Showing posts with label GMB. Show all posts
Showing posts with label GMB. Show all posts

Thursday 7 November 2013

Sabina Khan and Zaffar van Kalwala move ahead in the Brent Central race

Sabina Khan has overtaken Dawn Butler in the number of ward nominations for Brent Central tonight having been chosen by both Welsh Harp and Dudden Hill.  Zaffar van Kalwala got the male nomination in Dudden Hill and Dr Sundar Thava the Welsh Harp. Kalwala now has four nominations, equal to Dawn Butler, with Sabina Khan one ahead on five.

Patrick Vernon was a strong runner up in both Mapesbury and Dudden Hill.

Kingsley Abrams has been nominated by the GMB Central London Branch.

Tony McNulty and Sabina Khan were nominated by the Cooperative Party.

Ward Nominations Complete List
.
Ward
Female nomination
Male Nomination
Tokyngton
Dawn Butler
Zaffar Van Kalwala
Stonebridge
Butler
Kalwala
Harlesden
Butler
Kalwala
Willesden Green
Sabina Khan
Imran Ahmed
Kensal Green
Khan
Parmijit Dhanda
Dollis Hill
Butler
Liaquat Ali
Mapesbury
Khan
Mike Katz
Dudden Hill 
Khan
Kalwala
Welsh Harp 
Khan
Dr Sundar Thava

Friday 14 June 2013

Green activists declare support for Brighton Cityclean workers

The GMB Cityclean picket line this morning
The Green Party has rightly been subject to close scrutiny over the performance of its first Green led (though minority) council in Brighton and Hove. The party has been hampered by an unholy alliance opposition of Labour and Conservative councillors but nonetheless has been able to implement some progressive policies. Its decision to stay in office and implement Coalition cuts has been controversial to say the least and one that I do not support, but some problems have been of its own making, through inexperience or poor decision making.

This is the case with the Cityclean dispute and I support the position put below in an Open Letter by a group of Green councillors and activists in the city:

As concerned Green Party activists, Councillors and trade unionists we feel we have no option other than to write this letter. This is our response to the news that the Council’s Cityclean workforce intend to take industrial action following the collapse of negotiations relating to proposed changes to their pay and allowances.

We are appalled that the situation has escalated to the point where Council employees are forced to take strike action in order to be heard. We are concerned that as activists from a party which has spent years arguing for workers’ rights that on this occasion the argument is wrong.

We continue to oppose the imposition of pay cuts as per the decision of our Emergency General Meeting in May. Further we will show solidarity with the workers affected by this decision.

We are Green Party members because we believe in its core value of social justice. Imposing a reduction to the take home pay of some of our lowest paid workers runs completely contrary to this.

We fully support the difficult process of trying to equalise the Council’s very complex allowance system so that all staff are treated fairly. That said we deplore the fact that previous Labour and Conservative-led councils failed to fix the problem when they had the opportunity.

However, we cannot accept a situation which attempts to impose a settlement on staff without the agreement of all Unions involved. Negotiations should not pit worker against worker.

We remain concerned that as yet there appears to be no satisfactory negotiated resolution which means that balloting has happened and industrial action will occur from 6am this morning for a week.

We ask all sides to urgently find a successful resolution to avert industrial action which we believe could cause all workers, the council and the City considerable pain.

Tuesday 11 June 2013

Brighton Green Party and GMB move a little closer on cityclean dispute

Senior members of Brighton & Hove Green Party have issued statements in response to the GMB's stated intention for their members in cityclean to go on strike for a week starting this Friday 14th June.

Leader of the council and convenor of the Green administration, Jason Kitcat, said:
 
"I am disappointed by the GMB decision to begin industrial action this Friday. I understand the strong feelings involved and am committed to ensuring there is a negotiated solution to resolving the difficult historical equal pay issues for the council's pay and allowances. The council's negotiating team is engaging openly and regularly with both recognised trade unions.

 "During the forthcoming strike week, which starts on Friday, the environmental health of the city and its residents is clearly essential and council officers will continue to meet their public health legal obligations but this administration will not sanction the use of agency or contract workers to do the regular work of legitimately striking council staff whilst those staff are out on strike.

