NIPSA News May/June

NIPSA NEWSThe newspaper of the leading public sector trade union May/June 2015 Tel: 02890661831 www.nipsa.org.uk

Download your membership application here: http://www.nipsa.org.uk/About-NIPSA/Join-US/Application-Form

NIPSA welcomes all delegates to the annual conferences

Stormont guardssettlement totals £700k(gross)

BROLLY GOOD TIME ATBELFAST MAY DAY PARADE – PICTURES PAGES 6 AND 7

NIPSA welcomes all delegates to our an-nual conferences in Derry/Londonderry.

This welcome is particularly extended tofirst-time delegates and trainee delegateswho are setting their first foot on the lad-der of the policy-making body of NIPSA.

For some this will be a daunting experi-ence but please be assured we have allbeen there at some time in the past makingour maiden speech.

I hope that whether you are a first-time

delegate, a trainee delegate or a veteran at-tendee, you will enjoy the conference andtake back the clear message to all mem-bers that NIPSA is relevant to our mem-bers. While we have a difficult time ahead,with a strong union in the workplace weare more relevant today than we have everbeen. Also please take the opportunity tovisit the many stands at conference.

AN OVERTIME issue involving 23 guardsat Stormont has finally been settled after aprotracted legal process with a combinedtotal payout of approx £700,000 (Gross).

The guards involved in the case have alsothanked NIPSA for pursuing their claimthrough the courts and have said it demon-strated the benefits of being a member of theunion.

In 2012, NIPSA News reported the success-ful outcome of a High Court decision in abreach-of-contract case involving guards atStormont. The case related to a requirementto work overtime between 8am and 9am and afurther hour overtime between 5pm and 6pm.

In his judgment Judge Stephens stated: “Ifind as a fact that the two hours overtime wereconditioned overtime. Accordingly, on thebasis of the defendant’s concession, the twohours overtime was not only compulsory butalso guaranteed.”

The case pursued in 2012 by NIPSA,through McCartan Turkington Breen, was inthe nature of a test or lead case, representingthe circumstances of a group of Stormontguards. However, following the High Courtdecision, the Department of Finance and Per-sonnel (DFP) refused to agree settlementterms that would cover the entire group ofStormont guards affected by the decision.

As a result, NIPSA was forced to serve fur-

ther writs seeking to ensure the terms of anysettlement would be extended to all Stormontguards undertaking the “compulsory and guar-anteed” two hours daily overtime.

NIPSA Headquarters Official, who repre-sented the Stormont guards at the time of thesuccessful outcome of the Appeal Court deci-sion and subsequently when the further writswere served, was Noel Griffin.

Unfortunately by the time of Noel’s retire-

ment in November 2013, the DFP was stillcontesting the writs and refusing to agree set-tlement terms.

Since then Assistant General SecretaryKieran Bannon has worked closely with JohnMcShane, of McCartan Turkington Breen, andlegal Counsel Brian McKee BL and FrankO’Donoghue QC in an attempt to have thecases settled.

Continued on page 2

Stormont security guards pictured with Assistant General SecretaryKieran Bannon (bottom left) and MTB’s John McShane (bottom right)

Continued from page 1

Kieran Bannon told NIPSANews: “It is quiet unbelievablehaving secured the High Courtdecision back in 2012 that theDepartment of Finance and Per-sonnel refused to agree settle-ment terms, forcing NIPSA tohave further writs served. It hastaken since 2012 until fairly re-cently to have settlement termsagreed, amounting to approxi-mately £700,000.”

Mr Bannon continued: “It wasclear that the employment cir-cumstances relating to the twohours daily overtime, applied notonly to the lead case back in2012 but also to the further 23Stormont guards for whom NIPSAhas continued to seek proper set-tlement terms.

“To have been forced to purse

this further legal action has led toa significant level of expenditurefrom the public purse. Noel Grif-fin made the point back in 2012that NIPSA had sought to resolvethe matter through negotiationunder well-established industrialrelations machinery but NIPSA’srepresentations were rejectedwith no attempt by managementto reach a compromise.”

While NIPSA indicated to theDepartment that it was preparedto enter discussions to agreeterms of settlement following theHigh Court decision in 2012,management within DFP failed toengage outside the legal process.

A significant amount of workwas directed at securing settle-ment terms on the part of NIPSAofficials and the legal team re-ferred to above. John McShane

of McCartan Turkington Breencommented “This class action isindicative of the benefits of thestrong legal representation se-cured by trade union membershipand a validation of the benefits ofNIPSA membership and the legalservices provided by McCartanTurkington Breen” At all stagesclose contact was maintainedwith the group of members beingrepresented.

Not surprisingly their frustrationwith DFP’s intransigent was ex-pressed on a number of occa-sions over the protracted periodof the civil proceedings. How-ever, the 23 members particularlyappreciated the support they hadreceived from NIPSA.

At a meeting at which the pro-posed settlements terms wereoutlined to affected members by

the legal team, they unanimouslystated that this case was a verygood example of being able todemonstrate the benefits ofNIPSA membership.

Not only was NIPSA preparedto pursue the matter in negotia-tions with management but whenthe employer failed to accept thecase, NIPSA, based on the legaladvice obtained, was prepared tosupport it being pursued throughthe legal route.

It simply would not have beenpossible for any individual mem-ber or a collection of members tohave pursued the legal casegiven the costs involved.

Without the support of theirtrade union, the Stormont guardswould not have achieved the justoutcome that NIPSA and its legalteam secured.

Page 2 NEWS

THERE can be no doubt that the outcome ofthe UK General Election was a surprisegiven that for months everyone speculatedthat there was going to be a hung parlia-ment with much debate about who wouldform the next coalition government.

Over the next five years the Tories willseek to impose many ideologically-drivenpolicies they were prevented from imple-menting during the last administration.

While it is totally unnecessary, ChancellorGeorge Osborne has announced that he willhave another budget on July 8 – a mere 62days after his party was returned to power.

This is a reminder of his first-ever budgeton June 20, 2010 – a few weeks after theelection of the Tory-Lib Dem Coalition Gov-ernment. It heralded the start of an on-slaught on public services and publicservants with pay freezes for public ser-vants and attacks on public service pen-sions.

