GMB's best ballot response

by press office - gmb Tue Nov 06, 2007 16:05 press.office at gmb dot org dot uk 07921289880

re comment in last line on alleged GMB failure to ballot re Local Authority pay offer below is a press release from GMB website which your contributor missed. So comment that GMB did not ballot is not correct. Also for information GMB balloted 1570 classroom assistants in Northern Ireland.

Tuesday 2nd October 2007

GMB Members Accept Local Government Pay Offer
GMB members vote running overwhelmingly to accept pay offer for 2007

The GMB ballot on the 2007 pay offer for Local Government workers shows an overwhelming majority to accept after an initial 2% offer was rejected and following protracted negotiations and a threat of strike action by GMB members and the other trade unions the local government employers made a new, improved offer on 24th August 2007. The new offer is for a 2.475% increase backdated to 1st April 2007 and would establish a new minimum rate of £6 an hour. Establishing a minimum rate of £6 per hour makes a difference for the 300,000 council workers currently paid less than that. There are no strings or other changes to conditions.

A GMB conference on Thursday 6th September considered the new pay offer from the employers to settle the 2007 pay claim. The Conference decided :-

(i) to formally consult our members whether to accept or reject the offer
(ii) to suspend industrial action plans while GMB members were being consulted
(iii) to give all members an individual vote sent to home addresses
(iv) to put this final offer to members as the best that can be achieved through negotiations

The ballot closed at noon on 1st October 2007.

The vote shows a 7 to 1 majority to accept on a 25% turnout.

Brian Strutton, GMB National Secretary for Public Services said, “GMB members have voted overwhelmingly to accept the local government pay offer. The size of the majority is surprising given that the offer is worth a little over 2.5% and is well short of inflation. But GMB members have made a realistic assessment and decided to take the offer.

This has been a bad year for public sector pay and GMB members want to get this round out of the way to focus on the negotiation for 2008.”

Ends

by Jenny Wed Nov 07, 2007 13:41

It seems to me very strange that the GMB press office chose to provide a very lengthy answer on the question of the ballot on the local govt pay offer but studiously avoided the questions on the classroom assistants ballot. My mother is a part time cleaner in a school and received a ballot paper regarding the classroom assistants dispute. Other cleaners and catering staff also received a ballot paper on an issue that was nothing to do with them. My mother is very concerned, especially as my sister is a classroom assistant who has been out on strike. She knows that she shouldn't have got the ballot paper but others were confused and returned the ballot saying they didn't want to strike. Its easy to see why - the ballot paper said “Whilst this is a consultative ballot, you need to be aware when you make your decision, that if you reject this offer, I will then have to carry out a legal ballot for strike action. Feedback to date from you tells me that you do not wish to go on strike and lose money in circumstances where you now understand that this is the best deal that can be secured through negotiations” Talk about making sure you get the result you want. Why did GMB ballot the wrong workers? Was it deliberate or was it incompetence? How can such a ballot be legal? Answer the questions GMB. How many classroom assistant members do you have? Why did you ballot the wrong workers?

by solidarity seeker Wed Nov 07, 2007 14:46

Never slow to put up my hands and admit I was misinformed and therefore wrong in my comments about the NJC pay deal. But the comment from Jenny above are a real eye opener. All that was missing from the GMB ballot paper was "And if you vote yes, we'll come round and shoot you" All I can say about the recommendation of the offer is that if that "Sellout offer" is the best you can get or are willing to fight for, the GMB should consider some other line of business. On the point about the ballot papers going to the wrong people, that is a disgrace. Also was the figure 1570 the number of ballot papers sent out, or is that the suposed number of GMB classroom assistants? Also if the GMB does have CA's in 800 of the 1000 schools in N Ireland, why haven't I seen or heard of any?

by press.office@gmb.org.uk - gmb Wed Nov 07, 2007 20:26 press.office at gmb dot org dot uk 07921 289880

Regarding the first post on the GMB ballot of classroom assistants GMB commented on two points. First was to set the record straight regarding the NJC ballot. We simply reporoduced the press release we put out early last month on the issue. Second we confirmed that we had sent ballot papers to 1570 members our records show are employed as classroom assistants in Northern Ireland's 800 schools.

It is GMB policy that members must be consulted on what the negotiators consider to be the best offer that can be secured by negotiations. It is standard practice to advice members that if they reject the offer that the consultative ballot will be followed by a formal statutory strike ballot organized by an outside balloting body. In this case the negotiators considered that this final offer was the best that could be secured by negotiations and the members were adviced of this and if they voted to reject the offer GMB would proceed to the formal strike ballot.

