AGENDA COMMITTEE 3Rd MEETING of 2016

IR(16)21 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS AGENDA COMMITTEE 3rd MEETING of 2016

Committee INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMITTEE Date &Time Wed 12th October 2016, 10.00 – 17:00

Venue CSP, 14 Bedford Row, London.

KEY MATTERS FOR DISCUSSION AND ACTION Paper No. 1. Chairs opening remarks and welcome verbal Notification of declarations of interest or potential interest in an agenda item under discussion (for reference the guidance notes are attached at the end of this agenda)

Apologies for absence.

2. Staffing update Verbal

3. Scene setting: external developments since the last IRC meeting Verbal Including: Implications of ‘Brexit’ IR(16)30

4. Sara Hazzard (assistant director SPED). Verbal

5. NHS Pay, Pensions and Terms and Conditions IR(16)22

6. TUC report IR(16)23

7. ERUS work plan: highlights and exceptions IR(16)24

LUNCH 8. Campaigns and Organising update Verbal

9. ARC motions: final responses IR(16)26

10. Group activity: review of external campaigning organisations the CSP, via the IRC, supports

Including paper: Review of ERUS donations and affiliations IR(16)29

11. Governance Review. Verbal

PTO 12. STPs (England) IR(16)27

13. Minutes of meeting held on 15th June 2016 IR(16)20 And any urgent matters arising 14. Any other urgent business (to be notified to the Chair in advance of the meeting) Verbal

15. Key communications messages and action points from the meeting – for IRC Verbal members and officers

Dates of 2017 meetings:  Wed 15th Feb venue TBC  Wed 21st June CSP  Wed 11th Oct CSP

Notification of declarations of interest or potential interests in an agenda item under discussion It is important that Committee members are conscious of the possibility of any declaration of interest (actual or potential) in considering any agenda of a meeting of which you are a member. Therefore, the following procedure should be adhered to:

If upon, reading the agenda papers you identify an actual or potential declaration of interest, you must:

1. email or telephone the Chair identifying the issue and provide your opinion on how it can be managed for a decision by the Chair of the meeting 2. declare at the beginning of the meeting the item on which there is an actual or potential conflict of interest 3. voluntarily withdraw from the meeting for the period of the discussion and any vote on the item of business so identified.

Agreed by Council June 2006, section on Declaration of Interest agreed by Council 25 March 2009.

IRC Agenda October 2016 2 Industrial Relations Committee

Reference IR(16)22

Title NHS Pay, Pensions and Terms and Conditions

Author Peter Finch Status For information, discussion and comment. summary & An update on the latest developments recommendations

1. Pay 2017/18

Staff Side evidence to the Pay Review Body (PRB) was due to be submitted by the 30th September. The 3 key elements of the evidence are:

 a return to UK wide pay scales using the existing pay scales for staff in pay bands 4-9,

 a restructure of bands 1-3 to deliver the National Living Wage. This would be done by resetting all pay points in these pay bands as a proportion of the top of band 3, consistent with the previously discussed hanging rate model.

 apply an increase of 1.9% to all Agenda for Change pay points which would begin to make up the loss in the value of NHS pay since 2010. This is the rate of inflation as measured by the RPI in July.

Within the evidence there are a number of other key points:

(a) That real terms median earnings have fallen by 12.3% between March 2011 and 2016,

(b) Currently there is a 2.4% difference between the first pay point of band 5 in Scotland and N Ireland.

Pete Finch October 2016

(d) Staff side would object to an award that achieved compliance with the National Living wage at the expense of staff in higher pay bands.

(e) Rejects the use of CPI as the key determinant of inflation given it excludes housing costs but does include non-working groups (most notably pensioner households).

(f) Reminds the PRB of the impact on staff in Band 8a of the increase in pension contributions in 2016(9.3% to 12.5%).

In response to comments in the PRB report for 2016, the staff side has also developed its own strategy covering a number of key workforce issues including the review of the Agenda for Change pay structure, maintenance of the JE Scheme, safe staffing levels, effective management of change, equality and diversity and a healthy and safe workplace.

Separately the CSP has again submitted evidence specific to our own membership. Our own evidence highlights the increasing frustration at the lack of any real independence in the workings of the PRB whilst it is forced to work within the Governments restrictive pay policy. We have also drawn on the results of 2 recent surveys, one our regular survey of CSP managers and the other a survey of NHS physiotherapy leavers. The remit letter from the Department of Health (issued 22 August) restates the assertion that the “continued prudent management of public finances” is crucial “to help protect jobs”, it also suggests the PRB might like to consider targeting any award (within the 1% cap!). At the time of writing the remit letters for the devolved administrations had yet to be issued. The Staff Side Executive are scheduled to meet the PRB at the oral evidence session in early December. Copies of both Staff Side and CSP evidence will be published on the web site in due course.

Although work is well underway in respect of the 2017/18 pay round, NHS staff in N Ireland are still awaiting the 1% increase recommended by the Review Body for the current pay round (due to be paid in April 2016). The award is presently awaiting the approval of the Department of Finance.

2. Junior Doctors:

Members of the Committee will be aware the original ballot for industrial action received 77% support for action. Since the last meeting of the Committee the BMA has undertaken a referendum of its junior doctor members on a revised contract offer (agreed in talks chaired by ACAS) but this was rejected by a 58%-42% margin. There were further discussions over the summer and the Junior Doctors Committee subsequently announced further periods of strike action over the coming months. These were recently

suspended (statement issued on 24th September) after concerns about patient safety were raised. The CSP has publically restated its position that the provision of 7 day services requires proper resourcing and any changes to contracts of employment should be reached by agreement not imposed. A verbal update will be given to the Committee.

3. Agenda for Change Review:

Progress on discussions since the last meeting of the Committee progress has been limited due to capacity issues arising from the employers concentrating on resolving the junior doctor dispute. There is a recognition however they will need to implement the provisions of the Living Wage and that work on Bands 1-3 requires agreement; implementation will affect N. Ireland in 2017 and England and Wales in 2018. If the cost of implementation is considered as part of the 1% pay cap this would translate into a 0.98% increase for all other staff next year and 0.96% and 0.78% in 2018 and 2019 respectively. The Staff Side have been absolutely clear that the Living Wage should be considered as part of Government social policy and the costs met from Treasury funds. A verbal update on other developments in the negotiations will be given to the Committee.

4. Maternity leave (accrual of bank holidays):

Members of the Committee will have read the news in Frontline and on the website regarding the success in getting wording in the national handbook changed, which means that NHS staff across the UK will now accrue entitlement to public holidays as well as annual leave, when on maternity leave. This change should also benefit members outside the NHS whose terms and conditions mirror the A4C agreement. Employers in Scotland had previously (2013) agreed to this change and this was followed last year by the successful outcome of a grievance lodged by a member in N Ireland. Whilst some employers in England accepted that public holidays should be included, others were refusing to do so, a number of members supported by their steward and ERUS officers lodged grievances against their employers. The amendment to the handbook makes it explicit this right applies to all NHS staff.

5. NHS Pension Scheme:

The Treasury discount rate is scheduled to be reduced from CPI plus 3% to CPI plus 2.8% in the coming months. This is a direct result of the decision to leave the European Union. The discount rate is a forecast on the returns that

can be expected on investments; as interest rates fall, fixed interest securities (e.g. bonds, gilts, treasury notes) also fall.

This lower rate increases the value of the pension scheme liabilities and increases the cost to employer contribution rates of around £800million from April 2019, members in the scheme could therefore be faced with a call for either higher contributions or reduced benefits (or a combination of both). The Scheme Advisory Board (S.A.B) (the CSP is a member of this) will be looking at this issue at a future meeting.

At the beginning of the month the Staff Side of the NHS Executive became aware of proposals by East and North Hertfordshire NHS Trust to offer higher rates of pay to Band 5 and 6 nurses and midwives who either leave or decline to join the NHS Pension Scheme. The proposal is similar to the one offered (and subsequently withdrawn) by Oxleas NHS Trust earlier this year. The Staff Side has written to the Trust asking them to withdraw the proposal and discuss with the staff side locally (who have not agreed to the proposal) options for dealing with any local recruitment and retention issues. The matter has also been referred to the S.A.B. and a report requested for the next meeting of the NHS Staff Council Executive.

6. Mileage:

The AA have stopped publishing a review of motoring costs so the Staff side agreed the current mileage rates will continue to apply (they were due to be reviewed in July). The Executive will review the position in November.

7. Working Longer Group

The NHS Working Longer Group (WLG) was established as part of the resolution to the pension’s dispute in 2012. The CSP has held a seat on the group since its inception. It called for a tripartite review of the impact of NHS staff having to work longer following the government’s decision to set the normal pension age of most public sector pensions equal to the state pension age. In 2014 its interim findings were published. As a result of the Department of Health (England) altering its service level agreement with NHS Employers, funding has been cut for this important piece of work.

As a result, the staff side representatives on the group produced a set of recommendations on how the outstanding work could be taken forward. These were accepted by the NHS Staff Council Executive (to which the group reports) and are as follows:

1. A number of steering group meetings have been cancelled to reduce the burden on NHS Employers with outstanding resources being used to develop our work with their communications department.

2. The group will continue in its present form until 31st March 2017. This will allow time to complete some outstanding work which is already underway including developing evidence to the government’s formal review of the State Pension Age. The group is also producing guidance for line managers to provide information on the challenges and opportunities an ageing workforce might present and to signpost to further information and resources to help meet those challenges. Similar guidance is being produced for NHS employees.

3. From April 2017 the group will meet twice a year to monitor data and the impact of an increased retirement age.

4. Our recommendations around well-being are already being taken forward by Health and Safety WPG

5. Plans to undertake age awareness monitoring to be taken over by the NHS Staff Council Equality & Diversity Sub Group.

8. Public Sector Exit Payments

The Committee was advised at the last meeting of a Government consultation on reforms to the perceived abuse of exit payments within the public sector. The key response submitted by the joint staff side was that these matters were best left to collective bargaining between unions and employers under the auspices of the NHS Staff Council (a view endorsed by NHS Employers). The Treasury have now published their response to the various submissions and despite the fact that many responses were opposed to reform they remain of the view that reform consistent with the proposals set out in the consultation paper is appropriate. They have therefore now asked individual Government Departments to reach agreement on reforms within “an overall, centrally-set framework.

This framework would set a maximum tariff for calculating payments of 3 weeks pay per year of service, a ceiling of 15 months on the maximum number of months salary which could be paid, a salary limit of £80,000 and taper on the lump sum payment as you get closer to the normal pension age. If “negotiations” on this pre-determined outcome are not successful, the Government will consider legislating on the matter. The government expects negotiations to be completed within 9 months (June 2017).

For a Band 7 physiotherapist with 10 years service who currently receives a payment of £34,478 this would reduce to £23, 869; after 30 years service the current payment would reduce from £82,746 to £51,716.

These proposals cover England only, it is for the devolved administrations to determine if and how they want to take this forward.

This issue will be subject to discussion at the next NHS Staff Council Executive meeting (19th October).

Peter Finch Assistant Director

Industrial Relations Committee

reference IR(16)23

title TUC Report (June-Sept2016)

author Claire Sullivan, ERUS Director

status For information and decision as set out in the paper

summary & The paper updates the committee on TUC-related work since the last meeting in June. The recommendations recommendations for action from TUC Congress will be presented verbally at the meeting

Introduction

The TUC agenda has continued to be busier than ever since the last meeting of the IR committee. The LGBT Conference and main TUC Congress have both taken place, as has London Pride, plus a march and rally against austerity on the eve of the Conservative Party Conference. These are all covered further on in the paper.

Plans for implementation of the Trade Union Act have continued and the TUC has been involved in influencing those plans.

At the forefront of the TUC's work over the summer of course has been ensuring a strong voice for working people in Britain, following the vote to leave the EU.

EU Referendum

In some ways it is hard to believe that the EU referendum had not yet taken place when the IR committee last met. The outcome of the referendum was an unexpected shock to many people, regardless of whether they supported 'Leave' or 'Remain'.

Amongst a noisy and confused media agenda in the immediate aftermath of the referendum, the TUC took an early strategic decision to focus on a small number of key areas with particular relevance to it as the 'voice of Britain at work'. Uppermost amongst those were:

C Sullivan 03/10/16

• Protecting workers' rights using the campaign slogan 'working people must not pay the price of vote to leave the EU'

• Anti-discrimination - reiterating the TUC and the trade union movement's longstanding commitment and record on fighting all forms of discrimination; this includes racism and xenophobia but also disability discrimination and other forms of abuse and less favourable treatment

In the months since the referendum Frances O'Grady, TUC general secretary, has become an authoritative voice in making the case for protecting workers' rights during and after Brexit. She has cogently highlighted the risks to the UK economy of failing to do so and has made a strong and persuasive case for the positive contribution made by EU migrant workers.

The TUC has also argued strongly for a 'seat at the table' during the two years of negotiations that will follow the triggering of Article 50, now expected to be before March 2017. Despite the TUC having supported remaining in the EU, it is vital that the interests of working people are represented and heard directly during the process of leaving. TUC Congress in September heard a very strong message in this respect, covered in more detail later in this report.

Trade Union Act

The process of implementation of the TU Act has been proceeding slowly over the last few months, during which much Government effort has been directed to addressing the aftermath of the EU referendum vote. However, there have been developments in a number of key areas.

The government is preparing an implementation plan which is expected to proceed in roughly the following order:

 BIS will commission an independent review into electronic voting, which must be in place by 4 November 2016.

 BIS has consulted over the summer on the transition period for new opt-in requirements for political funds

 BIS has consulted informally on revised Codes of Practice on picketing and industrial action ballots and notices to employers and supplementary guidance on the 40 per threshold over the summer

 The regulations on 40 per cent threshold will be published in Parliament and debated and voted upon by the Commons and the Lords.

 The statutory thresholds and wider restrictions on industrial action and picketing are likely to come into effect towards the end of 2016.

 BIS will consult on new powers for the Certification Officer to impose financial thresholds and to levy a charge (likely to be in late 2016 / early 2017).

 The Cabinet Office will consult on regulations on union facilities and check-off arrangements (dates tbc)

In August the TUC went on to launch its 5-point campaign plan – ‘Building Back Stronger’ - which is attached as Appendix 1 for information. The plan was formally adopted at TUC Congress in September. The campaign plan is a response to the twin developments of the referendum outcome and the TU Act. Also included in this attachment are two more detailed campaign briefings:

 Managing migration better for Britain

 Working people must not pay the price for the vote to leave: a national action plan

The five campaign priorities are:

 Working people must not pay the price of the vote to leave the EU

 Standing up for abandoned communities

 Great jobs for everyone

 Reaching young workers

 Building a stronger movement after the Trade Union Act

TUC LGBT Conference and London Pride

The TUC's LGBT conference took place in late June, immediately followed by the London Pride event. The delegation report from the conference is attached as Appendix 2. There are a number of recommendations contained in the attached report but they are for the CSP LGBT network rather than for IRC.

The day after the conference ended a group of CSP members, friends, colleagues and partners met for the London Pride march. This year’s march had been the first which limited entry to the procession to people who had obtained wristbands in advance. Although this made arrangements more complicated, people managed to find each other and have a hugely enjoyable day, with the usual important underlying serious message about valuing and celebrating diversity and championing and protecting equal rights and equal treatment.

TUC Congress 2016

TUC Congress took place in Brighton from 11-14 September. The CSP delegation of 5 was led by Jill Taylor, Chair of IRC, and was joined by a number of other CSP staff and the Chair and Vice-Chair of Council. All members of the delegation spoke in debates covering:

 The NHS

 Hidden disabilities at work

 Wellbeing at work

 Austerity and its impact on health

 The junior doctors’ dispute

 Protection of workers’ rights as Britain leaves the EU

In addition, delegates were able to attend a range of fringe meetings and these are covered in more detail in the delegation report attached as Appendix 3. Jill Taylor will also ask the committee to consider some recommendations at the meeting on 12 October, based on her verbal report.

Congress was addressed by Angela Rayner, Shadow Education Secretary; Luca Visentini, General Secretary of the European TUC; and Paddy Lillis, fraternal delegate from the Labour Party, in addition to the TUC President and General Secretary.

The most controversial area of debate was that of climate change where the timely creation of ‘green’ jobs does not always keep up with the commitment to a greener economy.

TUC Women’s Conference 2017

We are already in the process of preparing for the next Women’s conference in March 2017. As the dates for next year mean the conference takes place later in the same week as ARC, it may be more difficult than usual for CSP stewards and regional stewards to attend. Therefore, we are particularly keen to make some early efforts to find some other women delegates from amongst active CSP members.

Action: All IRC members to try to identify delegates who could attend TUC Women’s Conference next March.

Public Services Liaison Group (PSLG)

In line with other parts of the TUC, in recent months the PSLG has been largely dealing with the likely impact on the public sector of both Brexit and the TU Act. In addition, work continues on the public sector pay campaign, highlighting the impact of several years of pay restraint on living standards in various regions of the UK.

TUC Regional event – 2 October

Around 20 CSP staff and members, including the Chair of Council and Chair of IRC, attended an event in Birmingham on 2 October, the eve of the Conservative Party Conference. The 10,000-strong march and rally – ‘Austerity has failed’ – was organised jointly by the regional TUC and the People’s Assembly. The event had some strong messages and real-life examples of the failure of the Government’s austerity programme and called for a change in economic and political direction with a growth-led recovery.

C Sullivan ERUS Director

TUC Congress delegates report

I was proud to lead the delegation of 4 CSP members, all NHS clinicians, plus Claire Sullivan, ERUS Director, to "TUC16: Jobs, Rights and Investment". Myself as Chair of the Industrial Relations committee and Alex Mackenzie, Chair of the Regional Stewards, both previous TUC delegates, were joined by 2 new delegates to Congress, James Allen and Deb Russell who are both regional stewards. Deb had been a CSP representative at TUC Women's Conference in March and was inspired after this event to attend the main TUC congress.

We were given excellent support from CSP staff, Claire Sullivan, Director of ERUS, joined the delegation and we were supported by Elaine Sparkes and Tom Gill. We were delighted to be joined by other CSP visitors - Catherine Pope and Philip Hulse, Chair and Vice-Chair of Council; Sara Hazzard and Rob Ledger, Assistant Directors in SPED; and Kevin Dale and Cailean Gallagher, ERUS Organisers. We were also supported by Robert Millett from the Frontline team.

We had 6 opportunities to speak on 2 days of conference and in 4 different sections. I began in seconding the first motion on the 3rd day under the section Employment and Trade Union Rights. The motion outlined the need for the TUC to strive to protect the hard won rights of women and trade union members in the post BREXIT UK; the motion was unanimously passed. Next Claire Sullivan took to the podium, proposing a motion under the Health Services section. Claire delivered an amazing speech outlining the problems facing the NHS in the current financial climate and its current level of sustainability. This speech was very detailed and expertly delivered ensuring again a unanimous vote to support it. Under the same section we were again back on the podium with first time delegate Deb Russell. Deb was seconding a motion warning of the real dangers of austerity on our communities and population’s health and well-being. Deb spoke with passion of the difficulties members face whilst in the grips of austerity highlighting the rise of obesity amongst the lower paid families and the strain this puts of the health of the nation. This plight inversely puts even more pressure on the NHS as the funds are cut again under the banner of Austerity; this was support by many other unions outlining several aspects in which austerity hits our communities. Again another carried motion.

Under the Equalities and Diversity section Alex Mackenzie proposed a powerful motion outlining the pressures our members have to face when living with hidden conditions such as dyslexia. Alex highlighted the support members draw from the trade unions in combating workplace discrimination related to such conditions, again another fully supported motion. Next James Allen our second first time delegate had the opportunity to speak under the Health and Safety section of the agenda. James proudly offered the CSP’s solidarity and support to our RCM colleagues with their ‘caring for you’ campaign. James took this opportunity to highlight the CSPs own campaign ‘pinpoint the pressure’. This was a great opportunity to highlight the excellent work carried out for our members within the work place. Another fully supported motion. Our final opportunity to speak was on the final day when I was honoured to be able to offer our solidarity to the BMA in fighting the imposition of their new contract and I took the opportunity to highlight the necessity for the government to enter

into negotiations to create a better NHS by listening to its staff. This saw the close of congress and an amazing 4 days.

As a delegation we all took an active part in attending various fringe meetings.