Now what can be expected on July 8,when the Tories are no longer shackled to

another party to hold them back? It has al-ready been well leaked that the Tories wantto further cut welfare [social security] bene-fits to those most in need – such as the dis-abled and low-paid working families withcuts to tax credits – and to those peoplewho find themselves unemployed.

Even with these expected cuts, this goesnowhere near the much-trumpeted £12bn incuts that made headlines before the GeneralElection. No detail was provided then – butnow comes the detail…

The Conservative government also sig-naled a further flexing of muscles againsttrade unions with attacks on the ultimateright of any worker to withdraw their labour.

We have already seen individual workersbeing attacked through the imposition ofdraconian employment laws such as feesfor tribunals. So even when you have beendiscriminated against, unfairly dismissed orhad your pay withheld, for many they cannotafford to access the justice they need.

ACAS has reported thousands of fewer

claims being submitted in Great Britain.Here in Northern Ireland we have escapedthe worst as employment law is a devolvedmatter and, to date, we have been able topersuade the Employment Minister and theNorthern Ireland Executive not to introducetribunal fees and other draconian laws.

While there are certainly many issues forus to face in the coming months with thou-sands of civil and public servants leavingunder voluntary exit schemes, I think mostworkers will not realise the impact these joblosses will have on them until it happens.

NIPSA, together with other trade unions,must continue to build up our members forthe many battles that lie ahead, both locallyand regionally so that we have the confi-dence to take on the fight.

Over the coming months NIPSA will beworking across the branches to strengthenthe resolve of our members for the battleahead.

Alison Millar,Deputy General Secretary

Preparing for the battles that lie aheadEDITORIAL

QUITE shockingly within only a number ofweeks of being set up, the new EducationAuthority has become an employer thatmakes staff compulsorily redundant.

There has been much talk politically aboutreducing the public sector through voluntarymeans to “rebalance the economy”. Quiteapart from the nonsense about the economybeing rebalanced by cutting jobs in the publicservice when there are no alternative jobs

available, the myth spun by all political par-ties that job losses would be voluntary is in-creasingly being seen for what it is – a lie.

In the Education Sector, staff have very realfears as many hundreds of workers in Head-quarters Branches await clarification aboutwhether sufficient funds are available to con-tinue their employment.

These fears have been heightened by de-velopments in the last few months when theMinister announced that funding in certainareas would cease immediately, throwingscores of workers into turmoil as they at-tempted to deal with the forced reality ofcompulsory redundancy.

Reacting to these latest developments, As-sistant Secretary Paddy Mackel told NIPSANews: “More than 80 workers employed inthe Primary Modern Language Programmehad a bombshell delivered to them when itwas reported that the Minister had made an

announcement in Stormont that funding fortheir programme would cease from March 31,2015.

“No discussion, no debate, no warning, noconsultation and certainly no concern for theworkers, their circumstances, their families orthe work they undertake.”

He continued: “NIPSA has engaged withemployers and has written directly to the Min-ister complaining strongly about how this washandled, but also on a number of other is-sues which need to be dealt with in advanceof any decision to make staff redundant.Those discussions are continuing.

“This does, however, demonstrate the clearand unambiguous threat there is to all staffwho work in an area which is not covered bya legal statutory requirement to provide thatparticular service. These are extremely wor-rying times for many hundreds of membersacross the Education Sector.”

£700K payout for Stormont guards(gross)

NIPSA NEWSNIPSA Harkin House, 54 Wellington Park,

Belfast BT9 6DP, Tel: 028 90661831 Fax 028 90665847or email: [email protected] Editorial contact details: Bob Miller

email: [email protected] should be sent to the above address.

Unless otherwise stated, the views contained inNIPSA Reports do not necessarily reflect the

policy of trade union NIPSA.

Compulsory redundancies forcedon Education Sector workers

Page 3NEWS

The following is the NIPSA submission on Workforce Planning delivered to the HSC Health Committee on April 29GIVEN the recent announce-ments by the Chief Executiveof the HSCB that TransformingYour Care remains the strate-gic direction of the Departmentbut requires some rebrandingNIPSA must refer back to thesubmission it made in relationto the original TYC consulta-tion document ‘Vision to Ac-tion’ in terms of WorkforcePlanning.

At its inception there was aworking assumption that therewould be a reduction in overallworkforce of around 3% over thenext three to five years. In Janu-ary 2013, the HSC employedaround 54,000 whole-time equiv-alents and that would equate to1,620 whole-time equivalents.

TYC was predicated on athree-to-five year implementationperiod but given the lack ofprogress and budgetary con-straints and vacancy controls, webelieve further work is required toidentify the actual workforce fig-ure and accurate projections re-quired for the future.

If the 3% (3,000) cut in theworkforce remains the likely tar-get if TYC is implemented as itwas originally planned, thenNIPSA is firmly of the opinion thatsuch cuts will put the welfare andlives of the people in NorthernIreland at risk.

NIPSA continues to be con-cerned that such a figure is ontop of the vacancy controls indi-vidual Trusts have had in placefor a number of years due topressure from theDepartment/HSCB for cost im-provements across the HealthService. Such job reductions areunrealistic and will result in theHealth Service providers beingunable to fulfil their statutory obli-gations.

Another strand of TYC was the5% shift of funds from theacute/primary care to community

care. We believe this to be insuf-ficient and there is emerging evi-dence that any monies that arebeing released are not going tofront line services.

NIPSA would wish to see abreakdown in terms of the distri-bution of both the transitionalfunding and all other moniesmoving from acute to the commu-nity budget to support front lineservices. THIS SHOULD BEPRIORITISED. In our view thisbecomes even more critical inlight of the fact that the originaltransitional funding proposed hasnot materialised so workforcenumbers and planning must beskewed and somewhat unpre-dictable.

Fundamentally NIPSA believesTYC demands a more skilled,better-trained, better-rewardedstaff and not one which is priva-tised and delivered on the cheap.

NIPSA is firmly of the view thatTYC is not about choice and per-sonal social services but is aboutdoing things on the cheap, withless skilled staff, who have lesstime to give service users andwho work in a health system thatis being systematically erodedover the years.

NIPSA believe that care in thecommunity is reliant on a knowl-edge rich and confident HPSSworkforce, able to deliver qualitycare interventions without the “athand” support models of institu-tional care settings.