"Accordingly, I am able to announce that all agency workers currently engaged in refuse collection and street cleaning will be withdrawn from service by 10pm on Thursday night, the day before the strike is due to begin, and agency workers will not be deployed in these areas during the strike week.

 "The Council continues to invite both recognised unions to negotiating meetings. That offer is being made daily. I urge the GMB to return to the table."

 Caroline Lucas, MP for Brighton Pavilion, said: 

"I know from my postbag that residents in the city are worried about health issues and also about the fair and proper treatment of striking cityclean workers, so I welcome Jason's announcement. This is good news and I hope that now the position on this has been made clear, GMB negotiators will be prepared to return to negotiations before Friday."

On behalf of Brighton & Hove Green Party, chair Rob Shepherd said:

"It is with a heavy heart that I realise industrial action is imminent. But the Greens in Brighton & Hove have been saying all along that agency staff will not be used for strike breaking during next week's strike and Jason has confirmed this unambiguously. With this said, and with the agency workers being withdrawn well before the strike begins, I join Caroline and Jason in encouraging the GMB negotiators back to the table before Friday."

In response the GMB issued this statement:

GMB has welcomed a commitment from the leader of Brighton Council that no agency or contractors will be used during any period of industrial action. The commitment was made in an e-mail from Council leader Jason Kitcat who said:

“This administration will not sanction the use of agency or contract workers to do the regular work of legitimately striking Council staff whilst those staff are out on strike. Accordingly, I am able to announce that all agency workers currently engaged in refuse collection and street cleaning will be withdrawn from service by 10pm on Thursday night, the day before the strike is due to begin, and agency workers will not be deployed in these areas during the strike week.”

As a result of this commitment GMB has confirmed that it will engage in negotiations with the Council to see if a way forward can be found.

Mark Turner, GMB Branch Secretary said:

“This is a small first step for the Council on the way to resolving this dispute. As a result GMB has confirmed that it is willing to attend talks to listen to what the Council have to say.

I will however say that there will need to be substantial movement in their position for industrial action to be averted. Whilst our members do not take strike action lightly, they cannot be expected to accept these reductions to their take home pay. I would like to thank those Councillors in the administration who have supported our members and brought about this decision.”

Monday 23 July 2012

Children to lose hot meals at Brent school?

Message from GMB union posted today

No more hot meals?
 GMB Union is fighting to save the jobs of seven catering staff at Our Lady of Grace RC Junior School Dollis Hill Lane. Jobs are under threat as a result of the school’s decision to move from a full school meals service to a sandwiches only service which will be available only to pupils entitled to free school meals. The school will provide nothing at all for other pupils.

Mary Turner, GMB Branch Secretary and National President said “The decision by the Head Teacher and the Governors of the school is unacceptable on every level".

School staff were only made aware a few days before the end of the school term for the summer holidays. The employer catering contractor, ISS Catering, is seeing if it can relocate the staff to other schools in the borough. However, some staff will have to travel long distances from one end of the Brent to the other if they are lucky enough to find an alternative job.

The school has said that no decision had been taken, but a sandwich provider turned up at the school with samples.

The decision to provide a sandwich only service to pupils entitled to free school meals will identify them as children of parents on benefits and these children could face bullying as a result. Under the previous service free school meals pupils were integrated with those who paid for their school meals, so nobody could be singled out.

This will come as a shock to all parents of pupils at the school as the head teacher and governors have failed to consult them or GMB.

GMB is calling on the school to re-think its decision and is asking for the Diocese of Westminster and Brent Council to intervene.”

Sunday 22 January 2012

Is a council tax rise to protect services an option?

Local government is faced with real dilemmas regarding funding cuts imposed by the Coalition which they then have to pass on by cutting public services. Implementing cuts but 'protecting vital services' or 'protecting the most vulnerable' became the policy of many councils . When it was pointed out that the scale of the cuts made that impossible and they should refuse to make the cuts, they said that if they did that the cuts would then be made by people less sensitive to local needs. Early on Brent Council seemed to be arguing that they were making the cuts so cleverly that people would not notice the difference. However recently they have painted a much bleaker picture and admitted that the cuts threatened the very existence of viable local government.