 GMB and UNITE: From UBER to Sports Direct - How trade unions can win the fight for decent work for all. We were shocked to hear of the conditions people were being forced to work for and the conditions many people work under day and day out. I am pleased to note that on writing this report Sports Direct have succumbed to pressure to allow an independent enquiry into their working practices, a welcome win for our comrades.

 Unions 21: BREXIT, Devolution, and collective bargaining – are there opportunities for unions. Claire Sullivan sat on the panel and was supported in the audience by some of our delegation. They heard about the changing political and economic climate across the UK in the wake of BREXIT. Yet this was offset by the panel highlighting the opportunities that could open up for the trade union movement if change in embraced. New structures and new ideas about strengthening unions and collective bargaining in this new climate which will lead to sustainability and success for the unions who will represent the workforce of the future.

 Cuba Solidarity Campaign and Venezuela SC: International Solidarity. This fringe is always a firm favourite with the delegation. They heard about the huge developments in the last few years with most recently the re-establishment of diplomatic relations between Cuba and US. However we heard about the continuing occupation of Guantanamo Bay and remaining blockade. The delegation was inspired by the displays of solidarity and the positive impact the trade union movement continues to have on the situation in Cuba and Venezuela

 Justice for Columbia: Building Peace in Columbia: Gender and Social Justice In this fringe we heard about the rapidly changing situation in Cuba with peace talks reaching a peak. There was warning that this phase is internationally recognised as one of the most dangerous periods within the peace talks. We were honoured to be addressed by video link by Victoria Sandino the leader of the gender Subcommittee of the peace negotiations representing the FARC-EP. We heard of the fight for social justice and gender issues and the significant process made. It was sobering to hear of the situation in Columbia and the day to day life that members of the trade union face in the 21st Century.

 Unions 21: Unions and Digital – How are unions navigating the digital world. This was attended by our Vice-Chair Phil Hulse who sent a detailed report and found the fringe meeting extremely useful and informative. Here the delegates were given an opportunity explore the changing digital climate. They heard of the new landscape with new ways in which our population is interfacing with information. New techniques and campaigns and way to entice younger members and ensure unions are fit for purpose in the new Digital Age. I know that Phil has since made contact with the speakers of the fringe and fed this valuable information back into SPED and Rob Yeldham.

We attended 2 dinners, I attended the conference dinner which saw Jeremy Corbyn, Labour leader, address the dinner and I was able to network with several MP’s including Ian Lavery a local MP in my area, in which I tried to secure his support in the recent proposed closure of

a community hospital in a rural part of Northumberland. The second dinner was a health unions' dinner in which we were able to network amongst our health colleagues including Midwives, Radiographers, Podiatrists, Hospital Consultants, Dieticians and Orthoptists. A great opportunity to discuss the NHS and the political and economic climates we are all functioning in.

All in all, an excellent congress with lots of networking, influencing and a chance yet again to see the CSP recognised for its valuable input amongst some of the larger unions. Twitter was alive with quotes and campaigns and we all formed some stronger bonds with our colleagues in the other health unions as well as with the wider public sector unions.

Report from 2016 TUC LGBT Conference The TUC Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Trans (LGBT) Conference was held on 23rd/24th June at TUC Congress House. It was attended by a range of different trade unions, including three delegates from the CSP: Rachael Machin, Zack Jepson, and Ian Scrase supported by CSP Equality Officer Jess Belmonte. Conference started with reflection and period of silent remembrance for the victims of the Orlando shootings and a photo of the delegation with the message #LOVEWINS. Conference discussed six emergency motions and twenty one main agenda motions. This included the CSP motion number 10 on ‘Developing trans-friendly workplaces’ in response to Stonewall’s report “Unhealthy Attitudes” presented by Zack. Zack gained unanimous support for the motion and it was passed. The CSP also supported and seconded motion 7 for the Society of Radiographers on ‘HPV vaccination for men who have sex with men’ which was also passed. It was agreed by the delegation for motion 1 ‘2020 Vision’ to be carried to main TUC conference. This motion requests a forward thinking approach over the next four years to prepare for the forthcoming elections, presently as stands due in 2020. It asks for:  the development of key LGBT union campaign messages,  identification of LGBT equality manifesto demands including trans equality,  building and strengthening coalitions with LGBT and other community partners,  identifying key dates and events,  urging voter registration and engagement,  encouraging our activists to stand for office. Throughout the conference we also had a number of speeches including the activist Owen Jones and the inspirational Sophie Cook. The informal panel session ”Together for Trans” highlighted the successful steps that have been taken towards equality for the Trans community but reminded delegates about the ‘fights’ that still exist and must be won with support and solidarity of all.

Recommendations: On the back of the passing of a motion requesting the TUC now refers to the community as LGBT+ to be more encompassing. As a response it would be appropriate for the network to revisit the previous discussion and decide if we should take this step. This should be included on the agenda for our next CSP LGBT network meeting in November. Other action points are:  Network to revise CSP training toolkit for Trans members for representatives.  Network to consider rewording of CSP membership monitoring data collection question which appears on both hard copy application forms and the on-line profile questionnaire.  Members of the network to contact their local MP to request they ‘sign up’ to ensuring they will oppose any future attempts to undermine the rights developed by the LGBT community and for workers as a result of the outcome of the EU Referendum.

Ian Scrase on behalf of CSP delegation TUC CAMPAIGN PLAN 2016–17 BUILDING BACK STRONGER

BUILDING BACK STRONGER 03

INTRODUCTION

he TUC’s new Campaign Plan sets out how we plan to respond to the events of Our movement T 2016: both the profound consequences approaches the of the decision by the British people to leave the TUC’s 150th European Union, and also the significant impact anniversary in for our member unions of the passage of the 2018 in good Trade Union Act. health, united, Our movement approaches the TUC’s 150th and determined anniversary in 2018 in good health, united, and to act as one determined to act as one in defence of working in defence of people. You will see throughout this plan our working people. determination to grow stronger and bigger. And our commitment to equality for women, BAME people, LGBT people and disabled people underpins everything we do. Adopted at Congress 2016, this Campaign Plan supports and enhances the specific priorities and campaigns of our member unions in their industrial sectors. It will succeed only if it is the plan for all of our movement – member unions, workplace reps, grassroots members, and our allies too. Everyone can contribute to building our movement’s strength and resilience. The outside environment is changing fast – both the world of work, and the political context too. So this Campaign Plan sets out our priorities, and over the coming months we will supplement it with detailed plans including ways to get involved. I look forward to campaigning alongside you all in the year to come.

Frances O’Grady TUC General Secretary 04 TUC CAMPAIGN PLAN 2016–17

THE SITUATION WE FACE

As this plan is published, the UK has generation. Whilst the Act passed, it did just voted to leave the European Union. so with significant amendments as a We are now in a period of political and result of the trade union movement’s We must economic instability – which may be determined opposition, detailed lobbying ensure that the prolonged. Over the longer term, job and concentration on winning over losses and lower wages are likely if the unusual allies. Now the fight turns to the response of a UK does not maintain a strong economy further concessions we can secure in the Conservative and access to the single market. The implementation of the Act, and what the EU has also played an important role implications of the new legislation are for government to in improving workers’ rights in the UK. unions’ day-to-day work. the economic Laws on working time, health and safety, Alongside these challenges, the UK equality, family leave, rights for part- crisis facing trade union movement has set out its time, temporary and outsourced workers, determination to grow stronger, bigger the UK does and collective rights to information and and more effective at representing its consultation could all be up for review. not once members. A key part of that is meeting The referendum debate has heightened the challenge of engaging young again penalise tensions around immigration and workers. The latest figures (from late 2015) ordinary national identity, exploited by suggest that only 16.2 per cent of young unscrupulous politicians. It also brought employees aged 21–30 are members of a working people. to the fore once again the inequalities trade union or staff association, relative between the regions and nations of to 24.6 per cent of all employees. This is the UK and the harmful impact that in part a consequence of the increasing uncontrolled globalisation and years of casualisation of young people’s deregulation, cuts and underinvestment employment and the lack of trade union have had on less prosperous presence in sectors and workplaces 4 communities. We must ensure that the where most young people are employed response of a Conservative government (for example retail, hospitality and the to the economic crisis facing the UK outsourced private sector). Raising the does not once again penalise ordinary quality of our movement’s response to working people. this challenge is now urgent – and a priority for 2016–17. The trade union movement has also just completed the fight in parliament against the Trade Union Act – the

biggest assault on working people’s 2 rights to organise and to strike in a

5 BUILDING BACK STRONGER 05

THE UNIQUE ROLE AND CONTRIBUTION OF THE TUC

As the national centre for the UK’s trade Some cross-cutting themes should run union movement, the TUC is in a unique through all of the TUC’s work. As we position. We can bring together real approach our 150th anniversary in 2018, We should seek information and first-hand accounts we should always be a showcase for a to put trade from the shopfloor, the office, the modern confident trade unionism that warehouse and the factory and put it is in touch with the concerns of trade unions back with world-class economic and social union members and their communities at the heart policy analysis and lessons from trade – and we should seek to put trade unions abroad to produce a strong unions back at the heart of British civil of British civil and evidenced case for the changes society and public life. In everything society and that working people need. We are here we do, we should always promote the to represent trade unionists, and all benefits of joining a trade union and of public life. working people. members becoming more active in the union movement. Our commitment to We complement the work of our member equality, to anti-racism and to fairness trade unions by: should run through all our work. We * setting out a compelling case on are internationalists, and act with trade the national and international unionists around the world in defence stage for trade unionism and trade of and in solidarity with working people. union policies in the modern And we should harness the potential workplace and the wider economy of digital to transform our operations, campaigning and ability to serve our championing wider coverage of * members better. collective bargaining to improve 1 NHS workers take strike action pay and conditions at work for fair pay, Manchester. 2 Campaigning against the Trade * helping unions be stronger Union Bill, Mount Pleasant Mail and more effective. Centre, London. 3 Unions need to reach young The TUC’s acknowledged area of workers in the hospitality sector. expertise is factors affecting the 6 4 Protesting outside Byron workplace and the wider economy, and Hamburgers after an immigration raid, London. the experience of people when they are 5 Sadiq Khan and Frances O’Grady at work. We are at our most authoritative before The Great Debate on the EU and credible when we are talking about referendum, BBC One. work – in the UK or internationally. 6 Governor of the Bank of England Mark Carney with Frances at Congress, Liverpool. 7 Delegates at the TUC Black Workers Conference, London. 7 06 TUC CAMPAIGN PLAN 2016–17

PRIORITY 1 | WORKING PEOPLE MUST NOT PAY THE PRICE OF THE VOTE TO LEAVE THE EU

The referendum campaign our communities, and was passionately fought banishing them from our on both sides. But Our job now is to make sure public discourse. And we now that the British that the referendum vote is not will defend the rights of people have made their EU migrants who have decision, the trade union followed by a prolonged recession made the UK their home movement stands as or assault on those rights at work but feel the vote to leave one in demanding that the EU has put their right working people do not pay that are guaranteed by the EU. to live and work here the price of leaving the EU. in doubt. Our job now is to make Throughout, we will sure that the referendum entirety. And we will push providing our services. demand for working vote is not followed by a for access to the single And we will evidence people a seat at the table prolonged recession or market to be conditional the impact of the vote as decisions are made, and assault on those rights at on compliance with EU to leave the EU on jobs, for trade unions to play a work that are guaranteed rules on workers’ rights, wages, industry and full role in negotiations by the EU. We will put including those yet to investment. We will around the UK’s exit forward an alternative be implemented such speak up for trade union from the EU. Amid all plan to stave off a Brexit as the principle of equal concerns in planning for the political turbulence recession, focusing on pay for equal work in the life after the EU and in following this referendum, how we create good jobs same company regardless determining the trading our job remains the and invest in Britain’s of nationality. arrangements pursued. same: standing up for infrastructure. We will working people. In the referendum, voters The referendum demand a programme to showed their support for campaign has seen racism invest in transport, energy, proper funding for our and xenophobia rise to communications and public services. We will the surface of our society council housebuilding. hold the government again. As always, the trade Our work for a to account for these union movement will be at strong industrial and promises, pressing the the forefront of opposing manufacturing policy, case for investment racism, xenophobia and for a skills strategy for in world-class public all forms of prejudice Britain and to meet the services, from the NHS in our workplaces and productivity shortfall will to local government and be ever more important. for fair pay for those Britain must not become the cheap labour capital of Europe. We will 2 campaign for all EU- derived workplace rights to be retained in their 3

1 BUILDING BACK STRONGER 07

PRIORITY 2 | STANDING UP FOR ABANDONED COMMUNITIES

The referendum economy where wages English, so they can play a campaign gave a voice to are stagnant and good full part in the life of their communities who feel left jobs scarce lies with Trade unionists communities and in their behind by globalisation, government policy. are the natural workplaces, and we will deindustrialisation and push for the government Trade unionists are the the pace of change. They spokespeople to restore ESOL funding. natural spokespeople demanded control back for these communities for these Secondly, the TUC in their lives. We cannot – and it is vital that will demand that the stop globalisation, but communities we acknowledge their government set up a we can demand that concerns, renew the ties – and it is proper industrial strategy politicians shape it to work that bind us and together to bring back pride, good for working people, their vital that we demand accountability jobs and opportunities families and communities. from a political and acknowledge across the country, and In many of those business class that for too their concerns. revitalise manufacturing. communities – often, long has failed them. Young people should but not always, outside have options to build Standing up for left- London and the south- a life the communities behind communities east – good skilled, to support the aspirations they grew up in – rather requires a dual approach. unionised jobs that of all workers for a than having to move far Firstly, the TUC will pay enough to raise secure job. from home to find work relaunch our campaign a family have gone. or be stuck with a life for practical solutions The TUC will lead the Deindustrialisation and of insecurity and low- to deal with pressures trade union movement the hollowing out of quality jobs. This means caused by migration. We in reasserting British local labour markets a proper regional policy will campaign to make trade union values: hard has been decades in the built to deliver power, sure that cash gets to work, respect for one making, and has only investment, strong public areas of high pressure on another, an acceptance got worse since the services and economic public services through of difference, a profound financial crash in 2008. growth to towns and cities a new migration impacts opposition to racism and The average wage is still around the UK, increasing fund. We will redouble extremism. Trade unions £40 per week lower than access to skills and decent our efforts to ensure have always been a bridge it was before the crisis. work. And we will defend that bad bosses can’t between communities and During the referendum fiercely those good jobs use migrant labour to a support for new arrivals campaign, many voters that remain – not least undercut local workers, by – and we are now needed cited the pressure that our vital steel industry, calling for action on poor to play that role more than they feel uncontrolled and those industries employment practices and ever. And, once again, we immigration has put threatened by the UK vote bogus self-employment, will play our historic role on wages (especially to leave the EU. We will demanding equal pay for in helping working people in some industries), on make the case for trade workers doing the same fulfil their aspirations: we housing and on public agreements that create job in the same company will help more workers services. The trade union wealth and distribute it and extending sector- than ever before learn movement is clear: blame fairly, opposing those wide collective bargaining for underinvestment in deals which would public services and an undermine good jobs and 5 good wages.

4 Powered by Welsh Trade Unions

1 The TUC NHS Safer in the EU rally, London. ‘Wales can’t 2 TUC ad vans hit the road in London in prosper while support of staying in the EU. 3 Protesting against Islamophobia and the valleys incitement to racial hatred. struggle.’ 4 Defending good jobs in our vital industries: workers from Tata Steel in Corby. Watch my story at 5 The Better Jobs Closer to Home campaign www.betterjobswales.org run by Wales TUC. 08 TUC CAMPAIGN PLAN 2016–17

PRIORITY 3 | GREAT JOBS FOR EVERYONE

New forms of organising The trade union and build worker voice at work continue to pose a movement needs to every level, including on challenge for the ability develop a clear agenda New forms company boards. We will of workers to secure a to push for decent pay of organising also support thousands permanent position, with and conditions, security, of workers into high decent wages and terms skills training and an work continue quality apprenticeships. and conditions. The appropriate employment to pose a And alongside it, as we advent of zero-hours or status for workers across approach our 150th year, very short hours contracts, the outsourced and non- challenge for we must set out anew the continued increase traditional employment the ability our vision for how we in agency contracts, sector. This must create an economy that worker surveillance, and include redoubling our of workers delivers decent jobs for the rise of low income, efforts to secure union to secure a everyone, including how bogus self-employment influence and grow we use new advances in all threaten our goal of union membership and permanent technology to create better great jobs for everyone. recognition, and working position, with jobs and raise productivity, So does the so-called with allies to achieve and to make sure working “uberisation” of work, a concrete policy change decent wages people get the skills so labour-on-demand model and greater enforcement and terms and they can benefit. which sees hundreds of of the rules that exist. thousands of workers conditions. We must continue to making a living through advocate to retain, freelancing, contracting, enhance and extend to temping or outsourcing, more workers the UK’s will include defending organised through package of employment pension entitlements technological innovation rights, protections and speaking out for in a modern revival and benefits. This will policies and practices to of piecework. Whilst include arguing for increase equality at work uberisation currently fair wages for all, a real affects a limited number living wage wherever of workers, the methods of possible and calling for organising the allocation a lifting of the pay cap of work that digital in the public sector. It 2 innovation has enabled, will in time spread across the economy.