TYC with its overarchingthemes of procurement and pri-vatisation dressed up as value formoney initiatives, runs a risk ofasset stripping the framework ofknowledge, skills and the ethos ofpublic service that defines theHPSS workforce replacing keysections of it in a profit-driven,race to the bottom line.

NIPSA is also of the view thatthe Health Service has neverbeen more vulnerable of being

outsourced to the private sectoras where it currently stands now.This is evident in recent domicil-iary care reviews and recentvalue for money audits.

The reality is that moraleamong nurses, admin staff, socialworkers, social care staff is at anall time low because the kind ofservice these committed publicservants want to deliver is unableto be delivered despite their bestefforts.

There is a clear view prevailingin the thinking that services arebeing run into the ground so thatthe private sector appears like acredible alternative.

Finally, we represent a numberof disciplines. In terms of socialworkers, we want to ensure thatthere is a sufficient number of so-cial workers to meet the require-ments as set out in the 10-yearSocial Work Strategy launched byMinister Poots. Throughput ofstudent numbers placements, de-mand and supply will needanalysed in detail to match theneeds of the strategy.

In relation to Admin and Cleri-cal, these are key staff whoshould be considered front lineservices because, in their ab-sence, clinics will not operate,consultants will not be able toperform their duties and there willbe a systemic failure in all serv-ices if not properly resourced.They have been crippled by va-cancy controls.

Finally the Social Care Work-force is being targeted for privati-sation, value for money auditsand it is evident from reports fromthe RQIA and others that workoutsourced leads to a consider-able decline in standards giventhat in some Trust areas we haveaward-winning, quality-assuredprofessionals replaced by less-skilled, qualified or experiencedstaff.

FOLLOWING the outcome ofthe UK General Election it iscritical that the trade unionmovement carries out a criticalassessment of what strategyand tactics it needs to developto protect the interests of pub-lic sector employees, to defendpublic services and to preventthe destruction of the socialsecurity protections for work-ing class people who findthemselves forced out of theworkforce through redundancy,illness or disability.

There is no doubt that theMarch 13 strike action and anti-austerity public protests organ-ised by the trade unionmovement succeeded in high-

lighting the opposition to thecuts and putting pressure onthe local Northern Ireland polit-ical establishment.

This was despite the fact thatthe number of unions involvedin the March 13 action wasconsiderably fewer than the ac-tion on November 30, 2011.

While there was a differenceof opinion among the publicsector unions about the needfor further strike action in ad-vance of the May 7 UK GeneralElection. This was also thecase among various sectionswithin NIPSA. Therefore it isessential to start the processof building the trade union’scapacity and preparedness to

take action to defend members’interests. This can only beachieved by unions engagingwith each other in an honestand fraternal way.

We also need to examine andreview the effectiveness of theindustrial action short of strikeaction. The reality at the mo-ment is that there is unlikely tobe any further immediate coor-dinated strike action involvingthe public sector trade unionsat least until the autumn. Thefocus for defending members’interests will now – of neces-sity – shift to each sectorwhere we need to intervene tomitigate the worst impacts ofausterity.

After May 7, we must refocus our strategy to defend jobs and services

Services NHS shredded tomake privatisation viable

NIPSA hasexpressed“delight” thatformer Enter-prise, Tradeand Invest-ment MinisterArlene Foster(picturedright) hastaken the“commonsense ap-proach” andnot forgedahead withproposals that would have seenworkplace safety regulationsweakened in Northern Ireland.

The proposals would have seen achange in occupational accident,dangerous occurrences and diseasereporting requirements as set out inthe Reporting of Injuries, Diseasesand Dangerous Occurrences Regu-lations (Northern Ireland) 1997(RIDDOR)

The move came as workersacross the world marked WorkersMemorial Day on April 28 remem-bering those who have been killedor injured at work.

Assistant Secretary GeraldineAlexander told NIPSA News: “In re-sponse to the two public consulta-tions, NIPSA fought strongly againstthe proposals to change RIDDORwhich, we argued, would weakenthe regulation, monitoring and man-agement of health and safety andultimately lead to less protection forworkers.

“We are therefore delighted MsFoster, before being appointed asthe new Stormont Finance Minister,has taken this common sense ap-proach and has not slavishly fol-lowed the UK Government’sideological and cost-driven deregu-lation and cuts agenda.”

She claimed the calls for reformhad been fuelled by claims fromsome business groups that reportingduties were too complicated andburdensome.

“This decision has sent a clearsignal to employers that reportingover three-day incidents is not aburden on businesses. That RID-DOR reports provide much-neededintelligence data and there is a re-quirement on employers to complywith this duty.”

Ms Alexander added: “This is amajor victory for NIPSA and thetrade union movement in its contin-ued campaign of opposition againsta deregulation agenda which posesa threat to the health, safety andwelfare of all workers.

“It demonstrates through collabo-rative working with the Health andSafety Executive for Northern Ire-land and our devolved Assembly wecan effect change for the bettermentof all workers.”

NIPSA ‘delight’as Fostersignals no changeto RIDDOR

Page 4 NEWS

TTIP – a threat thatmust be faced downTTIP is a comprehensivefree trade and invest-ment treaty currentlybeing negotiated – prac-tically in secret – be-tween the EuropeanUnion and the UnitedStates and it could havemassive implications forpeople and the environ-ment on both sides ofthe Atlantic.

The stakes couldn’t behigher, and not only for Eu-ropeans and Americans,but also for the rest of theworld, which would be af-fected in many differentways by this agreementbetween these two tradingsuperpowers.

The objectives of TTIPgo well beyond intentionsto solidify the Anglo-Saxonneoliberal model. It is ageopolitical strategy toconfront the emergence ofa multipolar world.

TTIP is unusual becauseit is so wide ranging that ithas provoked huge opposi-tion and campaign groupshave sprung up to highlightvarious strands of the ne-gotiations and how theywill impact on differentareas of our lives.

While in Brussels weheard detailed testimonyfrom experts on the impactof TTIP on the environ-ment, agriculture, democ-racy and public health andwe also had an opportunityto question two EU repre-sentatives who are in-volved in the actualnegotiations.