No council, including the Green led Brighton and Hove City Council, have yet refused to make the cuts or set an 'illegal budget'. Clearly such a policy has to start somewhere and will only really be effective if it is a start of a movement by many councils. Someone has to take the lead and perhaps Brighton should have done. I have argued that Brent Labour should initiate such a campaign amongst London councils. Whilst not advocating refusing to set a budget  Cllr Ann John, leader of Brent Council,  recently conceded that if there was a groundswell of opinion there could be a joint approach to the Coalition government.  There is little time now for such a campaign ahead of the 2012-13 budget setting.

However, some councils, starting with Brighton and Hove, have taken a different step to protect services, albeit still implementing some cuts. The have decided to spurn the government's grant for freezing council tax, and gone ahead and tabled increases. The Budget Report that went before Brent Council, warned that a council tax freeze over several years would seriously erode the Council's revenue base. Cllr Muhammed Butt,  lead member for resources, said that the government grant was a 'trap' and would result eventually in a loss in revenue but Ann John said that Brent Labour had made a manifesto commitment to keep the council tax low. She noted however that some Tory councils were now in revolt and things might change.

According to Brent's figures the impact of raising the Council Tax by 2.5% would be significant (figures in bold in brackets below):


Budget Gap
2012-13 £m
2013-14 £m
2014-15 £m
2015-16  £m
Annual
4.4 (4.4)
6.4 (1.1)
22.5 (19.7)
16.1 (13.1)
Cumulative
4.4 (4.4)
10.8 (5.5)
33.3  (25.2)
49.4 (38.3)

Brighton and Hove has led the field with a council tax rise of 3.5% but have been followed by Darlington Borough Council. Leicester City Council. Middlesbrough Council. Nottingham City Council, Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council, Stockton-on Tees Borough Council and Stoke-on -Trent City Council who are all Labour authorities. They have been joined with lower increases by Tory authorities, Chelmsford (2.46%), Peterborough City (2.95%) and Surrey County Council (2.99%).  Whilst losing the government grant the rise enables them to have a net increase in revenue and this safeguard some services.

Eric Pickles, Communities and Local Government Secretary, has lost no time in denouncing these councils. He said that 'a vote against the council tax freeze is a vote for punishing tax rises.....councillors have a moral duty to sign up to keep down the cost of living'. Councils also have a moral duty to maintain services for their residents. A council tax rise can be seen as a different way of shifting the cost of the economic crisis on to ordinary people and it is not a particularly progressive tax, but at the same time it shares the cost of preserving services for the most vulnerable amongst all residents.

It is certainly a strategy that deserves debate and Greens in Brighton and Hove have had an extended consultation with local residents about its budget which was opposed by the 'Purple Opposition Coalition' of Labour and Conservatives.

Breaking ranks with Labour,the GMB in Brighton which represents many council workers, has given its approval to the Greens' council tax proposals.


Branch secretary Mark Turner said:
The GMB agrees that the plans to increase council tax by 3.5% this year are in the best long term interests of the city.

The Coalition government offer of a freeze in council tax is a bribe that would quickly leave the city much worse off, and less able to provide the services that residents expect and need.

It seems that Brighton Labour and Conservative parties have not grasped the financial realities of the long term damage taking the council tax freeze would create.

The city already faces extreme challenges because of the Coalition's huge reduction in the grant to the council - taking the freeze offer would make the situation even worse.

While the increase may seem unfair to residents, the truth is that we will all be much worse off without it, not just the council staff who will lose their jobs, but the whole city would suffer as services deteriorate needlessly.
Because Brent Council made a decision to freeze council tax before putting forward a budget we have not been able to have a debate about this in Brent. A decision to raise council tax can be seen as still making ordinary people pay for the economic crisis caused by the bankers and hitting them when incomes are frozen and inflation rising. It can also be seen as the only way to preserve vital council services and spreading the load across the population.

Next year I believe Brent Council should have a full and open debate about the options available as the Brighton Greens managed recently. Formulating a 'needs led' budget with local people, trades unionists and voluntary organisations would give a firm basis for going out and campaigning against Coalition cuts and would be a way of preserving local democracy.