1 Union campaigning won concessions from Sports Direct. 2 Labour on demand: uber and Deliveroo typify modern-day 1 casual work for many. 3 Jacci Woodcock, the inspiration behind the Dying to Work campaign, seeking dignity, choice and control for all workers with a terminal illness. 4 Good digital communications are key to reaching young workers. 5 A young worker on a pre- Apprenticeship training course in construction, environment and personal development, Margate. 6 Unions must appeal to young families, too. BUILDING BACK STRONGER 09

PRIORITY 4 | REACHING YOUNG WORKERS

Many young people have capacity amongst the next a poor experience of work generation of union reps, – certainly compared Young workers are more likely enhance the involvement to the expectations than older workers to be poorly- of young people in the of their parents when TUC and showcase the they started out in the paid, work part-time or be work that unions are labour market. Young unemployed or underemployed. doing to recruit young workers are more likely members. And we will than older workers to be work with member unions poorly paid, work part- to deliver a stepchange time or be unemployed influence, grow trade In the coming year, we in unions’ digital or underemployed. This union membership, will launch a range of communications, to help partly reflects the fact that density and the coverage high-profile campaigns unions meet members’ the vast majority of young of collective bargaining. about workplace issues expectations and be fit for workers (88 per cent) are The TUC’s new Reaching that matter to young the future. employed in the private Young Workers initiative, people. We will signpost sector, and within that, launched last year and young workers to help primarily in hospitality continuing in 2016–17, with the problems they and retail, as well as in aims to raise the profile face at work, to show that smaller workplaces. and appeal of trade trade unions understand unionism amongst young young people’s concerns. The key way to improve people, and make sure that We will work with unions the experience of work trade unionism works for to develop and test a set of for young workers young people. new models of collective is to increase union organisation that are attractive for young workers, scaling up those which show promise. We will build organising 4

5 10 TUC CAMPAIGN PLAN 2016–17

PRIORITY 5 | BUILDING A STRONGER MOVEMENT AFTER THE TRADE UNION ACT

Much of the last year sectors now subject to was spent fighting the double threshold), to the government’s We will argue for the next raise turnout at elections unnecessary and government to repeal the and ballots, and ensure undemocratic Trade union income cannot be Union Act. Together, the Trade Union Act in its entirety. threatened by government union movement and interference. The TUC will our friends – and some assist member unions to unusual allies – in both meet this huge challenge, will seek to ensure that the The Trade Union Act Houses of Parliament and will not hesitate to government cannot hide was a massive attack on were able to secure support member unions behind bogus concerns our movement’s right to significant concessions, as they chart their path about security that limit exist, and on the right to which mean that the into a post-Trade Union unions’ ability to engage strike. But as always, when impact of the legislation Act future. our members through attacked, we must respond is less far-reaching than modern means in their by growing stronger and At the heart of our we expected. But the homes and workplaces. getting bigger. movement are our reps implications of the Act We will also continue – a vital resource for our remain significant – and The right response now with our forensic scrutiny members. We will find the work on the detailed to the new restrictions and detailed lobbying better ways to support implementation of the placed on unions is to on the regulations that them through a modern proposals is still to come. refocus on membership accompany the Act, education offer that growth, extending In the coming year, the alongside our member uses digital and sharing collective bargaining TUC will lead the trade unions, taking every good practice to build and getting closer than union movement in opportunity to minimise the skills, knowledge and ever to our members’ opposing any moves to the impact of these confidence reps need to industrial concerns. That allow agency workers to changes. And throughout, be as effective as they can will put us in the best break strikes – a proposal we will argue for the next be at work. possible position to win announced but not yet government to repeal ballots (including in those brought forward. We will the Trade Union Act in also make sure the union its entirety. movement makes a strong case for allowing unions 1 The TUC rally and lobby against the to use electronic balloting 2 Trade Union Bill, Westminster. for industrial action 2 A unionlearn Apprenticeships workshop, Warrington. when the government 3 Coming back stronger: in the wake announces the review of the Trade Union Act unions will they conceded during the refocus on building membership. Bill’s passage. It must be 3 set up by November; we

1 BUILDING BACK STRONGER 11

MEMBERS OF THE TUC GENERAL COUNCIL 2015–16 (As at August 2016)

Sheila Bearcroft MBE Sue Ferns Christine Payne Jane Stewart GMB Prospect Equity Unite Christine Blower Larry Flanagan Dave Penman Claire Sullivan National Union of Teachers Educational Institute FDA Chartered Society of of Scotland Physiotherapy Mary Bousted Tim Poil Association of Teachers Steve Gillan Nationwide Group Niamh Sweeney and Lecturers POA Staff Union Association of Teachers and Lecturers Joanna Brown Janice Godrich Dave Prentis Society of Chiropodists Public and Commercial UNISON Mohammad Taj and Podiatrists Services Union Unite Roy Rickhuss Tony Burke John Hannett Community Chris Tansley Unite Union of Shop, UNISON Tim Roache Distributive and Jane Carolan GMB Steve Turner Allied Workers UNISON Unite Linda Rolph Dave Harvey Gail Cartmail Advance Dave Ward National Union of Teachers Unite Communication Maggie Ryan Sally Hunt Workers Union Mick Cash Unite University and National Union of Simon Weller College Union Brian Rye Rail, Maritime and Associated Society of Union of Construction, Transport Workers Chris Keates Locomotive Engineers Allied Trades and NASUWT and Firemen Mike Clancy Technicians Prospect Sue Mather Fiona Wilson Malcolm Sage Community Union of Shop, Brian Cookson GMB Distributive and NASUWT Fern McCaffrey Eddie Saville Allied Workers GMB Manuel Cortes Hospital Consultants and Tony Woodhouse Transport Salaried Len McCluskey Specialists Association Unite Staffs’ Association Unite Mark Serwotka Matt Wrack Tony Dale Seán McGovern Public and Commercial Fire Brigades’ Union Union of Shop, Distributive Unite Services Union and Allied Workers Frances O’Grady Roger McKenzie Jon Skewes TUC General Secretary Neil Derrick UNISON Royal College of Midwives GMB Gloria Mills CBE Eleanor Smith Mark Dickinson UNISON UNISON Nautilus International Micky Nicholas John Smith Maria Exall Fire Brigades’ Union Musicians’ Union Communication Ged Nichols Liz Snape MBE Workers Union Accord UNISON

Photography © Getty Images/Kidstock (covers) © iStockPhoto Franck Reporter (09) © Pete Jenkins (08) © Press Association Images | Nick Ansell (07, 08); Stefan Rousseau (05) © Report Digital | Paul Box (10); John Harris (04, 05); Paul Hermann (04, 10); Jess Hurd (03, 04, 05, 06, 08, 09, 10); Philip Wolmuth (08) © Photofusion/Rex Features/Shutterstock | Janine Wiedel (06, 09). THE TUC’S CAMPAIGN PRIORITIES, 2016–17

1 Working people must not pay the price of the vote to leave the EU 2 Standing up for abandoned communities 3 Great jobs for everyone 4 Reaching out to young workers 5 Building a stronger movement after the trade union act www.tuc.org.uk/campaigns

Published by Trades Union Congress Congress House Great Russell Street London WC1B 3LS tuc.org.uk

ISBN 978 1 85006 994 2 August 2016 Design: TUC Print: College Hill Press

Managing migration better for Britain

What the government should be doing now

Introduction The EU referendum campaign gave a voice to communities who feel abandoned by globalisation, deindustrialisation and the pace of change. In many of those communities – often, but not always, outside London and the south-east – good, skilled, unionised jobs that pay enough to raise a family have been lost. Deindustrialisation and the hollowing out of local labour markets has been decades in the making, and has only got worse since the financial crash in 2008. The average wage is still £20 per week lower than it was before the crisis. Many of these communities are commonly described as ‘left behind’ although trade union members in those areas know that what has happened has not been an accidental by-product of unstoppable economic forces, but the result of conscious economic and political decisions to abandon domestic industries and the communities they relied on, which have only exacerbated the growing inequality in Britain today. In these communities, voters feel alienated by the pace of change, and by the pressure that they feel poorly managed immigration has put on wages, housing and public services. Throughout the EU referendum campaign, trade union campaigners for Remain heard workers say they were planning to vote Leave because of their concerns about immigration. TUC polling conducted immediately after the EU referendum revealed that controlling immigration was one of the top concerns (although by far not the only concern) of Leave voters, and also a concern for many Remain voters. It was highest in areas where EU migration has been new and has grown quickly, regardless of the level of immigration from the EU. Migrant workers from both the EU and further afield are employed in a range of industries, from highly skilled IT professionals to dedicated nurses and midwives. However, public concern is particularly focused on the use of migrant workers as a source of cheap labour – although with nearly six million workers in Britain earning less than the independently set living wage, migrants are certainly not the only group used by unscrupulous employers to undercut a fair rate for the job. It is clear that the government, other political parties and civil society need to respond constructively to the concerns expressed at the referendum. One of the main problems that our polling indicated put off potential Remain voters was the perceived failure of the Remain campaign to tackle the issue of uncontrolled immigration from the rest of the EU. Instead, we need clear practical policies to reduce the impact of migration on communities that feel left behind – including actions that build solidarity and community cohesion. The increase in racist attacks and incidents since the referendum - which suggest that a minority consider that widespread concerns about migration legitimise racism - does mean that policies to manage migration have to be accompanied by action against racism.

Managing migration better for Britain 2

What follows is a set of initial ideas that could guide the new government towards a more honest relationship with the British people with respect to immigration. In addition to the proposals put forward here, the government needs urgently to bring forward proposals to return economic prosperity and good jobs to all communities of the UK and also to tackle racial harassment and attacks. Where those policies directly impact on migration, we also refer to them here, but other TUC reports cover these issues separately. These are steps that the government could take immediately – they do not need to wait until we have left the EU, nor established a new relationship with the rest of the EU or the world. They are vitally important and urgent, and unions are ready to play our part.

1.1 1. Take action against undercutting and exploitation In TUC polling conducted in 2014, we found that one of the highest concerns about immigration was the perception that immigrants drive down wages and working conditions. We know that over the economy as a whole, migration does not reduce wages or increase unemployment, but there are many specific cases where unscrupulous employers’ abuse has indeed had these effects. The TUC has therefore long called for better regulation for the labour market to prevent employers exploiting free movement rules to get cheap labour and using migrant workers to undercut other workers, in the same way that in the past we have advocated equality legislation to address concerns about the exploitation of women entering the labour market, and in the same way we still advocate adult rates for younger workers. Unscrupulous employers will always seek someone to exploit so they can undercut existing workers. For too long, bad employers have been able to get away with using migrants in that way. Too many employers have been able to get away break the law, paying workers under the minimum wage and housing workers in illegal and unsafe conditions such as sheds and trailers. This has driven down conditions for all workers and forced an increased number of workers into insecure employment. Nearly two million workers are now in some form of temporary, insecure job and nearly six million workers are being paid less than the voluntary living wage. The only choice for many workers, and the employment future they see for their children, is to take low pay jobs with precarious contracts or face unemployment. We need new rules to tackle exploitation, such as action on zero hours contracts and bogus self-employment, as well as closing the loopholes in the rules covering posted workers and temporary and agency workers. A stronger approach to supply chain management domestically is also needed, allowing local labour clauses and modern procurement arrangements. Stronger enforcement would be a major step forward, yet the government has cut the resources and powers available to enforcement bodies such as the HMRC (which enforces the national minimum wage), the Gangmaster and Labour Abuse Authority (GLAA – originally set up after the Chinese cockle-pickers’ tragedy at Morecombe Bay) and the Employment Agencies Standards Inspectorate. Now, the Migration Advisory Committee notes that an average employer can expect a visit from a national minimum wage inspector just once in 320 years.

Managing migration better for Britain 3

But as well as better regulation and stronger enforcement by the government, trade unions have always relied on collective bargaining as a tool to establish greater equality and fairness at work. That is why the TUC’s call for industry-level wage setting institutions such as modern wages councils has a major part to play in eradicating exploitation and preventing undercutting. The government should:  Provide significant increases in funding for enforcement bodies: HMRC, the GLAA and the Employment Agencies Standards Inspectorate.  Increase the number of people employed in border control, and give them explicit responsibilities to prevent trafficking and other forms of exploitation.  Support unions and employers to identify and address exploitation taking place, including more effective laws against exploitation and more proactive use of existing powers to prevent trafficking and modern slavery.  Close loopholes in the laws on use of agency workers and posted workers.  Prevent employers only advertising jobs based in the UK in other countries – often in Eastern Europe.  Work with unions to ensure workers are informed of their rights to prevent them being exploited by employers.  Encourage employers to negotiate collective agreements with unions to create decent conditions for all workers, including migrants. This would promote good community relations too, and there are many examples of unions and employers working in partnership to promote this.  Tackle insecure forms of work such as zero hours contracts, close loopholes in the rules governing agency workers and ensure that bogus self-employment does not shift risk from the employer to workers.  Establish modern wages councils to make such collective agreements at sectoral level which would help prevent undercutting of good employers in profitable sectors.  Allow local labour clauses and respect for union agreements in procurement contracts.

2.1 2. Ensure fair access to housing, education and health Pressure on the NHS, on schools, and on housing is often cited as a reason to oppose immigration and limit migrants’ access to services. It is clear that most of the pressure on public services is as a result of the extreme budget-cutting approach of this government and the last, which has left many local services, not least the NHS, disastrously underfunded. EU migrants, like migrants generally, contribute more in taxes than they take out in services and benefits, but that contribution is not shared fairly. The benefits of migration to the economy as a whole should be used to ensure

Managing migration better for Britain 4

that the services which local communities rely on do not suffer as a result of often rapid population increases. The government should:  Create a much expanded migration impacts fund so that areas of high immigration and high pressure on services get the extra funding they need. Every community should be able, annually, to take part in an inclusive process to map need and understand the pressure points for local services – and local services need to respond (and have the funding to do so, through the expanded migration impacts fund).  Build more homes for families and for young people, both to rent and to buy - the TUC has already called for 75,000 to 100,000 new homes to be built every year in addition to the approximately 150,000 built annually – and crack down on rogue landlords, especially those who put their tenants at risk in dangerous overcrowded so- called “beds in sheds”.  Follow through on the Leave campaign’s promise of hundreds of millions of pounds of extra resources for the NHS, even though the money needed will almost certainly not be delivered by leaving the EU itself.

3.1 3. Tackle economic insecurity Many of the communities that feel abandoned need more than action against undercutting and exploitation, and will not necessarily benefit immediately from measures such as the national action plan that the TUC has proposed to improve the economy as a whole. They did not benefit from the growth in overall economic wealth that characterised the decade before the economic crisis, and we need to take action that will ensure not only that growth returns to such areas, but that that future economic gains from that growth are fairly shared. The major increase in infrastructure investment that the TUC and many employers are calling for will require many more skilled workers. The TUC has always argued that migration should not be used as a long term solution to skill shortages such as in education, engineering and the 130,000 jobs in the NHS – doctors, nurses and others – currently filled by EU migrants. These could be filled by local labour with the right training and apprenticeships, but training places and the funding required are often not in place. These problems will require a mix of responses, and we would therefore want to see the government develop:  A fairer taxation system, including the measures outlined above to ensure that spending is directed to areas where population growth due to migration has put pressure on public services.  Skills training that is more relevant and readily available for young people (eg through a Youth Guarantee) and for older workers, and expansion of measures to support adult learning in basic skills like literacy and numeracy (where the OECD estimates 48% of 16-34 year olds in England have under GCSE levels).

Managing migration better for Britain 5

4.1 4. Promote shared values and a shared language Too often, communities from different ethnic and cultural backgrounds live parallel lives, without meaningful opportunities to interact, develop friendship and understanding. To build a strong, tolerant society, the government needs to prioritise community cohesion and good relations. That means rearticulating and celebrating shared modern British values – which are also the values of the trade union movement: doing your bit, respect for difference, a profound opposition to racism and extremism. And it means creating meaningful opportunities to show those values and mark their pride in their communities and in the nations and regions of the UK. Faith groups, tenants associations and other community groups have done much to promote such modern British values, which is essential for effectively opposing racism and extremism. Trade unions have always been a bridge between communities and a support for new arrivals – and we are now needed to play that role more than ever. A recent example of this was in a TUC, Migrant Voice and Hope not Hate project linking unions, local authorities and voluntary sector groups in Corby, Manchester and Southampton. One of the outcomes of the project was that participants helped to form the Southampton Fairness Commission with Southampton Council which called for better jobs, pay and services for the city. The project also featured the major Corby employer RS Components, which had signed a collective agreement with Usdaw guaranteeing that migrant and local workers would be treated equally and have access to skills training. Trade unions play a key role in reinforcing shared values. We also need to make sure that everyone has the opportunity and the support necessary to learn English, and access the opportunities that a common language brings. Unions are at the forefront of teaching speakers of other languages English (ESOL), so they can play a full part in the life of their communities and in their workplaces. In the last 3 years, unionlearn have delivered English language training for 10,000 migrant workers. However, both unionlearn and further education more generally have suffered significant cuts in funding with the government making a 24% reduction in spending on non-apprenticeship related training in 2015 in England– and ESOL has suffered some of the largest cuts. The government should:  Support and encourage local community and cross-sector initiatives to encourage diverse parts of the community to promote volunteering, inclusive events at moments of national unity such as royal occasions, Remembrance and sporting events and other events that showcase inclusive expressions of local pride, commemoration and cultural diversity.  Significantly increase funding to workplace and community-based ESOL learning.

Managing migration better for Britain 6

5.1 5. Protect the rights of EU citizens in Britain and tackling racism and xenophobia Understandably, the vote for the UK to leave the EU has caused considerable worry amongst EU member state nationals who live and work in the UK. The then-Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond MP recently suggested the status of EU citizens in the UK depends on a deal being struck with other EU countries on the status of UK citizens. This approach is opposed by many across business, the unions and civil society, who believe that the status of EU migrants after Brexit is a matter that is within the competence of the UK government to determine unilaterally. The week after the referendum, the TUC and CBI issued a joint statement stating that as a matter of urgency, government needs to act to allay the concerns of EU nationals living and working in the UK, and UK citizens living and working in the EU. This statement was backed in a letter to the Sunday Telegraph signed by the TUC, the Institute of Directors and Conservative and Labour politicians from both sides of the referendum debate, alongside a long list of academics, commentators and experts. A number of individual employers have also moved quickly to assert that their employees should have the right to remain in the country and continue to be a valued part of the workforce. In addition, the Government needs to make clear that refugees and migrants from communities long established in the UK are welcome, to recognise their contribution to the economy and society, and to ensure they are able to integrate easily and fully into local communities. Measures to achieve that are set out in a separate report from the TUC, but will, crucially, include measures to engage local communities in building social cohesion. The government should:  Make clear that EU citizens still have full rights to work in the UK and equal rights with UK citizens.  State that any discrimination against EU citizens is unlawful and will be prosecuted.  Take steps with employers and unions to tackle racism at work, and with local communities to tackle racism in society generally.

Conclusion Managing migration better for Britain means providing practical solutions to the problems that people see in their communities. The government must crack down on exploitation, invest in local areas that are feeling increased pressures from population change and provide the chance for everyone to learn English. And more importantly, it is time to make sure that all communities across the UK – whether they voted to leave or to remain – feel that they have a share in rebuilding UK economic prosperity after Brexit. Working together, and emphasising the importance of workplaces and local communities as places to build opportunity for all working people, we can start to mend the fractures the EU referendum has exposed. These divisions only

Managing migration better for Britain 7

benefit bad bosses, rogue landlords and extremist politicians. As Jo Cox MP said in her maiden speech in the House of Commons in 2015, we have more in common than that which divides us.

Managing migration better for Britain 8

Working people must not pay the price for the vote to Leave

A national action plan to protect the economy, jobs and workers’ rights

Introduction After the vote to leave the European Union, the UK is in uncharted waters both politically and economically. The TUC did not seek this outcome, but accepts the decision of the British people. Yet with so many still so scarred by the effects of the 2008 financial crisis, working people and their communities must not pay the price – again – of economic slowdown and uncertainty. In this interim period before a new Conservative leader begins the process of leaving the EU, the government must act decisively to minimise the negative impact on the economy of extreme uncertainty. The governor of the Bank of England’s statement and actions on the morning after the referendum illustrate how decisive action can help protect financial markets. But there are limits to how much can be expected of monetary action. The chancellor’s statement on Monday 27 June was also welcome, but the reaction of the markets demonstrates the need for a bolder strategy. And of course, the TUC does not agree with the chancellor that the fundamentals of the UK economy are strong: one need only point to the concentration of wealth, jobs and investment in London and the south-east and the decades-long decline in manufacturing to see that the UK is exposed to significant risk compounded by the economic uncertainty of a vote to leave the EU. In this short paper, the TUC proposes specific actions which can be taken immediately or in the coming weeks, with regard to:  protecting jobs, apprenticeships and livelihoods  industrial planning, public investment in infrastructure and financial support for economic activity  using government spending rather than monetary policy to stimulate demand, while still defending sterling  protections for working people’s employment rights, pay and pensions, and the role of trade unions. Of course, in the longer term, the UK needs a plan to retain access to the single market. More widely, the government must acknowledge and seek to heal the wounds evident in the country – those of the enduring crisis in living standards, of the financial crisis and of the uncontrolled impacts of globalisation. And our political establishment needs to reflect on the causes of the anger and disaffection of many voters. These topics are not those of this paper – although in the coming months the TUC will return to these themes. Instead, this paper seeks only to be an immediate response to the looming impact of the vote to leave the EU on the lives, jobs and wages of working people in the UK.

Working people must not pay the price for the vote to Leave 2

A national action plan for British jobs and British industry The UK needs a national action plan to protect British jobs. The two key roles would be to support the economy in the present climate of extreme uncertainty and prevent recession, and to begin the task of mending the divisions in the UK economy that the referendum result has exposed. Responsibility – and, crucially, resources – for implementing the National Action Plan should be shared with the devolved nations, English local enterprise partnerships, combined authorities and city regions as well as the relevant government departments.

Immediate help for industry Our union representatives report that industry will face immediate challenges as extreme uncertainty hits demand and impacts on their order books. Automotive, aviation, agriculture, retail and financial service industries are immediately the most vulnerable. The government must make available emergency aid, as well as helping with extra costs associated with the implications of the referendum vote, if necessary through guaranteeing bank and other loans, and assistance with the costs of currency movement. A task force of national, regional and local government, unions and business should monitor the situation in sectors and regions, to provide early warning of problems, and lay the foundations for a changed approach.

A modern industrial strategy At the heart of the plan should be a modern industrial strategy to revitalise the UK’s manufacturing industry. The strategy should include:  understanding the UK’s existing and potential industrial strengths, and developing an agenda for nurturing those sectors where the UK can remain competitive, rely on extensive research and development and have great export potential – and which could provide the well-paid, highly skilled jobs of the future  the development of an industrial roadmap that meet the UK’s economic and industrial needs, at both regional and sectoral level, and put the UK on track to meet

its commitments to CO2 reduction under the Paris Agreement  close working with the higher education sector and a skills strategy for the whole workforce – including a substantial role for apprenticeships; as a subsidiary goal, UK investment in research and development should be increased to three per cent of GDP.  the immediate announcement of a smart procurement strategy, so that key infrastructure investments, defence and security procurement and public spending commitments are used strategically to support industry, including steel production.