We put out the following press release to report the result on 5th November 2007.

GMB members in northern ireland vote by wide margin to accept classroom assistants pay offer

GMB officer Eamonn Coy appeals for wise heads to prevail in the Education Service to conclude agreement on long running talks on job evaluation

GMB members employed as classroom assistants in over 800 schools across Northern Irelandhave voted in an individual postal ballot by a 4 to 1 margin to accept the final offer to conclude an agreement to settle the long running talks on job evaluation.

During the second week in October 2007 GMB sent a postal ballot to it's1,570 class room assistant members in over 800 schools in Northern Ireland on final offer and asked that ballot papers be returned by 26th October. This deadline was extended by a week because of the postal strike.

Eamonn Coy GMB Senior officer in Northern Irelandsaid, "GMB members in the classrooms in Northern Irelandhave voted by a wide margin to accept the final offer to settle this long running issue. They now look forward for wise heads to prevail in the Education Service to conclude an agreement on the current generation job evaluation scheme to get the £40million plus in the offer into their pay packets.

GMB members voted to accept the offer because they understand that not a single classroom assistant now employed will be worse off as a result of the offer. No current member of staff will loose money or be required to work longer or different hours.

Our members know that almost half of them will be upgraded worth £3.5m on the annual pay bill; they will get £25m in back pay; and £15m for agreeing to rationalise hours for new staff.

GMB members in schools want to see this matter concluded so that talks begin on job evaluation for other grades like cleaners and catering staff and expect these negotiations to be just as successful for these staff."

End

Notes to editors: GMB Members were advised that the offer was in 3 parts as follows:-

Regrading: Approx 50% of existing staff will be upgraded at a cost of £3.5m per year and up to £25m will be paid in back pay back to1995.

Hours rationalisation: The employer has agreed that an additional £15 million will be paid as a one off lump sum to all existing classroom assistants by way of compensation to existing staff for an hours rationalisation for new staff. 3,195 classroom assistants with less than 5 years service will get £1,614 and 3,629 above 5 years will get £2,479.

Pay Protection: No existing members of staff will be required to work additional hours or be required to change their hours of work or their times of work. Existing members of staff not upgraded will continue to receive their current hourly rates for their current hours of work. All existing staff not upgraded will continue to benefit from future pay increases. In addition, the special needs allowance will also be fully protected for existing staff and again, staff will see an increase in this allowance in line with future pay increases

end
Regarding comments that ballot papers were sent to members in other school support roles in this consultative ballot the union relies on our records in conducting internal ballots. This is why we print notices for noticeboards as we did here requesting those who did not get a ballot paper to contact us if they require one and for those balloted by mistake to contact us so that we can update the occupational and other membership details on our records. The regional committee would intervene if the result was likely to be influenced by these errors. The margin in this case is not likely to be affected by these errors.

by press.office@gmb.org.uk - gmb Wed Nov 07, 2007 20:26 press.office at gmb dot org dot uk 07921 289880

Regarding the first post on the GMB ballot of classroom assistants GMB commented on two points. First was to set the record straight regarding the NJC ballot. We simply reporoduced the press release we put out early last month on the issue. Second we confirmed that we had sent ballot papers to 1570 members our records show are employed as classroom assistants in Northern Ireland's 800 schools.

It is GMB policy that members must be consulted on what the negotiators consider to be the best offer that can be secured by negotiations. It is standard practice to advice members that if they reject the offer that the consultative ballot will be followed by a formal statutory strike ballot organized by an outside balloting body. In this case the negotiators considered that this final offer was the best that could be secured by negotiations and the members were adviced of this and if they voted to reject the offer GMB would proceed to the formal strike ballot.

We put out the following press release to report the result on 5th November 2007.

GMB members in northern ireland vote by wide margin to accept classroom assistants pay offer

GMB officer Eamonn Coy appeals for wise heads to prevail in the Education Service to conclude agreement on long running talks on job evaluation

GMB members employed as classroom assistants in over 800 schools across Northern Irelandhave voted in an individual postal ballot by a 4 to 1 margin to accept the final offer to conclude an agreement to settle the long running talks on job evaluation.

During the second week in October 2007 GMB sent a postal ballot to it's1,570 class room assistant members in over 800 schools in Northern Ireland on final offer and asked that ballot papers be returned by 26th October. This deadline was extended by a week because of the postal strike.

