Many Hands Make Light Work!
Stefan Cross QC commented on the equal pay study carried out by Glasgow University noting that the campaign run by Action 4 Equality Scotland (A4ES) defied 'existing organisational theory'.
Now this is very true because the fight for equal pay in Glasgow has broken the mould in so many ways, the most impressive of which, arguably, has been its ability to build unlikely coalitions and mobilise thousands of grassroots claimants into a an unstoppable force.
'Many hands make light work' - as the saying goes.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/irj.12237
Stefan Cross QC
Fascinating academic article on the history of our struggles. The first I’ve seen that gives proper prominence to the role Mark I has provided. Apparently we’ve defied existing organisational theory.
Not the last examination of your historical fight ladies, I would wager.
Glasgow - Many Hands Make Light Work (09/03/18)
Back in February I said that the next big step in the fight for equal pay was to ensure that Glasgow City Council faces up to the mess that senior officials created with their 'unfit for purpose' WPBR pay scheme which was introduced in 2007.
I drafted a motion about getting rid of the WPBR which is reproduced below, for easy reference, and has been shared with all Glasgow councillors, as well as the city's MSPs and MPs.
For my ow part I had a productive meeting with my local MSP (John Mason) and I am in the process of arranging a discussion with my MP (Alison Thewliss) and my local councillors - Robert Connelly, Jennifer Layden and Greg Hepburn (Cecilia O'Lone, my Labour councillor is on long term sick leave).
But I can only do so much on my own and this is where the thousands of claimants across Glasgow can make their voices heard - as they did in persuading the City Council not to appeal the Court of Session decision regarding the discredited 'unfit for purpose' WPBR to the UK Supreme Court.
Now agreeing to replace the WPBR is not a big thing to ask especially as the pay scheme has already been condemned by Scotland's highest civil court.
So why is it taking so long for the council to face up to a decision that is staring it own the face?
Scotland's Labour leader has agreed that Glasgow's equal pay claimants are due and apology and one of the things the council should be apologising for, if you ask me, is the cockamamy WPBR pay scheme with its discriminatory 'rules' and practices.
Because until the WPBR is replaced with new pay arrangements and a new job evaluation scheme which is transparent, consistent and fair - things can only get worse.
The next full meeting of Glasgow City Council is on Thursday 5 April 2018 and my aim is to get my motion, or something very similar, debated and voted upon at this council meeting which would effectively tell senior officials to 'get their finger out'.
All it takes is one single councillor (out of 85) to place a motion on the agenda calling for the council to replace the WPBR and Glasgow's equal pay claimants can play their part by lobbying local councillors along with the city's MSPs and MPs.
Such a decision is for the city's elected councillors to make, but MSPs and MPs are part and parcel of Glasgow's political network so they have an important role to play as well.
So get emailing, texting, Tweeting, Facebook messaging and visiting Glasgow's politicians in the days ahead because the target date is less than four weeks away - Thursday 5th April.
Let me know what responses people get (good, bad or indifferent) and I'll share this information on the blog site.
Glasgow City Council's WPBR pay scheme has 'got to go' which is the key message behind this motion I've drafted for discussion and debate with local councillors and other Glasgow politicians.
Now the WPBR has already been characterised as 'unfit for purpose' by the Court of Session, Scotland's highest civil court, and it's easy to see how three senior judges came to their unanimous decision because the scheme:
Previous pay differentials have been disguised and camouflaged, but the old order is still in place.
Meanwhile, senior council officials say they cannot explain the costs of the WPBR or the mysterious circumstances surrounding the procurement of the scheme by an external consultant - Hays HR Consulting and a consultant named Steve Watson.
So spread the word far and wide - no 'ifs', 'buts' or 'maybes' the unfit for purpose WPBR has got to go.