Increased infrastructure spending The national action plan should also announce an immediate increase in infrastructure spending. Spending on infrastructure will be lower this parliament than the last as a share of GDP, even accounting for recent increases.

Working people must not pay the price for the vote to Leave 3

Even before the referendum vote, the OECD argued that action on infrastructure spending was urgent to support demand and break free from stagnation and low growth. They emphasised that this spending has a high multiplier, so it delivers a strong short- term boost to demand and stimulus to activity across the whole of the economy. Moreover, in the longer-term, infrastructure spending strengthens the supply side of the economy – with the potential to create a permanent increase in GDP of up to 0.5 per cent.1 Following the referendum, action to increase infrastructure spending is urgent. As part of its action plan the government should announce its intention to implement a significant and sustained programme of spending, with a strong regional dimension. This should include:  a construction programme for affordable homes to rent and buy  announcing further expansion of high-speed rail, including detailed plans for Crossrail 2 and HS3, and additional support for HS2  giving the go-ahead to a new runway at Heathrow, in line with the recommendation of the Airports Commission  support for a new generation of nuclear power stations  rolling-out ultra-fast broadband across the UK and other spending on information and communication infrastructure  a full-scale carbon sequestration programme for power and industry, focussed on carbon capture pipeline and storage infrastructure (CCS) in key industrial regions  increase in the proportion of UK expenditure on renewable energy sources, likewise aimed at the industrial heartlands  an expansion of domestic energy efficiency programmes, including community energy projects. The housebuilding programme should be of the order of 75,000 to 100,000 new homes per year, of which a significant proportion should be council housing. In addition to supporting skilled jobs growth, this will have the additional benefit of supporting the aspirations of a generation of young people who have given up on the prospect of a home of their own. More generally British banks and the financial industry are not meeting the challenges British industry faces. The authorities need to:  devise better ways to mobilise resources in pension schemes towards industrial projects  roll back plans for the privatisation of the green investment bank  introduce vital borrowing plans for the British Business Bank

1 National Institute of Economic and Social Research, Macroeconomic Impacts Of Infrastructure Spending – report to Trades Union Congress, p6 www.tuc.org.uk/sites/default/files/tucfiles/infrastructure_spending.pdf

Working people must not pay the price for the vote to Leave 4

 conduct a review of the implementation of the ‘Vickers’ / Independent Commission on Banking proposals to ensure that the UK banking system is capable of serving the wider economy, including discussion of for example regional banking.

Fiscal and monetary policy We need major changes to recent fiscal and monetary strategy to deal with the implications of the referendum vote to leave the European Union. For the past six years, so-called fiscal consolidation has meant severe spending cuts. Instead, expansionary action has relied on monetary policy – not least quantitative easing (QE), but also schemes such as funding for lending. Obviously in present circumstances no expansionary action should be ruled out: it may be that a quick dose of QE will help to calm markets and the financial system. But as the OECD has now recognised, too much has been asked of monetary policy, and fiscal policy needs to be brought into play. We need decisive action to support the real economy as well as asset values. Government spending is the most effective means to support aggregate demand, providing direct employment and/or higher incomes, as well as boosting the private sector when new or increased incomes are spent. The government should make it clear that any immediate investment will be financed by borrowing rather than raising taxes or cutting spending elsewhere, which would suck demand out of the economy when the imperative is the opposite. Even in spite of heightened fears about government finances over the past six years, markets have never been readier to lend to governments in major economies (and because they are regarded as a safe asset UK government bond interest rates are falling after the referendum, so government borrowing is getting cheaper). Looking ahead it is likely that actions to protect or strengthen the economy will be looked upon favourably by financial markets. Future public finance outcomes depend on the condition of the economy: spending now will help to prevent an economic crisis and therefore will support tax revenues into the future. Ahead of the referendum, the Monetary Policy Committee warned of a potential policy dilemma between action to prevent the inflation that an exchange devaluation might cause and those needed to support the economy. In the immediate aftermath of the exit vote, the TUC argued for steps to shore up the pound or at least limit its fall. Living standards need to be protected from price rises for basic goods – as, for example, the UK imports 40per cent of its food. Since the financial crisis sterling has traded at an average exchange rate of around $1.60 (2009-2015), and at around $1.40 since the start of the year. In the wake of the exit vote, it has traded between $1.30 and $1.40. The announcement by the governor that the Bank of England could use reserves of up to £250bn to protect markets helped to moderate any sterling decline and supported other financial markets but is not adequate without government action. With inflation still at historic lows and spare capacity likely greater than generally thought, monetary policy should remain on an expansionary setting and ultimately be supportive of government spending.

Working people must not pay the price for the vote to Leave 5

Rights at work and pay Working people must not pay the price of economic uncertainty after the referendum. Higher wages would not only stimulate the economy, but would begin to redress anger at inequalities and injustices that may have played out in this vote. After all, average real wages are still £40 a week less than they were when the global financial crisis began, the longest and deepest crisis in earnings since the early 1800s. While there were some gains in 2015, these have already began to retreat. The TUC supports the government’s higher minimum wage (the so-called ‘national living wage’), but more needs to be done. The lowest paid are in the greatest need of protection: the government should commit to significant progress towards a real living wage, ensuring that young workers are not left behind. The government should remove the one per cent cap on public sector pay rises, and should encourage private sector employers who can pay more to do so. There is a virtuous circle: with the government acting decisively, firms will be more confident to give pay rises, and these will quickly be returned to firms through more spending. The IMF have just advised Japan to require profitable employers to ‘comply or explain’ against a target of 3per cent wage increases in the private sector; the UK should pursue a similar policy. The government should also promote collective bargaining, which is the best means to delivering rising living standards and greater equality. The government should also act to protect working people’s pensions. The shock experienced by investment markets since the referendum risks inflating pension scheme deficits and undermining trustees’ funding plans. The Pensions Regulator should allow maximum flexibility in scheme funding to ensure that short-term volatility doesn’t lead to a fresh round of pension fund closures and a hit to both the long-term savings of UK workers and the capacity of British companies to invest for the future. UK workers should also not pay the price of voting to leave the EU in terms of reduced rights at work. The European Union has played a central role in protecting working people from exploitation, combating discrimination and promoting good employment practices. Politicians from both sides defended these rights as part of the referendum campaign. The government should commit not to repeal any of the rights which are guaranteed by the EU. Watering down or dismantling this legislation would amount to a direct attack on the basic rights, security and standards of living working people and a denial of campaign promises. It would also risk further damaging confidence and spending, when it is vital not to let demand in the economy weaken.

Recognising how trade unions can help Britain succeed The government must recognise that trade unions have a constructive role to play in the post-referendum environment. Throughout the recent steel crisis, unions worked constructively with government and business to safeguard jobs and investment. The involvement of employers and unions in the German response to the global financial crisis from 2008 onwards was a key factor in Germany’s earlier recovery than the UK’s. In the wake of the vote to leave the EU, unions and employers can, by working together, help prevent investors from fleeing the UK. This could help secure deals with employers to preserve jobs (and in some places, sustain whole communities) through this time of

Working people must not pay the price for the vote to Leave 6

uncertainty. For workers, involvement in decisions about how the referendum result may affect their workplaces will help counter disaffection with those in authority stemming from economic vulnerability and a sense of powerlessness. The government should set an example by involving unions in its planning, and should require employers seeking assistance from the national action plan to do so in consultation with the unions representing their workforces.

Preparing for exit negotiations The voters have been clear that they want the UK to leave the European Union. The task for the UK’s leaders is to work out how that can be achieved without working people paying the price. Years of uncertainty will be unhelpful for investment and would leave working people unable to plan their own futures. Investors will postpone job-creating investment until they know the UK’s future path, and people will put off major life decisions such as whether to marry, change jobs, start a family or buy a home. The government must urgently bring together a team of people to plan Britain’s next steps. This team must be cross-party, and have members not only from regional government, the Northern Irish, Scottish and Welsh administrations (as the prime minister indicated in his resignation statement) but also representatives of business, unions and civil society. The top priority is to protect access to the EU’s single market, to which nearly half of our manufacturing and much of our services are exported. Polling the week before the referendum suggested that 57 per cent of voters – including half of those planning to vote to Leave – would favour the same relationship with the EU that Norway has, rather than the looser, less beneficial arrangements of countries like Canada and Switzerland. We need to build the growing consensus in favour of an arrangement that would guarantee jobs and rights at work, while respecting the wishes of the electorate to leave the EU. But as the situation develops in the coming months, the TUC will doubtless return to the theme of which model for Britain outside the EU would best support the living standards and aspirations of working people, and how best we should approach our impending exit from the EU.

Rebuilding confidence and common purpose The UK now needs to move on from the decision made in the referendum without rancour or recriminations. There is evidence of an increase in racist hate crime. Politicians must step back from divisive and inflammatory rhetoric, whilst racist incidents must be firmly dealt with, both in workplaces and in the wider community. And the government must confirm the continued right of EU citizens currently living and working in the UK to remain here permanently. And the government – and the whole political class – must consider anew how to recognise and act upon the legitimate concerns of many voters about immigration. The TUC will return to this topic in a major new project speaking out for the concerns of those left behind in the UK economy, but for now we propose some initial actions that could be taken in the coming months.

Working people must not pay the price for the vote to Leave 7

The government should reintroduce a migration impacts fund so that the benefits of migration are shared fairly with the communities and public services in the areas of highest immigration and highest pressure. And the UK needs firmer rules and tougher enforcement to prevent unscrupulous bosses using migrant workers to undercut local labour. If all companies were required to respect collective agreements, this would ensure that employers were unable to use migrants to undercut pay rates – which would additionally help prop up demand in areas of high immigration.

Published by Trades Union Congress, Congress House Great Russell Street, London WC1B 3LS tuc.org.uk June 2016

Working people must not pay the price for the vote to Leave 8 Industrial Relations Committee

reference IR(16)24

title ERUS Work plan: highlights and exceptions

author Elaine Sparkes Assistant Director status For information and discussion summary & This paper summarises some of the key highlights recommendations to date in delivering the ERUS work plan during 2016.

Introduction

This paper aims to brief the committee on the highlights of the delivery of the 2016 ERUS work plan to date. The highlights are presented against the relevant sections of the work plan, a full copy of which is enclosed (Appendix 1). Also included is ERUS risk register for information which is a confidential paper (Appendix 2). The most recent information on workplace wins collated from training days and from reps directly is included in Appendix 3.

The committee are asked to note the paper does not generally include information covered elsewhere on the agenda.

ORGANISING Organising Strategy  The campaign in Worcester to prevent cuts to physiotherapy services has continued and at this stage it appears to have been successful with none of the 3 CCGs identifying physio as an area to consider further following the initial scoping exercise. Further information will be available following planned meetings in October.  Evaluation of the organising work is now underway to consider the impact of the projects and make recommendations for going forward with the organising agenda.  The role of workplace contact is now being developed to encourage members to get involved without having to take up a rep role initially, which may be more daunting. Information is available but it is not being widely publicised to allow the role to develop more slowly with support. Campaigning  CSP members and staff are attending the rally on 2nd October in Birmingham to challenge the on-going cuts to the NHS and the impact this is having on staff and patients.  There was an excellent CSP turn out at London Pride. Members of the CSP LGBT network with their family and friends joined a record 1 million strong crowd to celebrate the diversity in the capital, with an opportunity to promote the CSP and Physio Works, and fly the giant yellow and pink CSP flags with pride.

Elaine Sparkes October 2016

Training  E-notes are currently being developed as an additional training tool for reps and it is hoped these will be launched sometime in the new year.

Equality and Diversity  The disabled member’s network hosted a successful study day on reasonable adjustments for dyslexia. More than 60 delegates attended to hear CSP members with dyslexia talking about how they had successfully overcome barriers both in the workplace and at university. The speakers were filmed by an external company and the videos, along with other dyslexia resources, will be placed on the CSP website in the autumn.

NEGOTIATING Support, Advice and Representation  The Stewards Handbook has been rewritten and updated and is currently available in 'word' form as well as on the CSP website and iCSP. A published A5 version will be circulated to stewards in November.  The primary care policy stream has produced draft guidance to promote the role of physiotherapy within general practice. It is hoped this will be launched later this year.  A TUC led day is being held in Manchester on devolution on 9 November. It has been promoted through ERN and stewards networks and CSP member Naomi McVey is facilitating one of the workshops.  Following attendance at the ARC Fringe meeting on the TUC Dying to Work Campaign, CSP steward Kate Baker took the information back to her NHS Trust, promoting the campaign and pushing her employer to sign up. Subsequently the Southport and Ormskirk NHS Trust became the first NHS Employer to join the campaign. Partnership Forums  The Social Partnership Forum Workforce Issues Group is looking at the implications of new care models on employment and also therefore on partnership working, and specifically the impact of Sustainability and Transformation Plans (STPs). Guidance has been produced outlining the need for engagement with Trade Unions at all levels but particularly within regional SPFs.

Elaine Sparkes

Assistant Director

Appendix 1: 2016 ERUS WORK PLAN

The ERUS work plan provides details of the work plan for the year and identifies the links to the corporate strategy. It is underpinned by key principles:

ERUS will seek to promote quality employment for all members, and will take into account potential differences between the four countries as well as the different employment sectors. It will campaign for equality and diversity and for a publicly funded and delivered NHS.

ORGANISING Function Activity Key Activities/Outcomes Organising Strategy. To continue the work on developing and piloting new organising models, to evaluate the effectiveness of any pilots Pilot of any models developed is carried and consider roll‐out of successful models. out with an evaluation of impact and benefits. To promote the role of stewards and safety reps to employers, managers and other CSP members, encouraging joint working across the stewards and safety reps networks and with other CSP activists such as learning champions, and Resources are developed to engage members involved with ERNs, Country Boards and professional networks. members, promote roles of reps and assist in recruitment of reps along with targeted site visits. Evaluation of effectiveness is To use all opportunities to recruit and retain reps and evaluate the effectiveness of different methods of recruitment. carried out.

Dynamics is used to provide To utilise dynamics to support the organising strategy, to identify potential activists, such as former student reps, and ‐Regular reporting on rep coverage and to improve the efficiency of the accreditation system. turnover with evaluation of changes over time. ‐Automated systems for lapsed reps. ‐Information on potential activists in workplaces with no reps and these contacts are followed up.

Non‐NHS

To review the potential for extending the organising approach in non‐NHS sectors, assessing the opportunity to Review of current situation and develop the non‐NHS steward and safety rep networks by identifying key employers/workplaces, recruiting reps opportunities is undertaken along with where possible, and identifying opportunities for formal recognition agreements. evaluation of impact of recognition agreements gained in 2015.

Recruitment, Retention and Engagement

To continue to work with other directorates to review recruitment, retention and engagement opportunities. To Evaluation through measures identified by promote the adoption of an organising and campaigning model within the ‘My CSP’ programme, seeking to recruit, RRIG. retain and engage members through building relationships and ensuring benefits of membership are understood.

Campaigning National: To work with the 4 country TUCs, other Trade Unions, and relevant bodies on specific campaigns most relevant to Relevant campaigns are identified early in CSP members for example campaigning against the trade union bill, responding to the devolution agenda. the process and work is taken forward To support (as appropriate and as resources allow) key campaigns led by external organisations to which CSP is across directorates. Appropriate resources affiliated. developed and members provided with support to get involved. Effectiveness of Local: each campaign is reviewed by evaluating To work with reps, members and across CSP directorates to identify and campaign locally on relevant issues. against aims and assessing member involvement. To support stewards/members to:  Identify local issues of relevance for a campaign  Equip them with research tools As part of the organising projects, pilot  Support them to develop the campaign and run it locally local campaigns and evaluate the impact  Use the campaigns to recruit reps and members and develop activists. on engagement and recruitment of members and activists.

Political changes: To encourage and facilitate reps and members to engage and promote CSP issues identified leading up to the Appropriate communications regarding the elections in Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales and local elections in England in 2016. To encourage and facilitate elections are agreed and delivered across reps and members to engage with the EU referendum. directorates.

To consider the impact, on both healthcare and employment, of separate healthcare systems in all four countries ERUS on‐going involvement in the CSP including the devolution and integration agenda. To work across the CSP to involve affected members, provide policy group leading on integration. support and advice, and respond as appropriate. Links developed with the TUC, other TUs and relevant regional fora to ensure a CSP voice at national and local level on the employment implications of integration and devolution. Policy: To work across the CSP to improve the quality and breadth of data and information to support policy development on Development of CSP policy always includes a wide range of issues, ensuring a trade union and employment perspective is considered. consideration of TU and employment perspective and has input from relevant ERUS staff as appropriate. Training To provide a national and regional training programme for stewards and safety reps that equips reps with the skills, Evaluation forms from training consistently knowledge and confidence to assist them in their roles in the workplace. show stewards and safety reps have increased knowledge and confidence To continue development of web resources for reps and participate in CSP wide e‐learning group. following training.

To consider the role of regional training days and if appropriate develop new ways of delivering training, identifying Current strengths and weaknesses of pilots and evaluating impact. training days are identified and new models for piloting are trialled and evaluated if appropriate To utilise Dynamics to record and monitor attendance at training events. Dynamics provides monitoring information of attendance. Equality and Diversity To work with the CSP Equality and Diversity Group to develop a cross directorate equality and diversity strategy for Strategy for 2016 is agreed, shared with 2016. IRC, and evaluated against aims.

Leadership To encourage and support the leadership role of member activists, and in particular IRC members, NGRS and NGRSR IRC assessment on the effectiveness of this and diversity network members. area of work and development. To encourage stewards and key activists to attend the various TUC conferences, to participate in debates and Participation at TUC Conferences including promote the benefits to the wider membership. development of CSP motions and involvement in wider debates.

To support the PhysioWorks programme in encouraging active participation of all members and in promoting the role of leadership throughout the profession. To support the English Regional Networks and Country Boards through direct participation and/or encouraging NGRS to assess involvement and steward involvement. participation of steward network.

Good to Great To actively contribute to integrated, cross‐directorate working in taking forward the workstreams arising from the ERUS staff are actively involved in all Good‐Great review. workstreams and in taking the work forward.

Feedback from the workstreams is regularly provided by staff involved, and work is integrated into planning. Staff Support and Development To ensure an active commitment to supporting and developing staff through robust appraisal systems, identifying All staff receive a timely appraisal and and taking forward training needs, and appropriate management support. training needs are identified.

NEGOTIATING Function Activity Key Activities/Outcomes Support, Advice and Representation To support stewards and safety reps to undertake their roles in the workplace through regular communications, Assessed through stewards survey when relevant briefings and direct support from staff. undertaken. To provide members with high quality advice, support and representation on work‐related issues and problems Feedback from NGRS and NGRSR and through stewards, safety reps and ERUS staff and to provide support and representation for members and reps from complaints monitoring. other organisations with whom we have a service contract.

To support reps and members in responding to, and negotiating on, local issues such as cuts, competition and tendering, seven day services and re‐organisations.

To provide ERUS input to the policy streams of workforce planning, primary care, and integration to support reps and Relevant local issues are fed into the policy members to use the tools developed for bargaining in the workplace. streams and reps and members can access relevant information from the CSP to provide support in the workplace. National Negotiations Pay: To work with other NHS Trade unions through the NHS Staff council to maintain an independent process for IRC assessment – taking into account the determining pay in the UK, and campaign against current Government pay policy across the UK. context and emerging developments.

Terms and conditions: To work with other unions to preserve a nationally agreed set of terms and conditions. To work with other trade unions to ensure any proposed extension of seven day services is based on service need, protects current terms and conditions and is adequately resourced. A/A To ensure the CSP plays an active role in any discussions in the devolved administrations affecting members pay, terms and conditions.

Pensions: Play an active role in the continuing national work on the new Pension Scheme in 2016, including the contribution structure. Provide members and stewards with briefings on developments.

Health and Safety: Maintain CSP seat on HSWPG. Issues of To actively participate and work with Trade unions and other partners to take forward the work of the Health, Safety concern for CSP members are on the and Wellbeing Partnership Group, and ensure safety reps and members are briefed on relevant information. agenda.

Equality and Diversity: Maintain CSP seat on E&D subgroup. To actively participate and influence the work of the NHS Staff Council Equality & Diversity sub group and Issues of concern for CSP members are on disseminate outcomes. the agenda.