Eamonn Coy GMB Senior officer in Northern Irelandsaid, "GMB members in the classrooms in Northern Irelandhave voted by a wide margin to accept the final offer to settle this long running issue. They now look forward for wise heads to prevail in the Education Service to conclude an agreement on the current generation job evaluation scheme to get the £40million plus in the offer into their pay packets.

GMB members voted to accept the offer because they understand that not a single classroom assistant now employed will be worse off as a result of the offer. No current member of staff will loose money or be required to work longer or different hours.

Our members know that almost half of them will be upgraded worth £3.5m on the annual pay bill; they will get £25m in back pay; and £15m for agreeing to rationalise hours for new staff.

GMB members in schools want to see this matter concluded so that talks begin on job evaluation for other grades like cleaners and catering staff and expect these negotiations to be just as successful for these staff."

End

Notes to editors: GMB Members were advised that the offer was in 3 parts as follows:-

Regrading: Approx 50% of existing staff will be upgraded at a cost of £3.5m per year and up to £25m will be paid in back pay back to1995.

Hours rationalisation: The employer has agreed that an additional £15 million will be paid as a one off lump sum to all existing classroom assistants by way of compensation to existing staff for an hours rationalisation for new staff. 3,195 classroom assistants with less than 5 years service will get £1,614 and 3,629 above 5 years will get £2,479.

Pay Protection: No existing members of staff will be required to work additional hours or be required to change their hours of work or their times of work. Existing members of staff not upgraded will continue to receive their current hourly rates for their current hours of work. All existing staff not upgraded will continue to benefit from future pay increases. In addition, the special needs allowance will also be fully protected for existing staff and again, staff will see an increase in this allowance in line with future pay increases

end
Regarding comments that ballot papers were sent to members in other school support roles in this consultative ballot the union relies on our records in conducting internal ballots. This is why we print notices for noticeboards as we did here requesting those who did not get a ballot paper to contact us if they require one and for those balloted by mistake to contact us so that we can update the occupational and other membership details on our records. The regional committee would intervene if the result was likely to be influenced by these errors. The margin in this case is not likely to be affected by these errors.

by K Wed Nov 07, 2007 21:28

Could the unions please explain why they have not told their members that there was another BETTER offer made at the LRA negotiations?

Could the unions explain why they have not told their members that managements figures in the current offer are wrong? and that EVERYONE at the negotiations, management and trade unions, knows this?

It was agreed at the talks that the offer was not worth £25.2 million!

Why have classroom assistants not been told these facts?

by solidarity seeker Wed Nov 07, 2007 22:27

These figures of 3.5 and 25 million, are open to conjecture, and all the Unions know this. Why this is being kept quiet is beyond me. The members have the right to know what has been offered and what it will cost. GMB seem to be following the management line (No suprise there) Maybe these are GMB's figures, though judging by there claim to have 1570 classroom assistants in 800 of the 1000 schools in N Ireland I'd take what they say with a pinch of salt.
Also still no explanation why cleaners caterers and caretakers recieved ballots on the CA's offer.

by Alright Folks - Fighting Union Wed Nov 07, 2007 23:02

Am totally dismayed at the treachery of so-called brothers and sisters and supposedly fraternal organisations having a go at Strikers who have had the bravery to be the first to stand up to the Local Administration, and the top civil service mandarins that run Northern Ireland. One would make you THINK that Unison and the GMB have been bought over and are actually MAYBE acting as Government Agents?!?!?!
Will some of their Leaders get Knighthoods and accolades in the years ahead? We wait to see with baited breath, knowingly frowning at that being the case, PROBABLY.

NIPSA classroom assistants have shown the way for other workers, and one thing that is certain, that they have had a bigger list of enemies lined up against them than Adolf Hitler had against him in World War 2!!!!!
Management toffee noses have ranted and raved about this "wonderful" final-final-final-final offer, but have failed to tell classroom assistants that it is valued at about £16million, not £25.2, nor £30million.
Another wee aside, who would trust these Board Chief Executives who after all lied and lied and lied about their budgets two years ago!