Charles Dickens wrote about the Circumlocution Office in his famous book 'Little Dorrit' way back in the 1850s, but the same bureaucratic mentality seems to hold sway in the minds of senior officials in Glasgow City Council who appear to be doing their level best to frustrate and delay meaningful negotiations to end the council's long-running equal pay dispute.
The Circumlocution Office was (as everybody knows without being told) the most important Department under Government. No public business of any kind could possibly be done at any time without the acquiescence of the Circumlocution Office. Its finger was in the largest public pie, and in the smallest public tart. It was equally impossible to do the plainest right and to undo the plainest wrong without the express authority of the Circumlocution Office. If another Gunpowder Plot had been discovered half an hour before the lighting of the match, nobody would have been justified in saving the parliament until there had been half a score of boards, half a bushel of minutes, several sacks of official memoranda, and a family-vault full of ungrammatical correspondence, on the part of the Circumlocution Office.
This glorious establishment had been early in the field, when the one sublime principle involving the difficult art of governing a country, was first distinctly revealed to statesmen. It had been foremost to study that bright revelation and to carry its shining influence through the whole of the official proceedings. Whatever was required to be done, the Circumlocution Office was beforehand with all the public departments in the art of perceiving — HOW NOT TO DO IT.
Now the views of the Council Leader Susan Aitken couldn't be clearer, but the behaviour of senior officials stands in stark contrast as they fight to hold onto a a completely discredited WPBR pay scheme which has been characterised by the Court of Session, Scotland's highest civil court, as 'unfit for purpose'.
So it seems to me that the same officials who brought in the WPBR, under mysterious and unexplained circumstances, are now trying to circumvent the will of the council's leadership.
And that can't be allowed to happen because these bureaucrats are acting as both judge and jury in their own cause.
I drafted a motion about getting rid of the WPBR which is reproduced below, for easy reference, and has been shared with all Glasgow councillors, as well as the city's MSPs and MPs.
"Glasgow City Council accepts with the unanimous judgment of the Court of Session, Scotland's highest civil court, that its Workforce Pay and Benefits Review (WPBR) is 'unfit for purpose'.
"Council therefore instructs senior officials to replace the WPBR scheme, as a matter of urgency, to bring to an end discriminatory practices which treat its low paid women workers as second class citizens.
"Council further instructs senior officials to draw up plans for using the Gauge job evaluation scheme (JES) as a replacement for the WPBR.
"Council notes that the Gauge JES was originally recommended for use by the Scottish council employers via COSLA and the national trade unions (GMB, Unison and Unite), as part of the landmark 1999 Single Status (Equal Pay) Agreement."
But I can only do so much on my own and this is where the thousands of claimants across Glasgow can make their voices heard - as they did in persuading the City Council not to appeal the Court of Session decision regarding the discredited 'unfit for purpose' WPBR to the UK Supreme Court.
Now agreeing to replace the WPBR is not a big thing to ask especially as the pay scheme has already been condemned by Scotland's highest civil court.
So why is it taking so long for the council to face up to a decision that is staring it own the face?
Scotland's Labour leader has agreed that Glasgow's equal pay claimants are due and apology and one of the things the council should be apologising for, if you ask me, is the cockamamy WPBR pay scheme with its discriminatory 'rules' and practices.
Because until the WPBR is replaced with new pay arrangements and a new job evaluation scheme which is transparent, consistent and fair - things can only get worse.
The next full meeting of Glasgow City Council is on Thursday 5 April 2018 and my aim is to get my motion, or something very similar, debated and voted upon at this council meeting which would effectively tell senior officials to 'get their finger out'.
All it takes is one single councillor (out of 85) to place a motion on the agenda calling for the council to replace the WPBR and Glasgow's equal pay claimants can play their part by lobbying local councillors along with the city's MSPs and MPs.
Such a decision is for the city's elected councillors to make, but MSPs and MPs are part and parcel of Glasgow's political network so they have an important role to play as well.
So get emailing, texting, Tweeting, Facebook messaging and visiting Glasgow's politicians in the days ahead because the target date is less than four weeks away - Thursday 5th April.