Partnership Forums To ensure the CSP is actively involved and participates in the Social Partnership Fora at national and regional level Maintain seats on SPF and equivalent and the equivalent bodies in the devolved administrations. bodies. Issues affecting CSP members are To advise stewards and safety reps in their role participating in local partnership and negotiating bodies. on the agenda. Stewards and Safety reps receive training on the role of local partnership bodies and are supported to maintain involvement. TUC/STUC/ICTU/ WalesTUC To participate in the TUC General Council and in other Country and regional fora where possible. Encourage CSP IRC assessment on participation. steward involvement where appropriate and help develop the necessary skills. CSP stewards and activists have attended TUC conferences and participated in debate. Non‐NHS To identify opportunities and where possible negotiate recognition rights for members within the non‐NHS sector, Recognition agreements pursued and considering voluntary and statutory routes as appropriate. signed where opportunities have been identified.

Work Plan Review The highlights and exceptions from the Work Plan will be reviewed regularly throughout 2016 by ERUS staff and IRC. Reviews at regular intervals.

Appendix 2: CONFIDENTIAL CSP ERUS Risk Register 2016: Third Quarter Risk Event Causes Consequences Owner Last Quarter Assessment This Quarter Assessment Change In Treatment Treatment Action Assessment Approach Plan Since Last Quarter Likeliho Impact Overall Likelihood Impact If Overall od It If It Seriousness It Will It Seriousness Will Happen Happen Happens Happen s 1 BOS gives  BOS re‐ ERUS has to cover Claire High Low Low Mitigate Review budget to notice of tendering with the cost of the Sullivan/Elaine allow for contingency. contract end preferred current contract, Sparkes with ERUS provider to be which is used to able to provide part fund a post, a more from other extensive range resources. of services. 2 Legal budget  Increase Fixed fee Elaine High Medium Medium Mitigate Current legal budget is overspent number of arrangement Sparkes/Lloyd able to cover a one‐ members becomes Bowen off payment. Future accessing legal significantly arrangements will services and overspent with need to be considered complexity of consequences for to reduce costs in the cases. the budget this long‐term. year and next year 3. Health service  Economic Members require Claire Sullivan Medium Medium Medium Mitigate Keep any changes changes environment increase support under review. Seek to increase the and new ways on major service establish TU pressure on of working in re‐organisation recognition with new CSP resources the NHS lead to including employers where more service integration and appropriate. changes. new models of employment. 4. There is a  Tendering Members become Pete Low Medium Medium Mitigate Keep trends under significant processes and more fragmented, Finch/Elaine review, including increase in new ways of working for Sparkes analysis of any private delivering employers who increase in private providers of services lead to will not always providers. Seek CSP NHS services. an increase in recognise the recognition where providers. CSP. Organising possible and have becomes clear strategy for the increasingly more non‐NHS. difficult. 5. There is a  The four Impact on Claire Low Medium Medium Prevent/mi Lobby to continue divergence of countries set recruitment and Sullivan/Pete tigate with a UK wide system UK wide different pay retention across Finch of pay across the NHS. policy and rates and move the UK. Pressures Develop contingency pay. away from PRB. on workload to plans for managing deliver across any changes. four countries. 6. There is a  The TU act may Impact on ERUS Pete Medium Medium Medium Mitigate Evaluate organising decrease in impact directly ability to support Finch/Elaine project and impact on numbers of on facilities members Sparkes reps recruitment, reps and/or time. including identifying any actions the provision Workforce potential increase for good practice. of facilities pressures and in individual Ensure gaps are time. general hostile matters and identified early, action political climate decrease time for taken to recruit and may reduce more strategic support given to new numbers. issues. reps.

Appendix 3: Workplace Wins June‐September 2016

North West and Mersey

Downbanding/Jobs

Management proposed a restructure across five clinical areas that included the removal all clinical Band 7 posts from stroke, neuro‐rehabilitation and intensive care. Over 20 physios were placed at risk and all Band 7s lost would have been replaced by Band 6s. Stewards and members worked tirelessly to defend their services: this included benchmarking exercises, reference to research evidence and national guidelines, and expressions of concern from a wide range of consultants and MDT colleagues. Staff provided alternatives ways of reducing cost without impacting on quality, safety or existing staff. Management accepted these in their entirety.

Learning? “Members: The main lesson I have told staff is that they need to be routinely measuring and demonstrating quality, safety and cost effectiveness, because services can and will be reviewed in the future. Also, they thought it was a done deal and management wouldn't listen: however, the proposals were so ill‐informed and the response so compelling and comprehensive that they had no other reasonable choice but to follow all our suggestions.” The advice the steward prepared for the members has now become integrated into the CSP advice on Organisational Change / Downbanding and so the process has resulted in an improvement in the resources available to all CSP Stewards. Feedback from members was that this guidance really helped them to put together an all‐ encompassing response.” (Stockport NHS FT)

Public Holiday Mat Leave

The accrual Bank Holiday has been backdated for the whole of one member’s maternity leave, rather than just from July, when the changes stipulating all NHS women employees will now be entitled to the public holidays that occurred while they were on maternity leave when they go back to work. That gives the member almost an extra 5 days. Says the Steward responsible for securing this: “Result – a very happy member!” (Bolton FT)

Special leave

A special policy that dictated a two‐hour cap for appointments has been changed to allow for reasonable adjustment in certain cases. The steward challenged the policy arguing there had to be exceptions to this rule, for example if a member of staff had an appointment that was located at a considerable distance from the workbase, of if they attended in order to investigate a disability or a potentially life threatening / disabling illness. All members of Laura's trust potentially benefit from these changes. What did the steward learn? "To challenge policies that are not fair." (Cumbria Partnership)

Disciplinary

Following the resolution to this issue the steward challenged a policy that stated that the disciplinary pack/documents would only be released 5 days before the hearing. This has now been changed to a minimum of 10 days.

Competence

At another trust, a steward supported a member through retraining related to competency issues. The managed was also supported and was very helpful. the member is now fully competent. Learning? "Things are more likely to work out well when all parties have a commitment to making them work."

Accrual of public holidays while on maternity leave: In a number of trusts local stewards pursued changes to local policies to ensure accrual of public holidays while on maternity leave. CSP guidance was followed, including threatening a grievance in one case, communicating with HR managers, finance directors and raising at staff side negotiating fora (JNCC). (Including North Cumbria University Hospitals, Warrington and Halton Hospital Central Manchester Foundation Trust and Liverpool and Heart Chest Hospital)

West Mids

Bank holiday entitlement

Secured positive outcome for member who challenged the right to accrue bank holiday entitlement while off on maternity leave. Supported by reps and SNO, members who raised this were given their bank holiday entitlements for the time off they had taken. The trust policy is being reviewed on this issue, which would then have implications for all staff who take maternity leave in future (Sandwell and West Birmingham Hospitals NHS Trust)

Brought staffside convenor on board with maternity leave / bank holiday pay, an issue that is likely to go down more formal route, as HR is blocking all discussion on the matter (Birmingham Community Healthcare NHS Trust)

T&Cs & Casework

 On call T&Cs compensatory rest to be paid. Flat rate uplift of 11%. Telephone calls and travel to be paid. (University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust)  As a trust we have reduced casework needs of staff. Perhaps policies are being implemented appropriately more often now (Walsall Healthcare NHS Trust)  New, improved sickness policy ‐ now badged as the Promoting Staff Health, Wellbeing and Attendance policy – is being met positively by staff. (Worcestershire Health and Care NHS Trust)  Successful result from a disciplinary 7 day services

Improved consultation for seven day working; the manager originally sought to include it in with the departmental restructure but achieved a separate consultation period for it (George Eliot Hospital NHS Trust)

Organising

Recruited a new steward, so that each of our three sites have a representative (Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals NHS Trust

Achieved a good working partnership with the three CSP stewards and health and safety rep (Worcestershire Health and Care NHS Trust)

Leadership

New AHP Consultant role has been awarded to a physiotherapist – 8A medical support for a stroke inpatient rehab unit (Worcestershire Health and Care NHS Trust)

CSP safety being considered for a secondment to the trust's Health and Wellbeing team to promote evidence based self‐management, and signpost frontline staff to available resources. (Birmingham Community Health)

Patient services and staffing

Restored inpatient gym which had been used to extend the discharge lounge. The steward held meetings with staff, collected evidence of the productive use of the gym and alternative proposals, and met with the member of management who implemented the change (Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust)

Car parking

Knocked back plans to introduce for community staff, a proposal that would have negatively impacted those who needed to use their cars. Staff side unions opposed the proposals and staff were consulted. Learning:

 You can challenge decisions  Get involved early  Empower members to acknowledge their responsibilities

Yorkshire

Disciplinary

A member was assisted with a disciplinary hearing and facing gross misconduct charges secured a final written warning, instead of instant dismissal. What did the steward learn? Preparing for a disciplinary case; supporting the member through a difficult and stressful time; renegotiation skills; understanding the trust policy; communications and engagement skills. (Northumbria Healthcare NHS FT)

Upbanding!

A member was upbanded thanks to the support of a steward in submitting a job re‐ evaluation and securing manager backing for it. Learning? Upbanding is possible to achieve even under today's financial constraints in the NHS. (Barnsley Foundation Trust)

7 days services/overtime

A regime of compulsory overtime for staff providing weekend respiratory physiotherapy was overturned after the illegality of compulsory overtime was highlighted and a team effort involving the respiratory team leaders, managers and staff found a solution. The service ‐ provided via a rota of respiratory trained on‐call/weekend physio staff ‐ was restructured including through the hiring of 2 further permanent staff covering half the weekend work, with the other half staffed by a voluntary rota. Learning? Managers were simply unaware that compulsory overtime was not legal and once they were made aware ‐ HR endorsed the steward's finding ‐ they were very keen to resolve the issue and open to ideas and joint working with unions and staff. (Bradford NHS FT)

Collective contract imposition

Moves to impose changes to contracts on physio staff to include extended hours working patterns at a social enterprise company were rebuffed after the intervention of the steward, supported by the senior negotiating officer. The 25 odd CSP members, who had been TUPE'd across from an NHS trust in October 2015, were engaged in a collective response that rejected the imposition of the contract changes and proposed two alternatives. Meetings with managers and members were held. The upshot is that currently the changes have not been agreed. Lessons? We did not have to agree within timeframe managers had originally suggested; it is good to negotiate as a collective group of members. (Locala in Kirklees, Calderdale & Huddersfield NHS Foundation Trust)

Health and safety and wellbeing

A safety rep secured a larger changing room after it was found there were insufficient changing facilities for females. The room was very small, and there were not enough lockers, so staff bags were all on the floor, while there was no seating. A joint inspection was conducted, together with team leader, who agreed the room was inappropriate and identified another much larger room that could also be transformed into a changing room. Learning? Joint inspections work! (Calderdale and Huddersfield NHS Foundation Trust)

Protecting physiotherapy services

A steward stopped a nursing budget Trust being used to recruit physio and thereby leading to physio staff doing nursing roles. The matter, which was brought to the CSP's Annual Representative Conference, was progressed by working with the CSP organiser and securing staff side support. The result was clear job descriptions for new recruits, clear purpose of how the nursing budget will be used and good union rep ‐ management engagement. Learning? Says the steward: “How to turn something which could have caused great concern into, hopefully, a positive example of physio in the workplace.” (Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS)

East of England

Sickness absence

80 odd members benefitted from a new, less draconian and more supportive sickness absence policy. The policy change was achieved by the steward working with staff side colleagues and HR at Norfolk and Norwich Hospital. Learning? "Closely working with other unions and negotiating with HR with good working relations allowed eventually for a mutually agreed policy." (Norfolk and Norwich Hospital)

Training

Some 4‐6 part time physio staff now have access to attend in service training thanks to the intervention of the steward. She checked the existing and previous employer (staff have been transferred from the NHS) which stated that part time staff could attend pro‐rata and this was agreed. Learning? "Don't take anything on face value ‐ check the policies!" (Connect Health)

Paternity leave

One member was granted paternity leave that had originally been refused and instead asked to use annual leave for the time off. The steward checked the policy and presented it to management and the member was given unpaid paternity leave and statutory paternity pay.

Positive feedback from Members to SNOs

“Just wanted to say a huge thankyou to you for your support regarding my recent consultation. Having had my job put at risk of organisational change was an anxious time for me, but your presence at meetings and via emails allowed me to understand the process and feel that someone was helping to fight for my job.

“There has been a really positive outcome and I am so pleased that I can be slotted into a post, without having to go through an interview process. This would not have been achieved without your hard work in the job evaluation process and highlighting to the Trust that the job descriptions are a substantial match.

Thankyou once again for your support and kindness.”

‐‐

Thank you. I’m so relieved! You have been a great help thank you again for all your support it was really appreciated.

‐‐‐

Industrial Relations Committee

Reference IR(16)26 Title ARC Motions: final responses

Author Peter Finch, Assistant Director of Employment Relations Status For discussion and agreement Summary & Summary and recommendations: The following are Recommendations the draft final responses to motions allocated to ERUS from ARC 2016. These will have been considered by Council at its meeting on 21st September and a verbal update will be given on those discussions. Final responses are to be considered at the December council meeting.

Motion 1

Abolition of the Human Rights Act

Conference is concerned to note that there is a very real threat to the Human Rights Act (HRA). There is a consensus in the new government structure and wider political discussions that the HRA could be abolished in the UK. This move would force the scrapping of European laws, including the right to life, the right to a fair trial, and the right not to be enslaved or tortured. Charities such as Freedom from Torture state that this move is not the answer and is ‘intended to weaken protection of human rights’. There is an intention for the current government to replace the HRA with a British Bill of Rights which would have ‘qualified rights’ that are limited and could be overturned, such as the right to privacy.

As physiotherapists and as members of the CSP we call on conference to support the HRA and what it stands for: fairness, respect, equality, dignity and autonomy.

We ask the CSP to actively campaign along with other trade unions to raise awareness amongst the membership and the public to protect the Human Rights Act.

FINAL RESPONSE Motion 1 Abolition of the Human Rights Act Prior to the EU referendum the Conservatives had been raising the prospect of the UK withdrawing from a pan-European approach to Human Rights. We now have a new Prime Minister who had previously raised the prospect of the UK changing its attitude to Human Rights.

Peter Finch September 2016

Whilst the Prime Minister appears to have put the Human Rights Act on the back burner, there have been some key cabinet appointments of senior Tory politicians who are opposed to HRA and prefer instead a British bill of Human Rights If this does re-appear as a policy issue then:- 1. We will use our affiliation with Amnesty International in any campaigns.

2. Work with the TUC on whatever campaign they might mount.

3. CSP might consider its own specific campaign with a health and therapy focus

The CSP is a member of the Amnesty International UK Trade Union Network Committee and regularly attends meetings with Amnesty where issues of joint concern are discussed and actions proposed. West Midlands stewards

Motion 2

Hidden disabilities

The disabled members’ network recognises the excellent work being done by the CSP in relation to support for disabled members.

With the continuing reduction of National Health Service (NHS) budgets, rising caseloads, plus an increased use of technology, we are hearing more and more frequently from members who are struggling with dyslexia, autism, mental health issues and other 'hidden' disabilities.

With this in mind we would like to ask the CSP to

 prioritise the objectives in the work plan developed at the well-attended dyslexia study day held at the CSP in November 2014

 provide training, awareness raising and support for stewards, health and safety reps and the leaders and managers of physiotherapy services professional network (LAMPS) to support CSP members with 'hidden' disabilities

We understand that CSP resources are limited. The disabled members’ network has a wide range of experience and an online network with secure access via iCSP. We ask the CSP to promote the disabled members network as a source of peer support for members with hidden disabilities via Frontline, the CSP website, Twitter and Facebook.

Disabled members network

Motion 2 – A further study day, hosted by the Disabled Member’s Network, on reasonable adjustments for dyslexia was held at the CSP on 12th July and attendance

was at full capacity. Working with P&D we employed a local company to video the speakers and will be making these videos, along with the other resources from the day, available to the wider membership, including stewards, safety reps and managers via the website and the new CSP Virtual Learning Environment. These resources will be launched via an article in Frontline at the end of October 2016.

Motion 3

Trans*individuals

This conference is concerned by the increasing statistics of the murder of Trans* individuals throughout the world.

There were 226 reported murders of Trans* individuals last year, despite this minority group making up less than 1 per cent of the world population. This figure is increasing year on year (compared to 160 reported murders in 2009). There is concern that the actual figures may be even higher, but not recorded due to the mis-gendering of victims by investigators. Despite the consistent work to raise awareness surrounding Trans* individuals and the issues they may face, the figures above show that awareness of transition alone is not making enough positive change.

In recent months, two female prisoners have been found dead within their cells while in male UK prisons; there is a lot of work still to be done to protect Trans* individuals.

Every year there is an international transgender day of remembrance to remember those killed due to anti-transgender hatred or prejudice.

We therefore call upon the CSP to work wherever possible with other unions, Stonewall and the TUC to raise awareness of the significant risks to Trans* people, and to visibly support the international transgender day of remembrance.

LGBT network

FINAL RESPONSE

Motion 3 – the LGBT network submitted a motion on trans friendly workplaces to LGBT TUC in June 2016 and this was passed by the conference unanimously. Prominent trans activist Tara Hewitt attended the LGBT network meeting in May to assist us to develop our work on trans rights further. The network continues to share and circulate useful resources to support trans staff and patients from external organisations via their iCSP network and Facebook page and have developed training for stewards and managers to accompany the CSP “Physiotherapy Treatment of Transgender Patients” information paper. The network has developed a number of ideas to mark transgender day of remembrance in November and these will be publicised in due course.

EMPLOYMENT ISSUES

EMERGENCY MOTION 3

Conference may be dismayed that on the 7th March the pay review body only recommended a 1% pay increase for NHS staff. However, in Northern Ireland we were pleased that our minister actually said he would accept the recommendations in full. However even if he follows through on what he has said it will still leave NHS staff in Northern Ireland paid less than staff in the rest of the UK This is because in 2015/16 our minister refused the recommendations of the pay review body and refused to negotiate with the unions and instead enforced a pay award that was 1% non-consolidated for those at the top of the pay scale only. To date those staff eligible for the 2015/16 pay award have yet to receive it, and the acceptance of the 2016/17 recommendations does nothing to address this pay gap that now exists We urge the CSP to continue to work with other unions to highlight this issue to members and to politicians in NI who will be seeking election in May. Northern Ireland stewards and safety representatives FINAL RESPONSE The CSP wrote directly to all the North Ireland main political parties prior to the election on this issue. We also encouraged members to do likewise to the candidates in their locality and provided a template letter for them to use. The CSP continues to argue for parity in pay across the UK as part of any review of the pay structure and in evidence to the PRB for the 2017/18 pay round.

Motion 7

NHS funding

Conference is very concerned about the increasing financial crisis facing the NHS. Despite apparent annual increases in funding, NHS finances are being drastically outstripped by demand. With an ageing population and linking of NHS and social care budgets, the demand is only going to rise. The situation is unsustainable.

The NHS requires additional funding, but how this should be obtained needs to be fully discussed and debated with all options on the table. There needs to be an open and frank discussion if the NHS as a publicly funded and provided service is to continue.

Conference calls on the CSP to work together with the TUC, other unions and stakeholders to co-host an event to start the conversation on the future funding of the NHS.

National group of regional stewards

FINAL RESPONSE

Council agrees that there is a need for a widespread debate on the level of funding for health and care. The CSP continues to make a vigorous case for a national health service which is adequately funded to meet its demands and free at the point of use, including pointing out the impact on patients and services when this fails to occur.

The CSP is taking an active part in the Challenge Alliance project to make the case that a higher level of health spending is needed for social and economic success. The Alliance includes patient organisations, NHS providers, commissioners, employers, professional bodies and trade unions. The approach proposed is to raise public awareness of the low proportion of UK GDP spent on health and social care across all sectors in order to influence political and official thinking.

We also continue to work closely with other health unions to campaign including:

 TUC public sector pay campaign which includes a particular focus on NHS funding and quality care  New TUC-sponsored website on the NHS, focused on highlighting funding needs and shortfalls, due to go live autumn 2016.

