who were in hardship due to strike action and when members took selective action on behalf of all members we ensured that they were suffering no financial loss.
The branch Executive believe that having a local fund like this is essential to ensure that when we take industrial action we are able to support members.
However the fund has now reached a level where the Executive think it appropriate to review it. At the last annual report the local fund had over £700,000 pounds in it. This means it is possibly the largest such fund in the union. It continues to grow each year. This means that should we need to take strike action we are in a strong position to be able to support members who may suffer hardship.
However, it is the view of the Executive that the local levy could also be used to support members in other ways. Therefore we are asking members to agree that the fund can be used for other purposes than supporting members in disputes.
We are clear that it cannot be used to support Scottish or UK activities, or to provide funds for conferences, visits, travelling or any other activity by branch members that should be met from our general funds. The proposal is that it could be used for specific agreed projects that would directly benefit and support members in the branch.
One proposal being considered is the at the branch would employ a ‘Caseworker’ who would be available to provide representation to members in disciplinary and grievances where the branch stewards are unable to do so. This would be a direct benefit to members in addition to the existing representation service that is available via stewards and branch officers.
We recognise that we need to retain a healthy fund to support members in disputes and so it is proposed that a figure be agreed that the fund should never fall below a certain level. This would be reviewed and agreed annually as part of the annual report and budgeting that members need to agree to.
Please make sure you read the further explanation that is in the Branchline and please cast your vote in the ballot.
To further encourage you to return the ballot paper we are holding a raffle with some pretty good prizes. So return your ballot paper and your raffle slip!