Let me know what responses people get (good, bad or indifferent) and I'll share this information on the blog site.
Glasgow - The Next Big Step (12/02/18)
Glasgow's 'Unfit For Purpose' WPBR.
"Glasgow City Council accepts with the unanimous judgment of the Court of Session, Scotland's highest civil court, that its Workforce Pay and Benefits Review (WPBR) is 'unfit for purpose'.
"Council therefore instructs senior officials to replace the WPBR scheme, as a matter of urgency, to bring to an end discriminatory practices which treat its low paid women workers as second class citizens.
"Council further instructs senior officials to draw up plans for using the Gauge job evaluation scheme (JES) as a replacement for the WPBR.
"Council notes that the Gauge JES was originally recommended for use by the Scottish council employers via COSLA and the national trade unions (GMB, Unison and Unite), as part of the landmark 1999 Single Status (Equal Pay) Agreement."
The next big step in the fight for equal pay in Glasgow is for the city to face up to the terrible mess that senior council officials have made of equal pay.
Now I've neem a very senior official myself, in my times, for example as Unison's Head of Local Government and the unions' chief negotiator with COSLA, the Scottish employers' umbrella organisation.
I realise that this is not easy for the people concerned because it requires them to eat a large serving of 'humble pie'.
But the evidence is now overwhelming that Glasgow City Council bought a 'pig-in-a-poke' when its senior officials commissioned the WPBR which has since been judged to be 'unfit for purpose' by the Court of Session, Scotland's highest civil court.
So my draft motion about replacing the WPBR is an idea whose time has come and I am going to circulate this to all local Glasgow councillors as well as the city's MSPs and MPs.
In my view, it's time the city's elected representatives and appointed officials were forced to discuss and debate these issues publicly instead of stitching things up behind closed doors which is what has been what's happening for years.
Claimants in Glasgow can help by writing directly to their local councillors, MSPs and MPs because as we have been witnessing in recent weeks - People Power really works.
In the meantime here is a list of email addresses for the Glasgow MSPs and MPs who were invited to a recent briefing on equal pay - only three turned up on the day (those marked with an asterisk).
Not one of Glasgow's eight constituency MSPs could find the time to come along which is rather odd, if you ask me.
I will let readers know via the blog site when I have circulated the draft motion to Glasgow councillors, MSPs and MPs.
Equal pay claimants may then wish to drop their own local representatives an email - to ask where they stand on this vitally important issue.
Not one of Glasgow's eight constituency MSPs could find the time to come along which is rather odd, if you ask me.
I will let readers know via the blog site when I have circulated the draft motion to Glasgow councillors, MSPs and MPs.
Equal pay claimants may then wish to drop their own local representatives an email - to ask where they stand on this vitally important issue.
GLAGOW MSPs and MPs invited to the Equal Pay Briefing
Glasgow Constituency MSPs (Scottish Parliament)
Glasgow Constituency MPs (Westminster Parliament)
Glasgow List MSPs
Annie.Wells.msp@scottish.parliament.uk *
Patrick.Harvie.msp@scottish.parliament.uk
Glasgow Constituency MSPs (Scottish Parliament)
Glasgow Constituency MPs (Westminster Parliament)
David.Linden.mp@parliament.uk
Paul.Sweeney.mp@parliament.uk *
Carol.Monaghan.mp@parliament.uk
Alison.Thewliss.mp@parliament.uk *Glasgow List MSPs
Annie.Wells.msp@scottish.parliament.uk *
Patrick.Harvie.msp@scottish.parliament.uk
'Got to Go', Glasgow! (10/02/18)
Glasgow City Council's WPBR pay scheme has 'got to go' which is the key message behind this motion I've drafted for discussion and debate with local councillors and other Glasgow politicians.