Who fought for extra money for them back then?
NIPSA Members!
Oh how people have short memory spans!!!

by solidarity seeker Thu Nov 08, 2007 09:06

I've just read extracts from the assembly questions on Monday. It seems to me that there has been some high level ministerial debate on the availability of more money to help end this dispute. The implication quite clearly that if needed, there was. This brings me back to a point I made weeks ago re Solidarity. If as it would seem NIPSA CA's have on their own got to this point. Fighting not only management, the assembly , but also the other two main unions. What could of been achieved if UNISON and GMB had formed a united front!! Can't the leadership or the members of these two unions see that it wouldn't just be NIPSA members benefiting but all the CA's whatever Union they were in. Also the shock waves the united front would have sent to the assembly would be to the benefit of EVERY public sector worker in N Ireland. If I can see this I can't believe the respective union leaderships couldn't. I would agree with the posting above, maybe they had an eye to THIER futures, not their members...

by Erin go Bragh - Northern Ireland People Suspect Asellout Thu Nov 08, 2007 09:46

Parity downwards!

The National unions are so determined to ensure that CA's over this side of the water dont get a better deal that they would not hear tell of trying to progress the NVQ Level 3 issue.

Their view in the LRA talks was that they did not want Mainstream CA's to get one more penny from this Job Evaluation!
Rubbish deals in England and Wales mean that the same should happen here?

I kid you not, ask the GMB and Unison if this is true, because it is, 100%! (lets get the facts out there).

Another thing, if NIPSA endorses that its members sign off at some stage on this rubbish as it stands, I would advocate that Additional Special Needs CA's employ Stephane Cross and take a case not only against the employer, but also against NIPSA for selling them short on their back pay entitlements from 1995 to today. Collective agreements were never designed to take away peoples entitlement!

by Erin go Bragh - Northern Ireland Public Suspect Asellout Thu Nov 08, 2007 11:05

Would the GMB answer these questions in order to provide clarity:-
"GMB members in northern ireland vote by wide margin to accept classroom assistants pay offer"
Was it Classroom Assistants or all GMB members?

"an agreement on the current generation job evaluation scheme to get the £40million plus in the offer into their pay packets".
Can the GMB substantiate there is going to be £40million plus paid out, or is this statement just a management regurgatation?

"GMB members voted to accept the offer because they understand that not a single classroom assistant now employed will be worse off as a result of the offer".
What about new Classroom Assistants, or those who break service, dont they forfeit? Has the GMB allowed for a few pieces of silver, the actual downgrading of most CA posts, some 68% of posts?

"Our members know that almost half of them will be upgraded worth £3.5m on the annual pay bill; they will get £25m in back pay; and £15m for agreeing to rationalise hours for new staff".
Clarify almost half?
Again, can the GMB produce figures to back up these statements, or are these statements just managements weasley words?

" GMB members in schools want to see this matter concluded so that talks begin on job evaluation for other grades like cleaners and catering staff and expect these negotiations to be just as successful for these staff."
Catering staff have already been evaluated? YES!

GMB have stated incorrect facts here, and should refute them if they can, but truth is, they will not be able to!

by searcher Thu Nov 08, 2007 12:22

I have been interested in the GMB's claim to represent 1570 classroom assistants in 800 schools in N Ireland. So I was obvioulsy interested whem Mr Coy presented two of his CA members on TV last week. Would the GMB like to comment about the fact that these two CA's don't work in a board school, so are actually not part of the dispute, they are from an intergrated school so are employed by NICIE. Surely Mr Coy knew this, though seing as the GMB sent out ballots to cleaners caterers and caretakers on this issue, I'm sure Mr Coy wasn't interested in such details as "Are these people actually part of the dispute before we use them to sell out their brothers and sisters.

by Marty McK - does it matter if there is an organisation? Fri Nov 09, 2007 22:59

Ask the question of each ELB how many GMB members are classroom assistants?

by N I People Suspect Asellout - Protecting Workers Interests Sat Nov 10, 2007 00:33

NIPSA currently claims 3100+ Classroom Assistant members, and I believe that to be a true figure.
GMB claim 1570,(Id say that might be their total membership in all staff in education) UNISON claims 2500 (another fabrication?), ATL claims 50; T&G hasnt a clue what it has, one day its 50, the next its 19!!!

Each Board should be asked this Freedom of Information question:
How many Classroom Assistant staff pay union subs by BACS to each union?
Provide this information for
NIPSA
Unison
GMB
T&G.

Bet you would see then who is the truth tellers.

Oh, has it never occured to anybody that the management Upper Class Spokesperson would tear a strip off NIPSA if for one second that NIPSA told a lie about their numbers of members?

by The Man In The Duffelcoat - Observers Inc. Wed Dec 05, 2007 16:04

Nipsa,well led by John Corey,fought a good fight but there is no point now in unions bickering amongst each other in public,with the media and the employers laughing at us.We should sort this out amongst ourselves and look at what else can be done,now that the strikes are over.