The question of democ-racy is of critical concernand the EU Parliament hasalready warned the EUCommission that it may notsupport the final draft ofthe treaty if it includes theIntra-State Dispute Settle-ment (ISDS) which givescorporations the means tochallenge governments be-fore special tribunals, forexample, when environ-mental or consumer pro-tection laws reduce profitexpectations.

These tribunals are pri-

vate arbitration tribunals,against whose decisionsno revision option is pro-vided. As a result, ISDSmay ultimately deter gov-ernments from pursuingpolicies which are in thepublic interest. One exam-ple of this in practice is thelitigation by tobacco giantPhilip Morris against theAustralian state for remov-ing branding from tobaccoproducts in the interests ofpublic health. Unfortu-nately many campaignershave often found their wayblocked when trying to un-cover the truth about TTIPwith a lack of transparencyaround the actual negotia-tions. Even elected mem-bers of the EU Parliamenthave come up against bu-reaucracy.

The delegation met withSpanish MEP, Noa Es-tevez, who told us how herand other MEPs recentlytabled 221 amendments tothe treaty before a debateon the elements solely re-lated to agriculture. In theend, only 26 were ap-proved for debate.

On average US farmsare 13 times larger than inthe EU which tend to bemainly small to mediumsized and are less mecha-nised and have higherlabour costs. Add to thatthe widespread practice ofanimal cloning and gener-ally much higher percent-age of genetically-modifiedfood in the US and thereare real fears that the EUwill be flooded with muchcheaper produce to thedetriment of EU farmersand farmworkers – nevermind the long-term effectson the food chain!

Zoltán Massay-Kosubekof the EU’s largest publichealth umbrella group, theEuropean Public Health Al-liance spoke in detail abouthis concerns that TTIPcould effectively end theability of EU states to legis-late on health.

Zoltan outlined how freetrade is in general not

good for decent publichealth systems as it tendsto lower the prices of poorquality and often danger-ous foods.

Usually this attractive-sounding aim of ‘removingred tape’ tends to be un-helpful for those trying toprotect public health be-cause the regulation canbe seen as a barrier onfree trade.

An interesting exampleof where this can lead to isaround alcohol price con-trols such as thoseadopted by Scotland andfloated for Northern Ire-land. This ‘Minimum UnitPricing’ will likely be unen-forceable under TTIP orthe source of a challengeunder the ISDS mecha-nism.

Similar examples of thenegative effects of TTIPwere heard from severalspeakers including tradepolicy analyst Paul-EmileDupret who pointed outthat opposition to the tradedeal is not anti-US but infact campaigners on bothsides of the Atlantic havejoined forces to reject whatwill be a bad deal for allworkers and everyone con-cerned with the environ-ment, public health anddemocracy.

Previous free tradeagreements were opposedby workers in the US,Canada and Mexico andtheir worries were wellfounded with jobs lostrather than gained afterpoliticians signed off de-spite well-presented argu-ments.

Paul-Emile Dupret re-ferred to a recent trend bythe EU Commission to playdown any predictions onjob creation because thereis evidence, from its ownresearch that 700,000 jobswill be lost if TTIP issigned.

In addition there will besignificant displacement ofworkers who will be forcedto move around the EU.Pro-treaty officials and

MEPs prefer instead toquote from the widely dis-credited Copenhagen Re-port which overplays thebenefits of TTIP and un-derplays its drawbacks.

The delegation, which in-cluded many farmers andtrade unionists, put manyof these points to the Headof Unit, Policy Coordinationand Inter-Institutional Rela-tions, Jean Charles VanEeckhaute and DG Agricul-ture and Rural Affairs Sen-ior Official John Clarkeduring two face-to-facemeetings.

Unsurprisingly both offi-cials played down con-cerns about the impact ofthe trade deal more or lessrubbishing research pro-duced by campaignersfrom across the EU, includ-ing John Hilary of War onWant who recently pre-sented his own research toNIPSA activists.

I have been left in nodoubt that TTIP is a threat

to be faced down. Capital-ism has an insatiable ap-petite which requiresconstant feeding in theform of new markets. Multi-nationals on both sides ofthe Atlantic are tied intothis cycle and both feelthey can out-compete eachother.

The reality is that theirability to sell their goodsand services at home ishampered by the wage de-flation which has grown toendemic proportions sincethe victories of bothThatcher and Reagan overunions that weakenedwage bargaining.

Now these multinationalswant to drive down regula-tion and environmentalprotection and furthererode workers’ rights anddemocracy to make aquick buck. We must unitewith all those with an inter-est in a decent future if weare to take them on andwin.

Assistant Secretary RYAN McKINNEY talks to NIPSA News about a recent delegation to Brussels to hear more about the threat posed by the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) negotiations

NIPSA News can exclusivelyreveal that the pay deal offeredto NIW Water workers follow-ing their five-week long indus-trial action in December andJanuary has been approved byFinance Minister Simon Hamil-ton.

The deal reached by the WaterGroup of Trade Unions requiredfull business case approval byboth the Department of RegionalDevelopment and Department ofFinance. Union members had re-cently threatened more actionunless the deal was signed offwithout further delay.

We can now reveal that thedeal includes two pay increasesfor non-industrial staff worth5.9%, 2.95% of which will bebackdated to August 2014 withthe remainder paid this August.

NI Water also submitted abusiness case for an annualbonus worth a further 2% ofsalary and has agreed to in-crease payments for staff whoprovide on-call cover from £65 to£135 per week, backdated toSeptember 2014.

A pay limit which normally ap-plies to all but ‘exceptional’ per-formers will be relaxed this yearensuring that around 170 staffwho have reached the normalpay scale maximum will receiveat least two increments.

The pay deal was subject toacceptance of pension reforms inline with those already imple-mented across the public sector.However, the industrial action se-cured improved terms here toowith full non-tapered protectionfor all staff aged 47 and aboveon April 1, 2013.

Additional phasing-in meansthat the increase in pension con-tributions will be 20% from July2015 to April 2016, then 35% in2016/17 and the remaining 45%in 2017/18.

Given that the starting point fornegotiations was the full increase

in contributions from April thisyear with no pay uplift, this is asignificant victory for water work-ers.

A recent ballot of members ofall unions was overwhelminglysuccessful with more than 80%of NIPSA members supportingthe deal.