An independent comment on the Brighton budget process can be seen HERE

Wednesday 25 August 2010

More than one way to fight the cuts?

Tonight's meeting at the Brent Trades Hall to discuss organising against the cuts will be vitally important. One important issue will be the type of action that can be taken. The problem with strike action, although a key weapon, is that such action by public sector workers can impact on the very people we are trying to defend. As today's report by the Institute for Fiscal Studies made clear these are poor families, women and those with disabilities. In the last period of mass anti-cuts action in the 70s and 80s there were attempts to bring together workers and users of services to not only defend public services but also to agree ways that they could be improved. As public sector workers we have to be prepared to admit that public services as presently constituted are not perfect.

In the summer in which Jimmy Reid of the Upper Clyde Shipbuilders occupation died, occupations should again be considered as a way of fighting cuts. The UCS occupation inspired other occupations across the country. As a young teacher I was involved in a small occupation when Fulham Baths (both a swimming pool and a public baths for those who at the time lacked bathrooms at home).  The baths were occupied by workers from the baths, trades unionists and members of the local community. As a local teacher and NUT member I joined the occupation and slept in a sleeping bag at the side of the swimming pool overnight and then went in to teach the next day. Now I cannot imagine how I coped with a full teaching load! The occupation was fully supported by local people, especially children as the photograph shows, and I used to take my class to swim in the pool during the occupation. We were determined to keep a resource used and valued by the community. We didn't save that particular building but we did help ensure a new pool was built nearby.

Children marching in defence of Fulham Baths and swimming in the occupied pool.
Some of the occupiers outside the baths including a young Paul Kenny (last on right), then a local GMB organiser, and now leader of the GMB

Another occupation around the same time in which I was involved was that of Hounslow Hospital. Although the times were different and strategies need to be updated there is a useful Handbook on Hospital Occupations available based on lessons from that campaign: HERE  We should consider occupations for community buildings that belong to us but which may be closed down (Kilburn College), moth-balled (Children's Centres if funding is not secured after 2011), or sold off (Brent Town Hall?).
Other methods could include working but not charging the public (tubes, buses etc) and showing the public in advance how the cuts will hit services by having an open day and showing them how cuts will hit. I did this sucessfully in one school where we 'implemented' the cuts and showed parents the resulting increases in class sizes, crowded class rooms and sharing of resources. The result was parents with much more idea of what cuts would mean and increased support for the campaign - plus good local newspaper coverage.

We will also need to consider how to campaign on cuts which are not jobs but welfare benefits including disability and housing, and cuts of funding for future projects like the Building Schools for the Future and Playbuilder programmes, and those affecting voluntary organisations. 

A complicating factor is the impact creeping privatisation. In contrast the to the 70s there are private companies waiting like vultures for public services to crumble so that they can leap in as 'providers' and make a tidy profit. As services provided by Brent Council to schools for example, are cut as staff are not replaced or are made redundant, they become less efficient. Schools will then be tempted to 'buy in' services from the private sector and deprive the council department of revenue, leading to a further downward spiral and perhaps leading to the department closing completely as it will be 'uneconomic'. The private sector will then be free to charge schools higher fees. This is likely to happen with services such as Brent's supply teacher pool. At present teachers employed by schools via the pool get a higher rate than private supply staff because the private companies rake of a fat agency fee. As headteachers are involved in recruiting teachers to the supply pool they have some control over the quality of staff - this is much reduced with private agencies.

But perhaps the greatest contrast with the 70s and 80s were at the time we still did have some shipbuilding, iron works and coal mining. With most of that dismantled by Thatcher and her followers and the subsequent reliance on the financial sector, with the dire results that we are now grappling with, we need to look at alternative economic models. An anti-cuts campaign needs to be proactive as well as reactive and we need to be questioning the whole basis of the Coalition's policy of drastic cuts and paying off the debt within 4 years. This is like a family deciding to pay off a 25 year mortgage in 4 years by turning off the heating, living on bread and water, and not sending the kids to school to save money on clothes!

Instead we need to be putting forward the need for investment in green jobs, education and training as part of the transformation of the economy and press for cuts where it really matters - Trident, defence, bankers' bonuses.