Motion 8

Job vacancies becoming service losses

Conference is concerned to note that there has been anecdotal evidence from across the UK around increasing difficulty with recruiting to some posts in physiotherapy services due to a lack of applicants. This is happening within a variety of different physiotherapy specialties due to an apparent lack of available physiotherapists. Alongside the concern that there are insufficient candidates or those with the wrong skills for the job, the other more pressing issue is that if the posts have not been filled after several rounds of advertising, the posts are then being lost altogether.

This is a major concern as specialised therapy skills are lost and teams are left with below ideal staffing numbers. Funding for the posts is then lost for the future; this therefore permanently reduces the workforce in that department and limits career progression once posts are permanently lost.

Conference calls upon the CSP to

 survey the extent of removal of vacant posts in physiotherapy services across all four UK countries

 support managers with business cases to retain their highly skilled posts in their teams

West Midlands stewards

FINAL RESPONSE

The CSP is continuing to monitor the number of physiotherapy posts at all grades across the UK analysing how the proportion of physiotherapists in each grade is changing using both our own and external workforce data. The CSP has repeated its survey of physiotherapy service managers in 2016. This included questions on recruitment and retention, freezing and deletion of vacant posts and impact of staff shortages. We will continue to monitor the situation and use this information in our lobbying and campaigning on workforce planning. CSP officers in Employment Relations and Practice and Development work closely together to advice members on action to take to protect jobs and services. The CSP has developed a number of tools to assist members to demonstrate the benefits and cost effectiveness of physiotherapy, available on the CSP website. These include:

 Physiotherapy Works Programme  Workforce Data model  Physiotherapy cost calculator  Cost of Falls Calculator  CSP’s Physiotherapy Framework  Safe and effective staffing levels guidance is also being developed.

Motion 9

Down-banding

In recent years the down-banding of physiotherapists has become a significant issue within the NHS. Anecdotal evidence suggests that when clinicians leave roles they are replaced with lower banded staff, for example, if a Band 8a leaves this becomes a Band 7 role and similarly when a Band 7 leaves it becomes Band 6. However, there is little objective evidence available to demonstrate this on-going trend and issue.

We call on the CSP to

 survey NHS physiotherapy services through stewards and managers to ascertain how widespread down-banding is across the UK

 review the briefing produced by CSP Employment Relations and Union Services (ERUS) on down-banding, including an explanation of the key differences between Agenda for Change bandings, and produce an easy to understand guide to the job evaluation scheme and how jobs are banded

Welsh board

FINAL RESPONSE

The CSP has recently conducted a survey of managers which will assist in identifying particular problems on this issue. We will also look at the published workforce data across all 4 countries which shows the percentage of physiotherapy staff in each pay band. This should provide sufficient data to enable us to understand the extent of the

problem. The issue is also raised in the context of maintaining adherence to the NHS Job Evaluation Scheme.

A training package has been developed for stewards regional training days, this covers checks on job descriptions and understanding the Job Evaluation Scheme process for banding posts. ERUS is presently reviewing and updating our briefings on job descriptions and down banding these should be completed in early 2017.

Motion 18

On call compensatory rest

This conference is aware that there are a number of NHS employers who do not have adequate guidance or policy to address how to manage appropriate compensatory rest for physiotherapists post on call ‘call-outs’. This can lead to undue fatigue, stress and further potential hazards to member and patient safety.

This conference requests the CSP to review current guidance and to publish new resources to guide stewards and safety reps on how to address this issue with management teams and establish local agreements.

National group of regional safety representatives

FINAL RESPONSE

On call compensatory rest

Moved by National group of regional safety representatives

Motion 19

Sickness absence policies

Sickness absence in the health sector is being addressed nationally, highlighting the positives of the drive to reduce staff sickness. However conference is aware that this has impacted at a local level, often with organisations adopting policies that impact negatively on staff including disciplinary actions. It can be appreciated this can lead to a culture of 'presenteeism' due to fear of sanctions, staff therefore placing themselves and others at risk.

Conference requests the CSP to actively promote the merits of supportive sickness absence policies that still provide managers with the authority to ‘manage’ members with the care and compassion which is the basis of the health sector.

FINAL RESPONSE

The CSP National Health and Safety Officer, as a member of the NHS Staff Council’s health, safety and wellbeing partnership group (HSWPG) is participating in a working group that has recently convened to explore shift patterns and the health, safety and wellbeing impact this has on the NHS workforce. It is intended to produce national guidance, to be available next year emphasising the importance of partnership working and good shift design to ensure staff’s health and wellbeing is maintained.

The Officer will also review ERUS information paper on the Working Time Regulations on the back of this work to ensure key messages on maintaining safe on-call rostering and compensatory rest arrangements is incorporated as required.

At local level improving compensatory rest provisions can be pursued by members as part of the upcoming CSP campaign on stress titled Pinpoint the Pressure: Taking Control of Workloads. A new resource pack for our activists will be provided, to support members in this process. The pack contains information and templates on how to survey, collect evidence and take effective action which can improve members’ health and wellbeing in their workplace.

National group of regional safety representatives

Emergency Motion 2 Conference notes that during the Lords second reading of the Trade Union Bill on January 11, 2016, Peers declared their expectation that the bill would lead to poorer treatment of workers. Concerns were raised that the bill is likely to worsen and not improve industrial relations, due to its attacks on workers right to strike, balloting systems and payment of union subscriptions amongst other restrictions. It is believed that this bill is the impetus for some employers already beginning attacks on union representatives’ facilities time, with stewards finding it more difficult to attend training, Staff side and joint management meetings, as well as other commitments they have in their roles as CSP Stewards. This will have a detrimental effect on how CSP members’ voices will be heard, their views represented both collectively and in individual cases and ultimately have a resulting negative impact on patient care. Conference therefore calls on the CSP to:

 Assess and review the amount of facilities time CSP stewards and safety reps are currently receiving.  Examine and develop ways in which this time may be protected in the long term.  Promote the value of facilities time, and the benefit of true partnership working.

Yorkshire and Humber stewards

FINAL RESPONSE

The Trade Union Act became law in May 2016. During its passage through Parliament a number of significant concessions were achieved through trade union and other campaigning, although a range of damaging provisions do remain in the Act despite this. The original proposals to cap facility time have been favourably amended. The Government's power to impose a cap on facility time has been deferred and also involves the following of a lengthy procedure. A cap cannot be imposed for the three years after new reporting requirements come into effect. Public authorities will have an opportunity to explain their use of facility time and will also be given a minimum of 12 months to make adjustments to their use of facility time prior to the introduction of any cap.

In addition to the above, over coming months the CSP will be: • Gathering up to date information on both formal and informal facility time as it applies to CSP accredited representatives through the 2016 stewards' survey • Continuing to develop and make the positive case for trade union facility time and its major contribution to positive partnership working at local level • Reviewing CSP resources on facility time and rights to time off to undertake trade union duties • Working with the TUC and across the health unions to make a positive case for facility time • Working with the TUC to shape the plans to implements the facility time provisions in the TU Act

Motion 27

Car park costs

Conference is aware that NHS staff have been under swingeing pay restraint for several years with little prospect of a reasonable pay rise for many years to come.

Members are struggling to make ends meet and in many areas this is exacerbated by car parking costs. These costs, borne by members, are often filling the pockets of private companies and are unacceptable.

Many members need to use their car for work or their workplace is so situated as to make public transport not viable.

Conference calls on the CSP to lobby the governments to ensure NHS staff are provided with free car parking at work.

South Central stewards

FINAL RESPONSE

With the exception of a small number of locations NHS staff in Wales and Scotland are provided with free parking. The CSP raised this issue at NHS trade union leads to ascertain what support there was for a joint approach to local employers in England, it was not felt (at this stage) to be a priority for the joint unions. We will however assist members who wish to campaign on this issue at local level.

Motion 28

Disclosure and barring service (DBS)

Conference has become aware anecdotally that some NHS trusts are now passing the costs of compulsory DBS checks on to staff when securing a new job role. This practice is of significant concern, placing yet another financial burden upon members in a time when take home pay is low.

Conference requests the CSP produce a statement to raise awareness to members of this issue and to discourage employers from adopting this unfair practice.

South Central stewards

FINAL RESPONSE

The CSP recognises that the passing on of DBS costs to employees is becoming more prevalent, thus increasing the financial burden on staff already facing real term pay cuts. Current evidence suggests a mixed picture amongst those employers charging individual staff, with some seeking to pass on the costs only for new starters within the Trust, and some providing exemptions for lower band staff. The CSP will continue to support stewards and members locally to challenge employers who adopt this practice, working with other trade unions through the appropriate local partnership arrangements.

Motion 29

Travel costs

Conference is concerned that the changes to the NHS terms and conditions altering the reimbursement of business travel costs has resulted in staff subsidising the NHS.

Some staff spend a day treating patients without travelling to their designated base, incurring fewer miles than their commute would be, and therefore do not get reimbursed for using their car to visit patients. If they were working on site, they would have alternative options of getting to work e.g. sharing, cycling or public transport; but as they are required to use their car for work, they have to pay the costs.

Although community employment contracts advise that staff are required to use their car for work, it is not fair that some staff are not paid for mileage incurred at work and do not have the option of managing the cost of their commute by using other forms of transport.

Conference calls on the CSP to

 investigate the extent of this problem

 investigate whether agreements differ between trusts and countries

 make the NHS pay review body aware of this impact on staff and negotiate fairer terms or compulsory access to employer funded cars for those staff penalised by the current agreement

South East Coastal stewards

FINAL RESPONSE

Changes to the mileage arrangements were agreed and implemented in July 2013. The arrangements for the reimbursement of mileage rates including where members travel from home to first call is set out in the national terms and conditions of service (section 17). If we seek to make changes to this part of the agreement NHS employers will almost certainly seek other (likely to be detrimental) changes to this part of the handbook. The mileage rates are set by the AA and are set at a level which should ensure the allowance meets the cost of owning and running a car.

Motion 30

Pay protection

Conference believes that there is inequality in pay protection for CSP members in the NHS as this has been implemented under local agreement.

With trusts merging and contracts changing there is no fair pay protection for CSP members across the board.

The different systems used in the four countries and then within each region and trust offer a huge variety, from life-time to just a few months.

In order to support members whose trusts merge, whose jobs come under threat or who are subject to organisational change, we call upon the CSP to

 scope out what protection is offered and where, and share these results with members

 use this information where possible to support members who wish to campaign locally against changes to pay protection

South East Coastal stewards

FINAL RESPONSE

This is not something covered by any national agreement and employers have resisted any attempt to agree, at a national level, something they insist is an issue requiring a local approach. Where problems arise the CSP will work with stewards and members and other staff side unions to support local campaigns and achieve a consistent approach to these issues.

Emergency Motion 4

Conference is deeply concerned about the Government’s decision to impose a new contract on the Junior Doctors in the NHS in England. Conference firmly believes that proper negotiation is the most appropriate method of making changes to workers’ terms and conditions. Conference feels this sets an alarming precedent for future negotiations in the NHS, particularly in relation to the roll out of 7 day working. Conference welcomes the CSP Chief Executive’s statement on the issue released on 11th February, and calls on the CSP to consider the impact of this imposition and continue to work with other unions to lobby Government at the highest level to

 emphasise the importance of positive partnership working between NHS staff and Employers,  reiterate the clear link between quality employment and quality patient care, and  that any changes to make the NHS a true 7-day service should be fully funded. National group of regional stewards

FINAL RESPONSE

The CSP continues to restate the points regarding the provision of 7 day services and the link between quality employment and patient care. In our statements we have also made clear our opposition to the imposition of changes to existing contracts of employment for any NHS staff. We have emphasised the importance of partnership working through our activity in the NHS Staff Council and Social Partnership Forum and in meetings with Government Ministers and officials.

Motion 31

Bank work

Conference notes that bank work is common in the NHS. However, CSP members are not being treated equitably regarding whether continuous bank work is acknowledged

as reckonable NHS service. Where this is not seen as reckonable service, CSP members are not earning the benefits that should come with this service within the NHS, once a substantive post is secured.

The evidence for this is anecdotal and patchy, and with the NHS struggling to make savings, employing staff on bank contracts will remain appealing to employers. We need to understand the extent of the issue, how many members are employed on bank contracts, who is affected by this, and what long term effect this has on them. Reckonable service has an impact on annual leave and on redundancy payments, which could be crucial to members in the future.

Conference calls upon the CSP to undertake a scoping exercise into current policy variations amongst NHS trusts in England in acknowledging bank work as reckonable service.

If this shows to be a particular problem, the CSP should

 support members to campaign locally to have bank work considered as reckonable service, and/or

 start a national campaign to gain these rights for all CSP members

National group of regional stewards

FINAL RESPONSE

Where problems arise the CSP will work with stewards and members and other staff side unions to support local campaigns and achieve a consistent approach to these issues.

Peter Finch Assistant Director

Industrial Relations Committee

reference IR(16)29

title Review of ERUS donations and affiliations

author Claire Sullivan, ERUS Director

status For information, noting or decision (delete as appropriate) summary & The paper and attachments are to assist recommendations committee members to prepare for a workshop at the IRC meeting. At the meeting members will work in groups to review all the current ERUS donations and affiliations to external organisations and make recommendations for the future. Committee members are also invited to bring ideas for new donations or affiliations.

Introduction

The CSP, through ERUS and the IR Committee, has a long history of supporting a range of external organisations, either through ongoing or annually renewed affiliations or by way of one-off donations.

Committee members decided earlier this year that we should use the October meeting to review all our current donations and affiliations, along with the criteria currently in place for assessing requests.

Background to current affiliations

Both the affiliations and the donations originate in a variety of ways, some following motions put to annual reps conference, some from requests by members and others by direct approaches from the organisations themselves.

The organisations supported also vary widely in terms of type and scope. They include:

• Single issue campaigns, such as Baby Milk Action and the Child Poverty Action Group

C Sullivan 03/10/16

• Wider campaigning organisations, including Amnesty International and War on Want

• Solidarity affiliations, including Justice for Columbia and the Greece Solidarity Campaign

• Policy organisations and 'think tanks', including Unions 21 and the Institute of Employment Rights

• Donations to annual single events, including the Tolpuddle Martyrs Festival and the Hazards Conference

The total budget allocated to these affiliations is modest at £5,000 per annum. This has remained broadly the same in recent years while the CSP has been maintaining a steady state budget, reflecting the largely static current income of CSP members.

Criteria used to assess requests for donations or affiliations

The following criteria were agreed by IR Committee in October 2010 in order to make decision-making in this area more consistent and more transparent.

a. Relevance

Is the request relevant to existing CSP policy or the CSP’s history of supporting campaigning organisations relating to employment rights or equality and social justice issues, whether in the UK or internationally?

b. Existing Arrangements

Is this a new appeal or area of work, or does the CSP already fund/contribute to a campaigning organisation or cause that is very similar?

c. Credibility

Does the campaigning organisation or cause have backing from bodies such as the TUC or from ERUS officer or member representatives who have had contact with it and who can provide sufficient information to be able to make an informed decision?

d. ERUS Budget

Is the cost containable within the annual budget for affiliations and donations?

In 2010 it was also agreed that requests should be agreed by the full IRC whenever practicable to wait until a forthcoming meeting. If this isn't practicable requests are considered by the Chair and Vice-Chair of IRC, on advice from the ERUS Director. This latter is much more often used for very modest one-off donations than for new ongoing affiliations.

Exclusions

The single largest affiliation by far is that to the UK TUCs. Affiliations fees are made annually to the Trades Union Congress (TUC covering England and Wales), Scottish TUC (STUC) and Northern Ireland Committee of the Irish Confederation of Trade Unions (NIC-ICTU). These affiliations were agreed by an all-member ballot in the 1990s and the TUCs are outside the scope of this affiliations review.

Groupwork

Committee members will be asked to work in small groups to discuss:

• Are the criteria currently used to assess donations right? Should they be amended or updated? If so, outline the changes proposed make a case for them to the rest of the committee.

• Is it appropriate to continue, as is the case currently, to consider requests from a variety of different sources, e.g. ARC, members

• Is it appropriate to spread the limited budget between a significant number of organisations or should larger donations be made to a smaller number?

• Should donations be spread amongst various types of organisations or limited to one type e.g. solidarity organisations?

• Should we consider new organisations in similar areas to those currently supported e.g. Country-based solidarity campaigns; anti-racist or anti-fascist organisations?

• Should we continue to support the same organisation/s for long periods of time or set a time limit to allow the limited budget to be shared around a greater number of organisations?

Groups will then be asked to look in more detail at 3-4 of the organisations we currently donate or affiliate to, review them and make a recommendation as to whether we should continue to support them. The relevant information will be provided at the time.

Attachments

1. Criteria used for assessing donations - 2010

2. List of current affiliations and the lead CSP officers for each one plus lead members where we have them

3. Most recent summary paper to IRC for all donations and affiliations - covering 2015

C Sullivan ERUS Director

3 Action for South Africa (ACTSA) Lloyd Bowen

Amnesty International Andy Ballard

Baby Milk Action Lloyd Bowen

Because I am a Girl (Plan UK) Claire Ronald

Burma Campaign UK Jess Belmonte

Campaign for Trade Union Freedom TBC

Child Poverty Action Group Lloyd Bowen

Cuba Solidarity Louise Walker

Greece Solidarity Campaign Rachel Newton

Hazards Donna Steele

Institute of Employment Rights Ian Taylor

Justice for Columbia Jim Fahie

Liberty Penny Bromley

Maternity Action Kate Moran

National Assembly for Women Kate Moran

National Pensioners Convention Neil Lark

Stonewall Jess Belmonte

Tolpuddle Martyrs Festival Andy Ballard

Trade Union Disability Alliance Jess Belmonte

Unite Against Fascism Saraka Keating

War on Want Patt Taylor IRC criteria for making decisions on affiliations and donations (2010)

At the October meeting members asked for information about the criteria used to decide whether the CSP should make a donation or affiliate to an organisation and whether decisions are made by the Chair and Vice Chair or the whole committee.

In 2005 the IR Committee agreed the following approach to the approval of one off donations which are repeated below for information. a. Wherever practical, the decision on whether to make a donation will be put to the next scheduled IRC meeting. b. Where the request is an urgent one, the decision will be taken by the Chair and Vice Chair of the IRC with a report given to the next IRC meeting.

Following the October discussions, the Director of ERUS has worked with the Chair and Vice Chair to develop draft criteria for making future decisions on affiliations and donations.

IRC members are asked to discuss and endorse the following proposed criteria: a. Relevance Is the request relevant to existing CSP policy or the CSP’s history of supporting campaigning organisations relating to employment rights or equality and social justice issues, whether in the UK or internationally? b. Existing Arrangements Is this a new appeal or area of work, or does the CSP already fund/ contribute to a campaigning organisation or cause that is very similar? c. Credibility Does the campaigning organisation or cause have backing from bodies such as the TUC or from ERUS officer or member representatives who have had contact with it and who can provide sufficient information to be able to make an informed decision? d. ERUS Budget Is the cost containable within the annual budget for affiliations and donations?

Industrial Relations Committee

reference IR(16)07

title Donations and affiliations

author Lloyd Bowen status For discussion summary & A summary of the external organisations (non TUC recommendations related) and campaigns that ERUS supported during 2015.

IRC members are requested to: 1. note the report and consider if they would like to volunteer to be a liaison between any of the groups and the CSP. 2. Specifically referring to the Greece Solidarity Campaign:  if there is an ability to help source equipment for the Piraeus Solidarity clinic?  If so how does the IRC recommend we do this?  To decide if the IRC want to seek a volunteer to be a link/liaison to help to drive this work forward.

1. Organisations the CSP supported during 2015

Below is a list of the organisations that the CSP, via ERUS, supported during 2015. I have included a brief description of the rationale for each group.

Ongoing annual support.

The organisation’s listed below we support on an annual and ongoing basis.

Agreement to support these organisation’s was made by previous IRC members in previous years.