Speaking about the agree-ment, NIPSA Assistant SecretaryRyan McKinney said: “This hasbeen a long but ultimately suc-cessful campaign. Negotiationsbegan 10 months ago, we hadfive weeks of industrial actionwhich was incredibly well sup-ported by staff and 13 days oftalks at the Labour RelationsAgency before the unions sus-pended the action.

“In the face of an actively-hos-tile media and in the contextwhere midwives and ambulancedrivers are being denied even a1% pay rise, we have shown thatwell organised and determinedindustrial action can win signifi-cant gains for workers.

“We have two more sets of paynegotiations in 2016/17 and2017/18 before the full increasein pension contributions takes ef-fect. By that stage we have al-ready guaranteed that somewater workers will be over£2,000 a year better off and noone will see a less than £1,000increase even after pension con-tributions are deducted.”

He added: “In the next twoyears we will be using our full in-dustrial strength to push for morethan the Government’s 1% paylimit so that wages continue mov-ing up, there will be no slippingback.

“It is incredibly important thatwith the election of a Tory major-ity government we have exam-ples like NI Water to takeconfidence from. This victorywould not have happened with-out the unity of NI Water workersand all three unions.”

Page 5NEWS

ACTION PAYS OFF

Union reps'meetingsqualify asworking timeATTENDING meetings at the workplacein the capacity of a union or health andsafety rep is working time for the pur-poses of the Working Time Regulations,the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT)has ruled.

Mr Edwards and Mr Morgan were em-ployed by glass container manufacturerEncirc on 12-hour shifts; Edwards wasalso a health and safety rep and Morganwas a union rep.

They attended, respectively, health andsafety meetings and union meetings.These finished in the late afternoon leav-ing Edwards with six hours break be-tween his meeting and the start of hisnight shift and leaving Morgan with justnine hours between the end of his meet-ing and the start of his night shift.

The employees argued they should, forthe purposes of regulation 10(1) of theWorking Time Regulations 1998 (WTR),be given 11 hours rest between the car-rying out of their functions at the meet-ings and attending on shift. Theemployer disputed the meetings were“working time”.

The EAT confirmed that regulation2(1)(a) of the WTR requires that each ofthe three elements in the definition ofworking time must be satisfied. Thus, theworker must be working, at the em-ployer’s disposal and carrying out theiractivities or duties.

The employment tribunal found the Ed-wards and Morgan were “working” whenat meetings. But it had adopted too nar-row an approach to two conditions ofworking time, said judge Eady sittingalone at the EAT. The two men were notrequired, she said, to be under the em-ployer’s specific control and direction interms of the carrying out of their dutiesor activities.

A wider approach was allowed, whichcould include where an employer has re-quired an employee to be in a specificplace and to hold himself out as ready towork for the employer’s benefit, whichmight include attending a union or healthand safety meeting, allowing for a broadunderstanding of “benefit”.

Also, there was no requirement thatthe activities or duties required werethose for which the two men were em-ployed under their employment con-tracts. If they were engaged in activitiesthat were — in the broader sense — forthe benefit of the employer, arose fromthe employment relationship, and donewith the employer’s knowledge at and inan approved time and manner, that couldbe sufficient. Their claims were thereforeremitted to the employment tribunal forre-consideration, applying this broaderapproach to “working time”.

This case summary was sourced fromDaniel Barnett's employment law e-mailbulletin and written by Dr John McMullenof Wrigleys Solicitors.www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2015/0367_14_2302.html

NIPSA has written toNorthern Ireland threeMEPs calling on themto take a strong standin rejecting the TTIP –and any future tradeor investment agree-ments – that threatenkey rights acquiredafter long democraticstruggles.

The union has ex-pressed “extremeconcern” that onlyone of the three –Sinn Fein’s MartinaAnderson – has so farresponded to NIPSA’srepresentations.

It comes as the Eu-ropean Parliament isset to vote on theTTIP talks. The origi-nal voting date in Mayhad to be postponedas so many amend-ments to the resolu-tion were received.The vote will now takeplace on June 10.

NIPSA’s GeraldineAlexander told NIPSANews: “We raisedconcerns over the se-rious threat to North-ern Ireland’s farmingindustry with the re-moval of EU importrestrictions on thesale of unsafe US beefand other foods aswell as the openingup of our NationalHealth Service con-tracts to US privatehealth insurers lead-ing to the loss ofthousands of jobs.

“We’re extremelyconcerned that onlyMartina Anderson ofSinn Fein has [so far]responded to our rep-resentations.”

She added: “Nextmonth is a pivotal mo-ment to stop TTIP forgood and NIPSA willcontinue to put pres-sure on our NorthernIreland MEPs andMLAs to send a clearsignal to negotiatorsthat the EuropeanParliament should re-ject TTIP because it isanti-democratic, anti-consumer and anti-public sector.”

NIPSAcalls on NIMEPs to rejectTTIP Water workers deal revealed

Page 6 MAY DAY

MAY DAY SPRITS HIGH

PICTUR

Page 7MAY DAY

H AS IT LASHED DOWN

ES: KEVIN COOPER, PHOTOLINE

- -

Factual outline of casesTHESE cases dealt with guardsemployed at the Stormont Es-tate who contended it was aterm of their contracts of em-ployment with their employer –The Department of Finance andPersonnel – that:(A) The working week was fivedays; hours being 8 hours work atnormal time – 9am to 5pm.(B) Further, it was a term of eachguard’s contract of employmentthat each working day includedtwo hours from 8am to 9am andfrom 5pm to 6pm paid at overtimerate of time-and-a half. (C) Further, the two hours con-tractual overtime were condi-tioned hours which wereguaranteed, thus ensuring thatthe contractual weekly hours foreach guard was 40 hours of workat normal rate and 10 hours atovertime rate.

On June 30, 2008 the Depart-ment for Finance and Personnelremoved the two hours condi-tioned overtime from each guardreducing the guards’ workinghours to eight hours per day (40hours per week) at normal rate.The guards did not consent to theremoval of the two hours condi-tioned overtime. Their existingcontracts of employment were notterminated and the guards werefrom July 1, 2008 willing to workthe contractual overtime of 10hours per week.