Now the WPBR has already been characterised as 'unfit for purpose' by the Court of Session, Scotland's highest civil court, and it's easy to see how three senior judges came to their unanimous decision because the scheme:
- the NSWP 37 hour 'rule' discriminates against the council's largely female workforce
- the City Council's overtime working arrangements blatantly favour traditional male dominated jobs
- Home Carers, for example, are issued with separate 'plain time' contracts for additional hours worked
- the city council's Employee Development Commitment was not made available to any of the female dominated claimant jobs
Previous pay differentials have been disguised and camouflaged, but the old order is still in place.
Meanwhile, senior council officials say they cannot explain the costs of the WPBR or the mysterious circumstances surrounding the procurement of the scheme by an external consultant - Hays HR Consulting and a consultant named Steve Watson.
So spread the word far and wide - no 'ifs', 'buts' or 'maybes' the unfit for purpose WPBR has got to go.
Glasgow's 'Unfit For Purpose' WPBR.
"Glasgow City Council accepts with the unanimous judgment of the Court of Session, Scotland's highest civil court, that its Workforce Pay and Benefits Review (WPBR) is 'unfit for purpose'.
"Council therefore instructs senior officials to replace the WPBR scheme, as a matter of urgency, to bring to an end discriminatory practices which treat its low paid women workers as second class citizens.
"Council further instructs senior officials to draw up plans for using the Gauge job evaluation scheme (JES) as a replacement for the WPBR.
"Council notes that the Gauge JES was originally recommended for use by the Scottish council employers via COSLA and the national trade unions (GMB, Unison and Unite), as part of the landmark 1999 Single Status (Equal Pay) Agreement."
"Council therefore instructs senior officials to replace the WPBR scheme, as a matter of urgency, to bring to an end discriminatory practices which treat its low paid women workers as second class citizens.
"Council further instructs senior officials to draw up plans for using the Gauge job evaluation scheme (JES) as a replacement for the WPBR.
"Council notes that the Gauge JES was originally recommended for use by the Scottish council employers via COSLA and the national trade unions (GMB, Unison and Unite), as part of the landmark 1999 Single Status (Equal Pay) Agreement."
Glasgow - Equal Pay Update (08/02/18)
Charles Dickens wrote about the Circumlocution Office in his famous book 'Little Dorrit' way back in the 1850s, but the same bureaucratic mentality seems to hold sway in the minds of senior officials in Glasgow City Council who appear to be doing their level best to frustrate and delay meaningful negotiations to end the council's long-running equal pay dispute.
The Circumlocution Office was (as everybody knows without being told) the most important Department under Government. No public business of any kind could possibly be done at any time without the acquiescence of the Circumlocution Office. Its finger was in the largest public pie, and in the smallest public tart. It was equally impossible to do the plainest right and to undo the plainest wrong without the express authority of the Circumlocution Office. If another Gunpowder Plot had been discovered half an hour before the lighting of the match, nobody would have been justified in saving the parliament until there had been half a score of boards, half a bushel of minutes, several sacks of official memoranda, and a family-vault full of ungrammatical correspondence, on the part of the Circumlocution Office.
This glorious establishment had been early in the field, when the one sublime principle involving the difficult art of governing a country, was first distinctly revealed to statesmen. It had been foremost to study that bright revelation and to carry its shining influence through the whole of the official proceedings. Whatever was required to be done, the Circumlocution Office was beforehand with all the public departments in the art of perceiving — HOW NOT TO DO IT.
Now the views of the Council Leader Susan Aitken couldn't be clearer, but the behaviour of senior officials stands in stark contrast as they fight to hold onto a a completely discredited WPBR pay scheme which has been characterised by the Court of Session, Scotland's highest civil court, as 'unfit for purpose'.
So it seems to me that the same officials who brought in the WPBR, under mysterious and unexplained circumstances, are now trying to circumvent the will of the council's leadership.
And that can't be allowed to happen because these bureaucrats are acting as both judge and jury in their own cause.