Action for Southern Africa (ACTSA) ACTSA is a membership organisation campaigning with the people of Southern Africa for justice, democracy and development in the region. www.actsa.org

L Bowen 03/02/16

Amnesty International Amnesty International is the foremost campaigning organisation in the field of human rights. It campaigns both for individual victims of human rights abuses and on broad human rights issues such as violence against women. www.amnesty.org.uk

Baby Milk Action The primary aim of this very small campaigning organisation is to stop misleading advertising of breast milk substitutes by companies -such as Nestle- which targets women in the third world. www.babymilkaction.org

Because I am a Girl (Plan UK) Because I am a Girl is a campaign that aims to transform the lives of the world's poorest girls. www.plan-uk.org

Burma Campaign UK Burma Campaign UK campaigns to stop human rights abuses in Burma, which include forced labour and using ordinary citizens as human minesweepers. www.burmacampaign.org.uk

Campaign for Trade Union Freedom The Campaign for Trade Union Freedom was established in 2013 following a merger of the Liaison Committee for the Defence of Trade Unions and the United Campaignt to Repeal the Anti Trade Union Laws. The CTUF is a campaigning organisation fighting to defend and enhance trade unionism, oppose all anti-union laws as well as promoting and defending collective bargaining across UK, Europe and the World. www.tradeunionfreedom.co.uk/

Child Poverty Action Group The goal of the CAPG Poverty is to eradicate child poverty in the UK. Although in the last decade the number of children living in poverty has reduced, progress has not been fast enough for us to reach the goal of ending child poverty by 2020 that all the main political parties signed up to in the Child Poverty Act. www.cpag.org.uk

Cuba Solidarity The purpose of Cuba Solidarity is to raise awareness of the situation in Cuba and promote respect for its sovereignty and independence. www.cuba-solidarity.org.uk

Greece Solidarity Campaign The Greece Solidarity Campaign (GSC) is an independent campaign and non-party political organisation, established in response to an appeal by Tony Benn in February 2012 for solidarity with the people resisting ‘austerity’ in Greece. www.greecesolidarity.org

Hazards Campaigns to improve conditions for workers across all industries. Hazards are supported almost entirely by donations. www.hazardscampaign.org.uk

Institute of Employment Rights The IER is funded by trade unions and individual donations. Its aim is to provide a wide variety of high quality publications to stimulate debate and analysis about employment law policies and legal developments in industrial relations. www.ier.org.uk

Justice for Colombia Justice for Colombia (JFC) is a British Non Governmental Organisation that campaigns for human rights, workers' rights and the search for peace with social justice in Colombia. Established in 2002 by a group of British trade unionists, JFC was created in response to the appalling human rights crisis in Colombia - and particularly the abuses committed against trade unionists. In that year alone, 184 trade unionists were assassinated and Colombia remains the most dangerous place in the world to be a trade unionist. www.justiceforcolombia.org

Liberty Liberty campaigns to protect basic rights and freedoms through the courts, in Parliament and in the wider community. We do this through a combination of public campaigning, test case litigation, parliamentary lobbying, policy analysis and the provision of free advice and information. www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk

Maternity Action Maternity Action works to end inequality and promote the health and well-being of all pregnant women, their partners and children from before conception through to the child's early years. www.maternityaction.org.uk

National Assembly for Women The National Assembly of Women was founded in 1952 to work for full social, economic, legal, political and cultural independence, equality for women irrespective of age, race, religion, philosophical belief, sexual orientation or nationality. www.sisters.org.uk/

National Pensioners Convention The National Pensioners' Convention campaigns and lobbies on the issue of pensioner poverty. www.npcuk.org

Stonewall Stonewall was formed to put the case for equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people on the mainstream political agenda. Stonewall provides research into discrimination in the workplace, homophobia including bullying in schools. www.stonewall.org.uk

Tolpuddle Martyrs festival The Tolpuddle Festival is the annual event commemorating one of the formative events in the historic struggle for trade union rights in Britain. Consisting of a summer youth academy for young trade unionists from the UK and abroad, a rally, theatre and music the event is regularly attended by CSP members. The CSP send a donation each year towards the costs of the festival. www.tolpuddlemartyrs.org.uk

Trade Union Disability Alliance TUDA is an organisation of disabled trade union members. It aims to bridge the gap between the trade unions and disability movements and lobbies to ensure trade unions make their services accessible to members. www.tuda.org.uk

TUC Pride A donation toward the TUC LGBT conference to help promote networking opportunities for delegates and towards the Pride fund.

TUC Black Workers conference Donation made towards the chosen appeal for the 2015 conference.

Unite Against Fascism Unite Against Fascism is a new national campaign with the aim of alerting British society to the rising threat of the extreme right gaining an electoral foothold in this country, in particular the British National Party (BNP). http://uaf.org.uk/

War on Want War on Want is a trade union supported development organisation fighting poverty in developing countries. www.waronwant.org

Finance and liaison information

The table below lists the organisations by name, the annual contribution (or affiliation) cost, CSP officer liaison officer and, where known, the IRC member liaison.

Organisation / Annual CSP officer liaison IRC member liaison campaign contribution Action for Southern £200 Lloyd Bowen Barbara Verrall Africa (ACTSA) Amnesty £120 Andy Ballard TBC International Baby Milk £50 Lloyd Bowen Kim Gainsborough Action Because I am a Girl £50 Claire Ronald Julia Prince (Plan UK) Burma Campaign £200 Jess Belmonte TBC UK Child Poverty Action £100 Lloyd Bowen TBC Group Campaign for Trade £150 TBC Union Freedom Cuba £100 Louise Walker TBC Solidarity Greece Solidarity £100 Rachel Newton TBC Campaign Hazards £100 Donna Steele N/A

Institute of £100 Ian Taylor TBC Employment Rights Justice for £150 Jim Fahie Alex MacKenzie Colombia 4

Liberty £431 Penny Bromley TBC

Maternity £120 Kate Moran TBC Action National Assembly £60 Kate Moran TBC for Women National Pensioners £150 Ian Taylor TBC Convention Stonewall £100 Jess Belmonte Michael Pearson

Tolpuddle Martyrs £100 Andy Ballard TBC festival Trade Union £100 Jess Belmonte TBC Disability Alliance TUC Pride £100 Jess Belmonte N/A

TUC Black Workers £50 N/A N/A conference Unite Against £200 Saraka Keating Jill Barker Fascism War on Want £250 Patt Taylor Kim Gainsborough

One off donations and offers of support

The organisations below received a small donation of support from the CSP. These were agreed with the Chair and Vice-Chair of the IRC.

Mary Qualie club £75 donation towards the costs of a play about Mary Qualie (1886 – 1958). Mary was a major figure in the TU movement in the first half of the 20th century. The play was a way of making her life and work better known to people.

North West TUC £100 donation towards the anti TU bill in the North West campaign

Robin Hood Tax Campaign £200 donation towards the operations of the campaign. The RHTC seeks to establish a Robin Hood Tax which would be a tiny tax on the financial sector that could generate billions of pounds annually to fight poverty and climate change at home and abroad.

TUC Disabled workers committee £50 donation towards the conference to help promote awareness and share networking opportunities.

Recommendation: IRC members are asked to note the above and, if interested, volunteer to be a liaison between any of the groups and the CSP.

2. Greece solidarity campaign

In 2015 ARC carried a motion on the health service in Greece. Two specific actions were requested. That the CSP affiliate to the Greece Solidarity campaign and that we set up links with physiotherapists in Greece to offer what support we can.

Affiliation was sorted and has been renewed but the second point has been harder to action. In May we e-mailed the Greece solidarity campaign to ask if they could help us set up links but received no reply.

However this year when they e-mailed about re-affiliating they also said that they were urging affiliates to consider formal links with solidarity clinics and similar community and trade union bodies in Greece and said they could help facilitate this.

We replied saying that we would like to make stronger links to Physiotherapist in Greece. In their reply they say

‘We are pleased that the CSP would like to explore making stronger links to physiotherapists in Greece and also seeing what support CSP members may be able to give more directly. In Greece the trade unions are organised in a different structure to the UK. We do however have many contacts in the health sector, unions and the social solidarity clinics which are staffed by volunteer medical staff including physiotherapists, so we will investigate and get back to you about possible links for CSP.

As you know 3.3 million people do not have access to health care and thus a network of solidarity clinics and pharmacies has been set up across the country which provide free health care and free medication.

There is a new exciting development which I learnt about when I visited Athens taking funds in November. The Piraeus Solidarity Project is developing a new Therapy Centre which they are establishing in a building which they have renovated. They discussed with me what equipment they will need - including physiotherapy equipment and they will be sending me details in the near future. I wondered if CSP members would be interested in helping source what is needed - the volunteers at the Piraeus Solidarity Centre stressed that second hand equipment would be fine. There may be opportunities for voluntary placements in Athens too. I will let you know of developments. In the meantime, is this something CSP could explore with members?’

Recommendation: 1. The IR committee is asked to decide if there is an ability to help source equipment for the Piraeus Solidarity clinic?

If so how does the IRC recommend we do this?

2. To decide if the IRC want to seek a volunteer to be a link/liaison to help to drive this work forward.

L Bowen

02/02/16

Industrial Relations Committee

reference IR(16)27

title STPs (England) author Elaine Sparkes status For information and discussion. summary & STPs are five year plans covering all areas of NHS recommendations spending across England. IRC are asked to consider and discuss the implications and identify any actions in response to these plans.

Background

The sustainability and transformation plans are currently being developed across the NHS in England with final plans due during October this year. There are 44 STP areas identified, each with a designated lead across the organisations within the geographical ‘footprint’.

The STPs have the potential to change the current ways of working and have implications for staff working across organisations. However, engagement with staff and Trade Unions is complex as there are no clear partnership arrangements within STP areas.

The following information is enclosed to assist in the discussion around this developing area:

 Sustainability and Transformation Plans Explained (Kings Fund article)  A list of STPs and leaders  National guidance on developing partnership working arrangements

Elaine Sparkes

Assistant Director

Elaine Sparkes: October 2016

Guidance for social partnership working in developing and implementing new care models and system transformation

The Social Partnership Forum (SPF) and the NHS Five Year Forward View, New Care Models Programme Team have agreed the following guidance for partnership working with trade unions to support the development and implementation of new care models and other forms of system transformation. Social partnership is employers involving staff, along with their trade union representatives, in decisions that impact on them. It is built on shared principles of trust and mutual respect; openness and honesty in communications, and a positive and constructive approach based on shared goals and aspirations. Academic evidence shows that good staff engagement, such as the partnership approach, can deliver better patient outcomes, as well as improve overall organisational performance. Social partnership can also help system transformation be successful. The move to more integrated care may require the development of new partnership mechanisms to support change beyond organisation boundaries. This guidance is primarily to help you ensure that appropriate partnership arrangements are in place at cross organisational/new care model and regional level to facilitate system change. It also updates on how the national SPF will support this agenda.

Partnership working can support system transformation Employers working in partnership with staff and their representatives is embedded in the NHS Constitution because it is the best way to effect change. The NHS Constitution requires all providers supplying NHS services and local authorities in the exercise of their public health functions, to commit to 'engage staff in decisions that affect them and the services they provide, individually, through representative organisations and through local partnership working arrangements.’

System partnership working The 2016 national SPF Partnership Agreement sets out a framework agreed by the Department of Health, NHS Employers, NHS Trade Unions, NHS England, NHS Improvement and Health Education England, which describes partners’ shared values and principles for effective joint working. This focus on joint working at a national level is particularly important in light of the NHS Five Year Forward View and moves to greater integration and devolution. The national SPF encourages, where appropriate, a cross sector partnership approach at all levels in the health and care system, in the development and implementation of new care models. At a Sustainability and Transformation Plan (STP) and new care model level, the health and care system could include: NHS providers, community providers, primary care providers, private providers, social enterprises, charities, the voluntary sector, local government and commissioners.

Common partnership principles for all levels in the health and care system:  Staff and their trade unions are involved in the development and implementation of system transformation that impacts on them.  Messages related to system change are clear and transparent and partners have a role in developing them.  Guidance and procedures, relating to how system changes impact on staff, continue to ensure transparency, equitability, fairness and equal treatment of staff.  Wherever possible organisations work together to manage the impact of organisational change on staff.

For more information on the SPF see our website: www.socialpartnershipforum.org

How the national SPF will support system transformation The national SPF working with the arm’s length bodies will:  Contribute to the development and implementation of policy on system transformation.  Work together to resolve challenges, related to new ways of working that can only be addressed at a national level.  Identify and promote good practice examples of successful partnership working in developing and implementing new care models.  Where required, produce joint national guidance and/or model policies.

The role of regional SPFs Regional SPFs can provide assurance that appropriate partnership working with trade unions is in place where system transformation within that region is proposed or already underway. They can:  Link with the STP footprints in their region, either with representatives from the STPs or organisational leads responsible for implementing change, to get an understanding of planned system change within the STP and how and when trade unions should be involved.  Ensure meaningful consultation and engagement is taking place about transformation plans and promote openness, honesty and transparency in communications.  Engage with the Local Workforce Action Boards, or other groups responsible for developing STP workforce plans, through a mechanism agreed in the regional SPF, to establish the workforce issues within each STP and how trade unions can contribute solutions to issues.  Put in place mechanisms to enable liaison with new care models within their region, so members of the regional SPF can assure themselves that trade unions are being involved at the organisational/new care model level.  Encourage the use of the regional Memoranda of Understanding in minimising the impact of organisational change on staff.  Identify and publicise good practice within new care models so the learning can be shared.  Consider widening membership to be more reflective of the health and care system (for example, representatives from local authorities, non-NHS providers or arm’s length bodies).

Partnership arrangements at cross organisational / new care model level Employers will be better able to introduce system change if they:  Agree collectively how early and on-going effective engagement with employees and trade unions will be carried out.  Involve employees, and their representatives, in decisions that affect them and the services they provide to enable effective and sustainable change.  Make sure staff and trade unions are kept fully informed on the strategy; the objectives and the likely impact on staff of planned system transformation.  Support staff during the system change, keeping them and their representatives updated on progress and giving them the opportunity to influence the change process on an ongoing basis.  Consider cross organisation partnership arrangements, where required, recognising the limitations of these forum as compared to organisational negotiating committees.  Agree with trade unions appropriate project time for union reps engaged in system transformation projects, in particular for union stewards representing staff who are affected by restructuring, relocation, redeployment, new roles, new technology or role changes.

For more information on the SPF see our website: www.socialpartnershipforum.org

 Work with trade unions on planning and delivering staff engagement activities such as roadshows, surveys and focus groups.  Promote transparency, equitability and fairness in all transfer, selection and appointment processes and ensure the consistent treatment of employees at all levels.  To participate in the regional Memoranda of Understanding to minimise the impact of organisational change on staff

Trade unions will be better able to influence system change for the benefit of staff and patient care, if they:  Seek to organise their representation to better streamline their involvement in system transformation. This could mean closer working between trade unions with some unions taking the lead role in a new care model, STP, LWAB or other groups responsible for developing STP workforce plans, and co-ordinating responses from all staff side constituents.  Get involved at an early stage in the development of system change so that a staff voice can be fed into the development of plans before they are fully formed.

September 2016

For more information on the SPF see our website: www.socialpartnershipforum.org STP Footprints North

Footprint STP footprint lead

Northumberland, Tyne and Mark Adams (Chief Officer, Newcastle Gateshead Wear CCG)

West, North and East Stephen Eames (Chief Executive, North Cumbria Cumbria University Hospitals NHS Trust)

Durham, Darlington and Alan Foster (Chief Executive, North Tees and Tees, Hambleton, Hartlepool NHS Foundation Trust) Richmondshire and Whitby

Lancashire and South Dr Amanda Doyle OBE (Chief Clinical Officer, Cumbria Blackpool CCG)

Rob Webster (Chief Executive designate, South West West Yorkshire Yorkshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust)

Coast, Humber and Vale TBC

Sir Howard Bernstein (Chief Executive, Manchester Greater Manchester City Council)

Louise Shepherd (Chief Executive, Alder Hey Cheshire and Merseyside Children’s NHS Foundation Trust)

South Yorkshire and Sir Andrew Cash OBE (Chief Executive, Sheffield Bassetlaw Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust) South

Glenn Douglas (Chief Executive, Maidstone and Kent & Medway Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust)

Michael Wilson (Chief Executive, Surrey and Sussex Sussex and East Surrey Healthcare NHS Trust)

Sir Andrew Morris (Chief Executive, Frimley Health Frimley Health NHS Foundation Trust)

Surrey Heartlands Julia Ross (Chief Executive, North West Surrey CCG)

Cornwall and the Isles of TBC Scilly

Angela Pedder OBE (Chief Executive, Royal Devon Devon and Exeter NHS Foundation Trust)

Somerset Dr Matthew Dolman (Chair, Somerset CCG)

Bristol, North Somerset, Robert Woolley (Chief Executive, University Hospitals South Gloucestershire Bristol NHS Foundation Trust)

James Scott (Chief Executive, Royal United Hospitals Bath, Swindon and Wiltshire Bath NHS Foundation Trust)

Dorset Tim Goodson (Chief Officer, Dorset CCG)

Hampshire and the Isle of Richard Samuel (Chief Officer, Fareham and Gosport Wight CCG, South Eastern Hampshire CCG) Mary Hutton (Accountable Officer, Gloucestershire Gloucestershire CCG)

Buckinghamshire, Oxfordshire and Berkshire David Smith (Chief Executive, Oxfordshire CCG) West

Midlands and East

John MacDonald (Chair, University Hospitals North Staffordshire Midlands NHS Trust)

Shropshire and Telford and Simon Wright (Chief Executive, Shrewsbury and Wrekin Telford Hospital NHS Trust)

Gary Thompson (Chief Officer, Southern Derbyshire Derbyshire CCG)

Allan Kitt (Chief Officer, South West Lincolnshire Lincolnshire CCG)

David Pearson (Director, Adult Social Care, Nottinghamshire Nottinghamshire County Council)

Leicester, Leicestershire Toby Sanders (Accountable Officer, West and Rutland Leicestershire CCG)

Andy Williams (Accountable Officer, Sandwell West The Black Country Birmingham CCG) Mark Rogers (Chief Executive, Birmingham City Birmingham and Solihull Council)

Andy Hardy (Chief Executive, University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust)

Herefordshire and Sarah Dugan (Chief Executive, Worcestershire Health Worcestershire and Care NHS Trust)

Northamptonshire John Wardell (Accountable Officer, Nene CCG)

Cambridgeshire and Dr Neil Modha (Chief Clinical Officer, Cambridgeshire Peterborough and Peterborough CCG)

Norfolk and Waveney TBC

Suffolk and North East Nick Hulme (Chief Executive, Ipswich Hospital NHS Essex Trust)

Milton Keynes, Pauline Philip (Chief Executive, Luton & Dunstable Bedfordshire and Luton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust)

Hertfordshire and West Beverley Flowers (Accountable Officer, East and Essex North Hertfordshire CCG)

Dr Anita Donley (Independent Chair for Mid and South Essex Success Regime from 1st April) Mid and South Essex

London

North West London Dr Mohini Parmar (Chair, Ealing CCG)

David Sloman (Chief Executive, Royal Free London North Central London NHS Foundation Trust)

North East London Jane Milligan (Chief Officer, Tower Hamlets CCG)

Amanda Pritchard (Chief Executive, Guy’s and St South East London Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust)

South West London Kathryn Magson (Chief Officer, Richmond CCG)

We use cookies to help give you the best experience on our website. By continuing without changing your cookie settings, we assume you agree to this. Please read our cookie policy to find out more.

DISMISS

Enter search term Search

Sustainability and transformation plans (STPs) explained

Page updated 24 August 2016

Sustainability and transformation plans (STPs) were announced in the NHS planning guidance published in December 2015. NHS organisations in different parts of the country have been asked to come together to develop ‘place-based plans’ for the future of health and care services in their area. Draft plans were submitted in June 2016, and final plans are expected to be completed in October. But what do STPs really mean? And what will they mean for the NHS?

What are STPs?

STPs are five-year plans covering all areas of NHS spending in England. A total of 44 areas have been identified as the geographical ‘footprints’ on which the plans will be based, with an average population size of 1.2 million people (the smallest area covers a population size of 300,000 and the largest 2.8 million). A named individual has been chosen to lead the development of each STP. Most come from clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) and NHS trusts and foundation trusts, but a small number of STP leaders come from local government.

The proposed scope of STPs is broad. Initial guidance from NHS England and other national bodies set out around 60 questions for local leaders to consider in their plans, covering three headline areas: improving quality and developing new models of care; improving health and wellbeing; and improving efficiency of services. Leaders have been asked to identify the key priorities for their local area to meet these challenges and deliver financial balance. While the guidance focuses mainly on NHS services, STPs must also cover better integration with local authority services.