History of casesAs a consequence of this

breach of contract by the Depart-ment for Finance and Personnel,a test case was identified andsupported by NIPSA – Stewart vDFP. Ultimately the case wassuccessful in the High Court.

This case determined that thereare essentially three types ofovertime voluntary, compulsory orguaranteed. Voluntary overtimeis overtime in relation to whichthere is no contractual obligationon the employee to perform if he

or she is requested to do so byhis employer.

Compulsory overtime is over-time in relation to which there is acontractual obligation on the em-ployee to perform if he or she isrequested to do so by his/her em-ployer.

Guaranteed overtime is over-time which the employer is con-tractually obliged to offer to theemployee.

Guaranteed overtime can be ei-ther voluntary, in which case theemployee is not contractually

obliged to perform it or compul-sory in which case the employeeis contractually obliged to performit.

As a general proposition, over-time is voluntary and the obliga-tion is on the party who contendsthat it is compulsory or guaran-teed to so establish.

In the test case of Stewart vDFP, Stephens J concluded: “Ifind as a fact that the two hoursovertime were conditioned over-time. Accordingly on the basis ofthe defendant’s concession thetwo hours overtime was not onlycompulsory but also guaranteed.”

ConclusionAs a consequence of the suc-

cess of the test case of Stewart vDFP, negotiations took place toaddress the other 23 Stormontguards whom it was contendedwere in the exact same circum-stances as the test case of Stew-art v DFP. These negotiationsproved fruitless and cases weresubsequently issued, supportedby NIPSA, for the other 23guards.

These cases were listed forhearing late last year but ulti-mately negotiations resolvedthem with a total settlementamount of approximately£700,000 (Gross) for the 23guards affected by the withdrawalof the two hours conditionedovertime.

Page 9NEWS

Chancery House, 88 Victoria Street, Belfast BT1 3GNTel: 029 9032 9801 www.mtb-law.co.uk

By John McShane

NIPSA fighting stress in the public sectorSTRESS in the public sector is escalat-ing and it’s easy to see why. With con-stant attacks on public sector jobs,futures have become uncertain and, asworkloads increase, the “stress” wordis probably used by many NIPSA mem-bers on a daily basis.

Research carried out by the Healthand Safety Executive underlines thisface.

A recent report stated: “The occupa-tions that reported the highest rates oftotal cases of work-related stress, de-pression or anxiety (three-year average)were health professionals (in particularnurses), teaching and educational pro-fessionals, and health and social careassociate professionals (in particularwelfare and housing associate profes-sionals).”

Yet the media would have us believethat we have it so good.

When the public sector loses 20,000employees, cases of stress will only in-crease. Those left behind will face sig-nificant changes to their jobs andincreased insecurity about the future oftheir own employment.

So what can we do about stress? Wecan book a holiday. We can consult witha doctor. We can take stress-relatedsickness. But when we return to work,the causes of stress are still there (and

in many cases they have gotten worse)and they won’t go away on their own.

Many public sector workers aren’taware that their trade union can helpcombat the causes of stress and, inmany cases, trade union advice shouldbe the first step in fighting the problem.

NIPSA has recently held short infor-mation seminars in workplaces to guidemembers through identifying the maincauses of stress and to inform themwhat trade union services are availableto them in assess workloads, approach-ing management for a stress evaluation,explaining the role of OccupationalHealth, job evaluations.

These seminars inform members howto obtain extra training for their posts,address issues surrounding bullyingand harassment, as well as explainingto employers their duty of care and theirrights to reasonable adjustments.

All of these services are covered byyour subscriptions, yet many NIPSAmembers aren’t fighting stress, they aremerely dealing with the symptoms.

If you would like to hold a seminar inyour workplace and inform your col-leagues about how NIPSA services cantackle the sources of stress. ContactNIPSA’s Organisation & RecruitmentUnit. The sessions last around 45 min-utes and can be held during lunch.

Stormont Guards v Department of Finance and Personnel

DESPITE being two months into the newpay year, NIPSA members employed in theHealth and Social Care Sector have still toreceive any pay increase for the 2015-16pay year.

In fact the situation is that members havenot received what was due to them as part ofthe NHS Pay Review Body recommendationfor 2014/15 pay.

The NHS Pay Review Body had recom-mended a 1% increase in the rates of pay plusthe payment of increments. However, thenHealth Minister Jim Wells followed the exam-ple of his English counterpart and imple-mented – without the agreement of NIPSA orany of the other trade union – a 1% non-con-solidated payment.

Those staff below the maximum only re-ceived their increments but had no increase intheir rates of pay. For 2015-16 there has beenno offer/recommendation for NHS pay asagain the Northern Ireland Health Minister didnot ask the NHS Pay Review Body to makeany recommendation.

To date, NIPSA has refused to enter into ne-gotiations with the DHSSPS(NI) officials asthey have made it clear that they only wish todiscuss 2015-16 pay and that as far as theyare concerned 2014-15 pay is closed.

Deputy General Secretary Alison Millar toldNIPSA News: “It is totally unacceptable thatthe Health Minister has refused to enter intonegotiations with the trade unions about 2014-15 and has already indicated that the Englishpay agreement is not necessarily somethingthat would be on offer in Northern Ireland be-cause in the minister’s view it is unaffordable.”

She warned: “De facto regional pay in theHealth and Social Care Sector has come in bythe back door in Northern Ireland. It is totallywithin the gift of the new Health MinisterSimon Hamilton to immediately instruct his of-ficials to enter into open and meaningful nego-tiations on pay so that NIPSA members

employed in the Health Sector can receive adecent pay increase as they are currentlypropping up the health service”.

Currently the Agenda for Change Pay situa-tion is very confusing and muddling. The fol-lowing table should hopefully simplify andexplain the differences in Agenda for Changepay across the four nations.

NIPSA sources have pointed out that therehas been a full implementation of the livingwage element of the claim in Scotland with apart-funding of this element in Wales.

It is clear that the resolution of Agenda forChange pay in Northern Ireland lies fairly andsquarely with the Minister Hamilton and hisNorthern Ireland Executive colleagues.

Page 10 NEWS

AS reported in the last issue ofNIPSA News, the future of theRobinson Centre and the staffwho worked there remains un-certain.

