18 January 2008
The Trades Union Congress has stressed the need to maintain a united front as public sector pay negotiations go forward in a potentially hostile climate.
In outright defiance of the government's 2% pay cap, local government unions this week staked a claim for a 6% pay increase for more than 1 million council workers in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.
Teachers meanwhile had their worst fears allayed when they learned that they would receive a pay rise in excess of the cap – 2.45% from September, followed by 2.3% in each of the following two years.
Pay dominated the agenda at this month's meeting of the TUC's Public Services Liaison Group, held on January 14, as union bosses digested the implications of the three-year pay deals floated last week by Prime Minister Gordon Brown.
The unions agreed on the importance of co-ordinating their campaigning activities and action. But a TUC spokeswoman told Public Finance that the prospect of any strike action was still 'way down the line' as individual pay negotiations had yet to get off the ground.
She added that the PSLG was likely to consider joint lobbying action at its next meeting, scheduled for early February. 'If there was [a lobby], it makes sense to have all the unions involved,' she said.
The Public and Commercial Services union led the call for joint action. General secretary Mark Serwotka said it was becoming increasingly clear that the government was using three-year deals to drive down pay.
'The 2005 pensions campaign showed that when unions work together they are stronger and can win, which is why we are calling on public sector trade unions to campaign together and prepare for joint action to ensure civil and public servants don't see their pay cut in real terms.'
The teachers' pay award, however, has done little to foster a sense of public sector unity. Their 2.45% pay hike for 2008/09 has infuriated police officers, who are still smarting at the decision to stage their pay award this year.
A Police Federation spokeswoman told PF that the decision 'blows out of the water the government's rhetoric that all public sector pay rises have to be below 2%'.
She added: 'There is no consistency in government policy. Police officers were angry before, they're even angrier now.'
Police Federation members are preparing for a march and rally in central London on January 23.
Teaching unions acknowledged that they had fared better than many other public sector workers, but with inflation running at 4% under the Retail Price Index, they continued to air their grievances.
National Union of Teachers general secretary Steve Sinnott said: 'Teachers will be worse off. This will reduce their standard of living and exacerbate the problems of recruitment and retention.'
Sensitivities over pay were further exacerbated by the recommendations of the Senior Salaries Review Body, which proposed an increase of 2.56% for MPs, plus a £650 'catch-up' payment. But ministers tried to defuse the expected row by proposing a two-stage deal to keep the rise below 2%.
Despite the cap, local government unions insisted that their claim of 6% or 50p an hour was modest.
Unison national secretary Heather Wakefield said: 'Over the past three years local government workers' pay has increased by less than the rate of inflation, so we are starting from a low base. We need to make sure that they catch up with the rest of the public sector.'
Peter Allenson, national organiser for services and local government with Unite, added that unions were determined to make a difference after last year's below-inflation pay increase.
'Local government employers must recognise the pace of change, and if they wish to become employers of choice they must reward their staff accordingly,' he said.
But local government employers warned that they would take a 'firm line' with the unions, saying any pay deal must be affordable.
Brian Baldwin, chair of the Employers' Side for council worker pay, said: 'It must be borne in mind that if the pay settlement is set too high, then local authorities will have to make unpleasant choices between cutting frontline services and laying off staff.'
PFjan2008
