Coun Rudge consults m'learned friends

By Paul Dale on Mar 31, 08 03:43 PM in Politics

New contracts of emoloyment imposing the resuts of a pay and grading review on 40,000 Birmingham City Council employees came into force today, and it's all getting very interesting.
With union threats of more industrial action in the run-up to the May council elections ringing around his head, is Coun Rudge about to opt for the nuclear option?
Asked to respond earlier today to an announcement by UNISON vice-chairman David Hughes that strikes were highly likely over the next few weeks, Coun Rudge warned the unions might find themselves on dodgy legal ground if they ordered members to walk out without staging a new ballot.
The sticking point under employment law appears to be whether a fundamentally revised offer to ameliorate the pay dispute has been put by the council. Rudge says it has. Union leaders say the offer is not worth putting to a ballot.

Rudge, who is a solicitor, said it was doubtful in law whether the unions could rely on a show of hands at workplace meetings as a mandate for continued industrial action. He believes that fewer than 10 per cent of the total union membership at the Council House attended the meetings, adding for good measure that the gatherings were dominated by extremists and members of the Socialist Workers' Party.
While he did not expressly say that the council would consider taking legal action were the unions to order new strikes, he did not rule out the possibility.
Rudge was also under the impression that UNISON has agreed to ballot its members - although this seems extremely doubtful judging by Mr Hughes' comments.
You can see why the unions would not want to risk a ballot, given the already doubtful support from the workforce for industrial action. It's worth recalling that UNISON, with 12,463 members at the council, could only persuade 4,443 to take part in the sole ballot to be held so far, in Janaury. And of those who could be bothered to express an opinion, only 2,610 voted to strike - less than 25 per cent of the total membership.
Indeed, the five council unions could only persuade 4,462 out of about 20,000 members to vote for a strike - again, just under 25 per cent.
In the one strike that was held, on February 5, only 9,000 of the 20,000 obeyed orders to down tools.
Since then of course the council has agreed substantial changes to the pay and grading proposals, resulting in 48 per cent of the workforce receiving a pay rise while about 12 per cent will see their wages cut, although this is reduced to 3.5 per cent by the end of a three-year protection deal.
As the wage rises begin to kick in from the end of April, support for strikes will be even further diminished.
And, strangely, the outspoken support for the union stance from the council's Labour group seems to have dried up. Perhaps the party has concluded it might not be a good idea to be allied to industrial chaos in the weeks leading to elections on May 1.

Comments (2)

Older/Newer

« The unofficial election campaign | Saving the best until last »

0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Coun Rudge consults m'learned friends. TrackBack URL for this entry: http://blogs.birminghampost.net/cgi-bin/mt421/mt-tb.cgi/949

2 Comments

birminghamsinglestatus said:

I am a little disappointed in the latest line being taken by yourself and the Post over Single Status at BCC.

I am not surprised given the political background but what happened to consistency ? On the 9th Jan in an editorial the fllowing appeared;

"the history of the pay and grading review has been littered with crass comments"

" these are cuts on a vicious scale that would certainly throw most families in Birmingham into a spiral of debt and misery"

"scale of losses...greater than anyone has been prepared to admit"

"latest figures are simply shocking"

"council leaders must look at amending the new grading system, or run the risk of being portrayed as heartless employers"

Now you seem happy to be a mouthpiece for Alan Rudge and happy to quote whatever he claims are the facts.

What happened to journalism ?

In an interview with BRMB last year

http://www.brmb.co.uk/Article.asp?id=510247&spid=12540

Rudge claimed that 3 years pay protection was the maximum allowed by law and he had no choice.

Yet now he can offer 4 years. Is there no-one from the Post asking why and how ?

Also, as you will well know, Rudge, Hughes and Albon have regularly told everyone how the percentage of losers will shrink to 7% and then even 3.5% (albeit when strike action was threatened). they have repeated this bogus claim time after time in the Post, the Mail, on TV, radio, in Forward, Inner Voice.

Yet in the Council meeting of 26th Feb the following took place;

Question from Councillor Holbrook

You declined to answer my written question EHR16 at the previous Council
meeting, and you failed to address the question when asked of you at
January’s meeting.
Would you now confirm that the 12% of employees who are “losers�? (red
circles) under the Pay & Grading Review will be subject to a pay freeze of
at least one year?
Therefore, all of these employees will be earning less at the end of the
three years protection period than they would have been earning had they
received an annual cost of living increase each year.
QED, all of the 12% of employees deemed to be losing (red circles) at this
stage will be earning less money from 2008 than if their pay had not been
frozen.

Answer from Alan Rudge

I can confirm that Cllr Holbrook has successfully interpreted what a standstill protection arrangement means.

So that would be a yes then ?

Again, where are the journalists kicking down Rudge's door saying hang on a minute ?

April 8, 2008 11:41 PM

muthu said:

This is very nice article. vice-chairman works are very good. this council is very creatively develop. its a great job.Cheers.........
-----------------
Muthu

dating

November 13, 2008 8:38 PM