The Judicial Review of theDOE Minister’s decision to trans-fer the Robinson Centre and thestaff to Belfast City Council willnot be heard until the middle ofSeptember with the likelihood ofthe judgment being reserved untila later date.

As NIPSA News goes to print,Belfast City Council are unable toadvise NIPSA of the future of theCentre as well as the health andsafety/asbestos report it was hav-ing completed following the trans-fer of the facility to Belfast CityCouncil.

Deputy General Secretary Ali-son Millar told NIPSA News: “Dur-ing the past seven weeks, NIPSAhas been working tirelessly pro-viding advice, guidance and as-sistance to 30 members who arecurrently facing an uncertain fu-ture.

“While initially Belfast City

Council had thought that many ofthe staff could be redeployedfairly quickly into temporary posi-tions, it has proven more difficultthat first thought. To date onlyone person has commenced in atemporary role, with a few moreexpected to be placed over thenext couple of weeks.

“For some staff it is proving al-most impossible to find them suit-able alternative employment.NIPSA will therefore be pressingthe Council to ensure that thesestaff continue to be paid and faceno financial detriment because ofsomething which is outside theircontrol.”

It is understood the Council hasbeen paying the staff during thistime as well as trying to find themtemporary employment so, ac-cording to union sources, no faultlies with Belfast City Council.

To date, NIPSA has not joinedin any local community campaignto re-open the Robinson Centreuntil the health and safety reportis published.

However, that is not to say that

at some stage – if the health andsafety of our members and thepublic can be guaranteed – thatNIPSA will not seek to have theRobinson Centre reopened.

According to the union, it is vitalthat something is put in place forthe thousands of people whoused this vital facility in EastBelfast.

Many of the staff at the Robin-son Centre have queries aboutunderpayments etc arising out of

the Single Status Agreementreached in Castlereagh Council.

NIPSA’s Kim Graham is work-ing closely with the newCastlereagh and Lisburn Councilto resolve these many queriesover pay. NIPSA has signalledthat if the issues are not resolvedby the end of May, legal proceed-ings for unlawful deduction ofwages will be lodged with the in-dustrial tribunals.

NHS pay differences acrossUK explained – NI lags behind

Continuing uncertainty for Robinson Centre staff

2014/15

England

Wales

Scotland

NorthernIreland

1% non-consolidated for all staffat max of pay band. No in-crease on rates of pay for allother staff in receipt of an incre-ment

1% consolidated for all staff upto pay point 42 (Band 8b/c over-lap). No increase for staff at paypoint 43 and above. Incrementsfor staff up to pay point 34. Staffabove point 34 (max of Band 7 –no increment

£187 non-consolidated paymentplus increments

1% consolidated on all paypoints plus increments

1% consolidated plus incrementsplus for those earning less than£21,000 per annum an additionalsum to increase their pay by£300 in total

1% consolidated plus incre-ments plus for those earningless than £21,000 per annum anadditional sum to increase theirpay by £300 in total

1% non-consolidated paymentfor those staff at maximum oftheir pay band. For those in re-ceipt of an increment – no pay in-crease

No increase in pay (no negotia-tions to date)

2015/16

Page 11NEWS

Juvenile Justice staff poisedto act over rota changesCUSTODIAL Staff at the YouthJustice Agency are poised totake industrial action aftermanagement responded to a12% budget cut by seeking toimpose rota and attendancepattern changes.

The Chief Executive of the YJAhas written to NIPSA and Unisonto advise the unions that the re-vised rotas will be implemented inthe Juvenile Justice Centre inBangor from June 1, 2015.

While the new rotas provide fora slightly shorter shift, they willmean that staff will be required towork an additional 17 shifts in theyear.

In a note to staff local JJC man-agement stated: “Senior Man-agement are now in a position toadvise in more detail of thechanges that are required to en-

sure Woodlands JJC continues todeliver a professional service witha significantly reduced budget.The amount of savings the YouthJustice Agency must deliver in2015-16 is £2,278,000 andWoodlands’ contribution to thesavings is almost £1,000,000.”

The note continued: “Wood-lands savings plan has also takeninto account strategic recommen-dations from the recent CJINI In-spection and also feedback fromthe Review of Staffing at Wood-lands JJC undertaken by the NIPrison Service Profiling Team.The YJA’s Savings Plan identifiesthe changes that are required todeliver a child care service with a12% decrease in our budget.”

NIPSA and Unison representa-tives have raised major objec-tions to the plans yet

management appear determinedto push through what are in effectdetrimental changes to contrac-tual terms and conditions withoutthe agreement of staff.

HQ Official Ryan McKinney toldNIPSA News: “Yet again we see amanagement side pushing theimpact of budget cuts on to theshoulders of hard-working publicservants who have already en-dured pay freezes and pensioncuts.

“Staff in Woodlands JJC dealwith some of the most vulnerableyoung people in our society andthey work in an often-violent andthreatening environment. Thereshould be no question of forcingstaff against their will to spendeven more time in such stressfulconditions.

“The young people who end up

in custody deserve the best pro-fessional care but austerity meas-ures mean they will besupervised by public servantswho have been hammered bycuts and are now to be strong-armed into submission.

“That’s why there has beensuch a strong response by NIPSAand Unison members – they havehad their fill of such treatmentand are standing up for them-selves.”

NIPSA News understands thatdiscussions are continuing withmanagement and that the unionshave sought a meeting with theJustice Minister to discuss theissue. In the meantime, NIPSAreps are preparing for a fight andit is predicted such action is likelyto include a strike.

I AM a Union Learning Representative(ULR). There are many challenges in thisULR role, the balancing of work commit-ments with general union business andthen trying to fit in ULR-related activitiesand work into this – it isn’t easy but thething is, as Roisin Graham often says, “It iswhat you make it”.

I started off for a long while as an onlooker,very tentative not sure how it would roll – Ihadn’t a clue how to approach the role butthen completed the training and from thisgained the confidence to consider doingsomething, so hence a day in the life of aULR. I organised a single event last June andthis has led to a natural progression of myrole.

One day in my life as a ULR was spent inthe Tyrone & Fermanagh Hospital canteen inOmagh. I wanted to offer staff a chance tocheck out what opportunities were available tothem, from formal learning to health and safetyadvice to what events were on locally. Isourced a space and invited approximately 15exhibitors to come along with all their informa-tion and advice as well as freebies of course!