The timelines for developing STPs and the process for approving them have been somewhat fluid. The original deadline for submitting plans to NHS England and other national bodies was the end of June 2016, but most plans will now be further developed and re-submitted by October. The plans are likely to be assessed and approved in phases, depending on their quality. From April 2017, STPs will become the single application and approval process for accessing NHS transformation funding, with the best plans set to receive funds more quickly.

What do they mean for the NHS?

STPs represent a shift in the way that the NHS in England plans its services. While the Health and Social Care Act 2012 sought to strengthen the role of competition within the health system, NHS organisations are now being told to collaborate rather than compete to respond to the challenges facing their local services. This new approach is being referred to as place-based planning.

This shift reflects a growing consensus within the NHS that more integrated models of care are required to meet the changing needs of the population. In practice, this means different parts of the NHS and social care system working together to provide more co-ordinated services to patients – for example, by GPs working more closely with hospital specialists, district nurses and social workers to improve care for people with long-term conditions.

It also recognises that the growing financial problems in different parts of the NHS can’t be addressed in isolation. Instead, providers and commissioners are being asked to come together to manage the collective resources available for NHS services for their local population. In some cases this may lead to ‘system control totals’ – in other words, financial targets – being applied to local areas by NHS England and NHS Improvement.

This all represents a very new way of working for the NHS. At The King’s Fund we’ve argued that taking a place-based approach to planning and delivering health and social care services is the right thing to do. This should also include collaboration with other services and sectors beyond the NHS to focus on the broader aim of improving population health and wellbeing – not just on delivering better quality and more sustainable health care services. But developing STPs is not a simple task. STP footprints are often large and involve many different organisations, each with their own cultures and priorities. Finding time to work on STPs can be a challenge in itself, given the severe service and financial pressures facing NHS organisations. The timescales set by NHS England to write STPs are also tight.

Perhaps the biggest challenge facing leaders is that STPs are being developed in an NHS environment that was not designed to support collaboration between organisations. Leaders of NHS providers, for instance, find themselves under significant pressure from regulators to improve organisational performance. This means focusing primarily on their own services and finances rather than working with others for the greater good of the local population.

In this context, incentives for NHS providers to work together can be weak. The very real danger is that organisations take a ‘fortress mentality’ instead, acting to secure their own future regardless of the impact on others. The dissonance between place-based planning and the continuing focus on organisational performance in the NHS is therefore stark.

Will they deliver benefits for local populations?

We won’t know the potential benefits of STPs until the plans are finalised later in the year. The ultimate prize on offer is the opportunity to integrate health and social care services more closely and to provide a platform for improving population health. Whether or not these ambitions can be delivered is yet to be seen. This first depends on what gets written in the plans, and then – more importantly – on whether their aims can actually be delivered in practice.

There are some reasons to be cautious about the kind of benefits that will be delivered. For example, concerns have been raised that leaders have focused their efforts on plans for reconfiguring acute hospital services, despite evidence that major acute reconfigurations rarely save money and can fail to improve quality too (and in some cases even reduce it).

Where next?

STPs could provide a foundation for a new way of planning and providing health services based around the needs of local populations. While STPs are primarily being led by the NHS, developing credible plans will require the NHS to work in partnership with social care, public health and other local government services, as well as third sector organisations and the local community. There has been limited time for public involvement in the plans so far, so leaders must ensure that local people are actively involved in the planning process as STPs develop.

The task of developing a plan may be challenging for some areas; making it happen will be altogether more difficult. Changes to incentives and performance management in the NHS may be needed to overcome the barriers that get in the way.

Find out more

The King’s Fund is carrying out research to track the development of STPs in four parts of the country. Its purpose is to understand how STPs are being developed and what lessons can be learnt for local areas and national policy-makers.

For more information, please contact Hugh Alderwick, Senior Policy Adviser to Chris Ham: [email protected]

Sustainability and transformation plans: related content Upcoming event on STPs from planning to implementation Find out more about our work on system leadership and our programme on building collaborative leadership.

Related publications:

Place-based systems of care A way forward for the NHS in England

Population health systems Going beyond integrated care What the planning guidance means for the NHS 2016/17 and beyond

Sustainability and transformation plans

Tracking the development of sustainability and transformation plans in England

Accountable care organisations (ACOs) explained

Related events:

Sustainability and transformation plans (STPs) From planning to implementation – London event 17 Nov 2016

Sustainability and transformation plans (STPs) From planning to implementation – Leeds event 1 Dec 2016

To top

Don't miss out

Twitter

Facebook

Youtube

Industrial Relations Committee

reference IR(16)20 date Wed 15/06/16 time 10:00 – 17:00 venue CiARB status To be agreed at next meeting of the IRC.

present Jill Barker Fiona MacKeller Keith Finn Alex MacKenzie Kim Gainsborough Chris Manning Phillip Hulse Jim Phelan Eirian Jones Katie Wilkie Becca Knowles Alex Zavallis-Roebuck

Staff Jess Belmonte (part of meeting) Lloyd Bowen Karen O’Dowd Julie Collins Claire Ronald Kevin Dale Elaine Sparkes Annette Fernandes (part of meeting) Claire Sullivan (part of meeting) Peter Finch Ian Taylor Ruth Jones Rob Ledger (part of meeting) Kate Moran (part of meeting)

apologies Claire Arditto Michael Pearson Nikki Clarke Catherine Pope Catherine Elliman Pamela Simpson Stephanie Heasley Barbara Verrall Alex Hejazi Louise Wright

Chairs opening remarks The chair welcomed everyone to the second meeting of and welcome the 2016 IRC cycle. 2 new members joined the committee: Alex Zavallis- Roebuck (student member) and, following the

J:\IR\8. IR committee\IRC 2016\Oct 16\IR(16)20 Industrial Relations Committee minutes 150616 v3 final.docx 1 of 10

resignation of Alex Hajazi, Becca Knowles has taken on the role of Newly Qualified Rep.

Notification of declarations There were none of interest or potential interest

Apologies for absence These were read out.

Verbal Staffing Update It was reported that, since the last meeting of the IRC, report Ruth Jones (SNO) and Annette Fernandes (Data management officer) had joined ERUS as new members of staff.

Shane Walsh (Admin Officer) has returned to ERUS after a temp role and Hanna Smith (PA to Director) has left the CSP and her role is being covered temporarily by Julie Maxted.

Julie Collins has taken over as one of the Scottish SNO’s and retains some of the Northern area of England. Verbal Scene setting: external Peter Finch updated the committee on recent external report developments since the last developments across the UK and more widely, IRC meeting including economic and political developments .

The committee noted that Katie Wilkie had offered to write to Frontline to highlight the positive changes achieved by the CSP and wider TU movement on the TU Bill which received royal assent on the 4th May 2016.

Action: Katie Wilkie to write to Frontline on the positive changes made to the TU Bill as a result of campaigning by TU members and others. IR(16)19 Equalities Jess Belmonte gave a presentation on the work of the 3 diversity networks. The committee considered a number of questions in groups and the key points and possible actions identified were noted by Jess to be taken back to the diversity networks and other aspects of ERUS work It was also suggested that the committee may like to invite Tara Hewitt, Lead for Equality, Diversity and Inclusion at South Manchester University Hospital Foundation Trust to a future meeting to speak to the committee about the positive impact an equality perspective can have on non-equality issues.

Action: Jess Belmonte to consider the feedback received.

J:\IR\8. IR committee\IRC 2016\Oct 16\IR(16)20 Industrial Relations Committee minutes 150616 v3 final.docx 2 of 10

IR(16)12 NHS Pay, Pensions and Peter Finch highlighted key issues including: Terms and Conditions PRB evidence. Committee members were asked to consider and suggest issues that should be covered in the CSP evidence. Members were also asked to provide names for possible case studies highlighting the impact of pay restraint on physiotherapists.

The committee endorsed the approach to the PRB evidence and noted that agency spend and the cap was a complex but important issue.

AfC review: the committee endorsed the approach to the AfC negotiations and to continue to explore the possibilities for positive change.

Pensions: It was noted that employers’ contribution rate will rise by 2% in 2018/19 due to treasury calculations.

Mileage: It was noted that the AA have ceased publication of mileage rates and so no longer provides a link for AfC mileage. It was noted that the mileage rates will continue at the current rate.

Action: IRC members consider and suggest to Peter Finch ([email protected]) other areas for CSP evidence and also provide names for possible case studies that could be used for submission to the PRB.

IR(16)13 TUC report Claire Sullivan reported on recent developments relating to the TUC. TU Actl: there was a discussion on how the provisions of the Actmight now be implemented. Also, on the practical application of the provisions to gather details of local union facility time.

Public Sector exit payments It was reported that the Treasury was still analysing responses to the recent consultation but there is an intention to curb ‘overly generous’ public sector payments.

Sickness absence: it was reported that a date for a meeting with the Treasury, to share evidence on early access to physiotherapy, was yet to be set. A consultation on reviewing public sector sickness absence is expected to be launched over the summer.

Women’s TUC conference: the following recommendations were agreed following the report from the delegation:

J:\IR\8. IR committee\IRC 2016\Oct 16\IR(16)20 Industrial Relations Committee minutes 150616 v3 final.docx 3 of 10

 To highlight the EHRC good practice toolkit on pregnancy and maternity to physiotherapists throughout the NHS and private sectors, adding to the current and ongoing campaign within the CSP.

 To highlight the issue of sexual assault on trains and stations and if you are a victim where to go for help and how to deal with it.

 Highlight the plight of the refugees fleeing war and persecution.

 It was also recommended to present the agreed recommendation before the NGRS for their attention and possible action.

Action: Alex MacKenzie to present the agreed recommendations from the women’s TUC at the next meeting of the NGRS.

Black workers TUC conference: the committee agreed, following the report from the delegation, to:

 Seek to push for more deliberations and information on issues relating to funding for student training for those from BME and poorer socio economic groups.  Raise awareness of the Sarah Reed campaign.

Action: Jess Belmonte to review the specific recommendations with a view to a further request to IRC at a future meeting

TUC Congress 2016: The committee agreed for Jill Barker, Alex MacKenzie, Deborah Russell and Claire Sullivan to be delegates to TUC congress and to remit the selection of 1 more delegate to the chair for decision.

Action: Jill Barker, Claire Sullivan and Lloyd Bowen to ensure arrangements for TUC congress are progressed.

STUC report: this was tabled for members’ information.

IR(16)15 Dying to work Jill Barker reported on the ARC fringe meeting. The committee agreed that the CSP should sign up as a supporter of the campaign, help promote the aims of the campaign and publicise the online petition to CSP members.

J:\IR\8. IR committee\IRC 2016\Oct 16\IR(16)20 Industrial Relations Committee minutes 150616 v3 final.docx 4 of 10

It was agreed to raise awareness via frontline, the CSP website and other social media platforms.

Action: Elaine Sparkes to progress this area of work.

IRC members to communicate the campaign to members accordingly. Verbal Campaigns update Claire Sullivan updated the committee on the progress report of the 3 campaigns identified.  Maternity and flexible working: it was noted that the NGRS had a discussion on the aims of this campaign and feedback had been noted.  Stress: a poster ‘Take control of workloads’ had been created. It was noted that the focus of the campaign will be to identify local solutions and local problems. A pack of information is being produced for use at local level. At the national level there will be a need to identify and explore any key themes that arise from the local campaigns. Target sites had been identified (1 per region/country). The issue will also form part of joint regional training days before the end of the year.

The committee agreed that it was important to measure and evaluate the impact of all of the campaigns and report the findings back at future IRC meetings.

Action: Claire Sullivan et al to provide updates and feedback on campaigns at future IRC meetings.

IR(16)15 Member survey The results of the member survey, that surveyed 10,000 CSP members, were discussed by the committee and key issues identified for the committee to consider. The response rate of 16% was a concern by some members as being low however it was clarified that the rate was in line with other surveys and not uncommon for this type of survey. Rob Ledger informed the committee that the results of the member survey would be considered alongside other member feedback obtained over the year. IR(16)16 ERUS work plan: highlights It was reported that the work plan had been amended and exceptions. following comments made at the Feb IRC meeting. The campaigns in Worcester (cuts to physio services) and Cumbria were highlighted. The committee agreed that the outcome of the maternity leave accrual cases in Northern Ireland in 2015 was a major success and changes to the A4C terms and conditions were awaited. The committee also discussed other successful cases across the UK J:\IR\8. IR committee\IRC 2016\Oct 16\IR(16)20 Industrial Relations Committee minutes 150616 v3 final.docx 5 of 10

Action: Elaine Sparkes to continue to provide update on progress to the ERUS work plan at future IRC meetings. IR(16)17 Governance Review Alex MacKenzie introduced a committee group activity on the governance review. It was explained that all committees had been invited to discuss and comments on the review.

IRC members were encouraged to continue to feed views and ideas to the review via Alex MacKenzie and noted the website page and email contacts to assist with this.

Action: IRC members to feedback any comments or suggestions relating to the governance review. Verbal War on Want Mark Dearn from War on Want presented an overview Report of the work of the organisation and invited questions from the committee. CETA and TTIP prompted questions from members and IRC members were encouraged to raise awareness of the potential dangers of CETA as well as TTIP.

Action: IRC members to consider how best to raise members awareness of the potential impact of CETA and TTIP. IR(16)18 ARC motions The committee noted the motions that primarily related to ERUS and agreed to delegate to chairs’ action the interim responses before a full report is brought back to the Oct IRC.

Action: Peter Finch and Jill Barker to agree interim responses and report back at the next IRC meeting. IR(16)10 Minutes of meeting held on The action point attributed to Elaine Sparkes ‘ERUS 18th February 2016 organisers to support any work developing information to recruit learning champions during workplace visits’ was incorrect and was not within our remit. It was agreed that this would be removed.

The minutes were then agreed. AOB It was raised that, at the recent meeting of the NGRS, a discussion had arisen concerning Band 5 recruits from international students and whether all band 5 were ‘work ready’ as opposed to HCPC registrant ready. It was noted that the issue would be raised at full council and detailed information would be passed to ERUS.

Action: IRC members on Council to raise the issue.

Members were requested to book any accommodation (via Lloyd Bowen [email protected]) and travel J:\IR\8. IR committee\IRC 2016\Oct 16\IR(16)20 Industrial Relations Committee minutes 150616 v3 final.docx 6 of 10

required for meetings in good time before committee meetings.

Action: IRC members to liaise with Lloyd as necessary.

Lobbying Act: it was raised under AOB that there is a need to carry out a membership audit under the new provisions of this Act, with the provision coming in to force in 2017. It was agreed that this would be an agenda item for the Oct meeting of the IRC.

Action: Lloyd Bowen to ensure item is included on the agenda.

Action summary

Agenda ref Who Action Verbal report: Katie Wilkie Write to frontline on the positive changes made to the TU Bill Scene setting: following campaigning. external developments since the last IRC meeting IR(16)19: Jess Consider the feedback received. Equalities Belmonte IR(16)12: pay, IRC Consider and suggest to Peter Finch ([email protected]) other pensions and members areas for CSP evidence and also provide names for possible case terms and studies that could be used for submission to the PRB conditions IR(16)13: TUC Alex Present the agreed recommendations from the women’s TUC at report MacKenzie the next meeting of the NGRS.

Jess Progress work on issues relating to funding for student training for Belmonte those form BME and poorer socio economic groups.

To work to raise awareness of the Sarah Reed Campaign.

Jill Barker, To ensure arrangements for TUC congress are progressed. Claire Sullivan and Lloyd Bowen IR(16)14: Elaine To progress this area of work. dying to work Sparkes

J:\IR\8. IR committee\IRC 2016\Oct 16\IR(16)20 Industrial Relations Committee minutes 150616 v3 final.docx 7 of 10

IRC To communicate the campaign to members accordingly. members Verbal report: Claire To provide updates and feedback on campaigns at future IRC Campaigns Sullivan meetings. update.

IR(16)16: Elaine Continue to provide update on progress to the ERUS work plan at ERUS work Sparkes future IRC meetings. plan: highlights and exceptions. IR(16)17: IRC Feedback any comments or suggestions relating to the governance Governance members review to Alex MacKenzie. Review Verbal report: IRC To consider how best to raise members awareness of the potential War on Want members impact of CETA and TTIP. IR(16)18: ARC Peter Finch To agree interim responses and report back at the next IRC motions and Jill meeting. Barker AOB IRC IRC members on Council to raise the issue of band 5 recruits. members AOB IRC Liaise with Lloyd as necessary for booking accommodation in good members time for future meetings. AOB Lloyd To ensure TUC Lobbying Bill / member audit item is included on Bowen the agenda for the Oct IRC. Claire To identify tasks and timelines. Sullivan?

J:\IR\8. IR committee\IRC 2016\Oct 16\IR(16)20 Industrial Relations Committee minutes 150616 v3 final.docx 8 of 10

Key messages from IRC 15/06/16

Staffing update.  ERUS welcomes new starters Ruth Jones (SNO), Annette Fernandes (Data management officer). Shane Walsh (Admin Officer) has returned to ERUS after a temp role and Hanna Smith (PA to Director) has left the CSP.

New members of the IRC.  Becca Knowles (Newly Qualified rep) and Alex Zavallis-Roebuck (student rep) were welcomed as new members of the IRC.

Economic overview: key points.  Inflation remains very low, being unchanged at 0.3%  The TU Act received Royal Assent in early May. While key provisions remain in areas such as industrial action ballot thresholds, significant concessions were achieved during an active campaign involving trade unions, including CSP members  The Junior Doctors' dispute has dominated the last period in terms of NHS industrial relations and the likely outcome will potentially have significant implications for other NHS staff including CSP members  Elections have taken place in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland

Equalities overview.  Jess Belmonte delivered a great session reviewing the work of the diversity networks and on broader equalities-related issues. Members to take away and think about/talk to other members about how they can take future action to promote equalities work throughout the CSP's membership.

Pay.  PRB Evidence: IRC members asked to send Pete Finch any relevant case studies for inclusion in this year's evidence to the pay review body  Talks to review the structure of AfC continue; progress continues to be slow but steady

TUC.  Update on the recent Treasury-led consultation on exit payments across the public sector, which closed in early May and on which the Government's response is awaited. An imminent consultation on sickness absence across the public sector is awaited, which will also be led by the Treasury.  Received and discussed reports and agreed recommendations from the recent TUC Black Workers and Women' TUC conferences  Agreed delegates to attend this year's main TUC Congress. These are Alex Mackenzie, Chair of the National Group of Regional Stewards; Jill Barker, Chair of the IR Cttee; Deb Russell, South East regional steward; and Claire Sullivan, ERUS Director.

'Dying to Work' Campaign.  IRC agreed to support the campaign. Committee members to promote the campaign to members

Campaigns: Maternity and Stress.  CSP (ERUS) is focusing on two national campaigns in 2016. These cover 'tackling stress at work' and 'maternity rights and flexible working'  There may also be some local campaigns relating to car parking if there is an active local issue/dispute to take forward

J:\IR\8. IR committee\IRC 2016\Oct 16\IR(16)20 Industrial Relations Committee minutes 150616 v3 final.docx 9 of 10

Member Survey.  IRC members identified key issues arising from last year's CSP annual member survey results. The high satisfaction levels are very encouraging and plans are in place for work on areas where there could be improvement

ERUS Work Plan.  Identified highlights on delivery of our 2016 plan, including the recent campaign in Worcester against cuts in physio services and organising work currently ongoing in Cumbria.  Positive successes in cases of accrual of bank holidays while on maternity leave and also in individual casework for members and in damages for members who have been injured or ill-treated at work

Governance Revenue.  Alex Mackenzie (Chair of the Council Governance Group) led a member discussion on the review of CSP governance. IRC members and any other CSP members are invited to continue to feed in views to Alex MacKenzie via email [email protected] .

Work of War on Want (WoW).  Mark Dearn visited to speak about the work of WoW and its campaigns. It was a great session that members thoroughly enjoyed and Cttee members are encouraged to share key themes with members. The two main focuses of WoW are campaigning for economic and global justice.

ARC Motions.  Members noted the work on motions passed at this year's annual reps' conference is ongoing and covers a wide range of relevant employment-related matters

J:\IR\8. IR committee\IRC 2016\Oct 16\IR(16)20 Industrial Relations Committee minutes 150616 v3 final.docx 10 of 10