There was a bit of work in organising thiswhich involved chatting to staff and membersof the local community to get a measure ofwho to invite. Then there was the job of actu-ally inviting them – this was time consumingas on first contact I was often met with the re-sponse of, “it’s someone else who deals withthat”. So after much chasing up and manyemails, telephone calls etc, I had my venueand my exhibitors.

However, I realised I had other things toconsider. I had to publicise the event – I didthis through NIPSA email, Trust Communica-tion and posters and flyers which I had printed.

On the days leading up to the event I gotpermission for the post staff to leave my flyersoff when dropping off mail to staff. I organisedtea/coffee and scones as an incentive to staffto attend and for sustenance for the exhibitors.

The day went very well and we had a NIPSArecruitment stand set up - this was my first ex-perience of recruiting and I must say I dreadedit but on the day I surprised myself in that itwas not the selling thing that I had thought it

wasgoing to be. It was enjoyable – staff were gen-uinely interested in finding out about NIPSAand one of the main questions was how muchwere the subscriptions, this made it really easyto persuade them to join as no one can beatNIPSA on this!

The day was a great success and I must sayI felt a bit lost when it was over as I had beenin the mode of always having another call orsomething else to do. This period of inactivitydid not last long. There soon came a requestto have the same events in Derry/Londonderryand Enniskillen, so it all began again, but I hadlearnt a lot already and so was able to improvewith each event.

This initial day’s work has led to many otherundertakings. Some exhibitors were unable toattend on the designated day so I organisedfor them to attend the hospitals separatelyagain creating another opportunity for recruit-ment.

I have linked with South West College andformed a partnership with them to deliver OCRNVQ Level 4 Certificate in Business & Admin-istration, currently we have five staff complet-ing this.

I have also met with senior managementwithin the Trust to negotiate a Learning Agree-ment and this is currently being developed.This meeting has opened up the opportunityfor me to sit on a Training & Developmentforum within the Trust and to form links withthe training teams within the Trust.

I have organised two quizzes, one for Christ-mas and one for International Women’s Dayand had a non-bake off competition to markIWD in my own office.

I realised when organising the events thatthere were opportunities available to staff thatmaybe they weren’t aware of so I am currentlyin the process of collating all internal learningopportunities and courses as well as what isavailable in the community together and hope-fully will be able to compile this into a booklet.

Again this involves me liaising with learningproviders within the Trust and in the commu-nity as well as the Communications Depart-ment within the Trust.

The ULR role is a rewarding one as it is allgains for staff unlike the regular union repre-sentation work. One of the biggest challengeshas been, and continues to be, the promotionof the ULR role – it surprises me even yet thatI have to explain this to people who shouldknow.

It is my vision that the ULR role becomesmore visible and instead of me chasing upstaff and trying to identify learning needs thatin time this will reverse and I will have staffcoming to me with their queries as with anyother clearly-defined committee role.

It is a varied and interesting role and I havecome up against hurdles and difficulties butdealing with these has helped my confidenceincrease, so a personal benefit is to be had.

There are other benefits – the role has of-fered many opportunities to recruit new mem-bers and promote the Branch (NIPSA WHSCT734) as I have been able to involve other com-mittee members in helping out at events aswell as having their photos taken when pre-senting prizes etc.

As a ULR I have networked and connectedwith some very good people and have madegenuine true friends – a day in the life of aULR is interesting, challenging and fun!

A day in the life of a Union Learning RepBy Janice Walsh

Janice Walsh receiving her ULR certificate from NIPSA General Secetary Brian Campfield

Page 12 NEWS

e clusivExcSA Me NIP

Home and • , Home ounts on Car, cemium disPr

• ov ecdown and vehicle reakee brrF

• urance on car inss usee businesrF

o ounts fc Dis embers on Ca

aurel insavr d Tre policiesurancravel Ins and T

OIvery in NI & R

e policiesc *

or , ar,

eanc *

• urance on car inss usee businesrF

• artner and e, Por Spousounts fo cDis

• Flexible payment options

• cident a ed aceland basNorthern Ir

08000 66 55 quote your NIPSA membership or dnumber f

e policiesc

en living at Home d Childr

and claims 24hr helpline

44ountsc dis

e only applies to the main policy s uss 1 businesee Clas*frted by calling 08000 66 equest be r. It musautomatically added to your policy

e Buranc. Abbey Ins55 44 and quoting your union number. uthorityegulated by the Financial Conduct Aed and rauthoris

quote your NIPSA membership

y holder and is not by calling 08000 66

ers Limited is ok Br.ority

NICS staff stage demo outside Belfast City Hall over cuts to services and jobs on April 30

No more tax hikes – but what about pensions?ONE of the election promises made byCameron and Osborne was that therewould be no more tax hikes in the West-minster Parliament’s next five-year term.

Have they forgotten what is already in thepipeline from April 6, 2016 for all those whoare in defined benefit pension schemes – i.e.all public servants? Public servants will be hitby a 1.4% increase on the rate of national in-

surance as set out below:However, not only will all workers in defined

benefit pension schemes be hit again in theirpocket but the employers are also being hitwith a 3.4% increase in employers National In-surance payments.

It is estimated that this could cost the NHS£1 billion. This money is supposed to be re-turned to public sector employers – but will it?Or will it be added to the £30 billion of publicexpenditure savings the Government are de-termined to cut public services by.

Not only, of course, will these National Insur-ance hikes hit take-home pay, they are an in-tegral part of the lie that the new flat-ratesingle pension will improve the lot of pension-ers:

FACT: It will not apply to pensions in pay-ment.

FACT: It will take to 2050 or beyond beforeeveryone paying for the new flat-rate pensionwill get it in full.

FACT: Defined benefit pension schememembers – i.e. all public servants – will seethe amount of their flat-rate pension reducedto take account of the years they were con-tracted out.

FACT: It is part of the pension reformsaimed at increasing State Pension Age to 66by November 2020 and 67 by 2026 with theaim to get it to 70+ by 2040.

Is this the first broken promise or a case ofselective amnesia?

Gross salary£15,000 £129 p.a.

£269 p.a.£409 p.a.£489 p.a.

£25,000£35,000

£40,000+

Increase in National Insurance