11.03.2010

Prepare carefully for fresh action

Dave Vincent fears that the PCS NEC has backed itself into a corner

This week’s two-day strike called by the Public and Commercial Services union got good support. According to the union, around 200,000 members came out, but the government claimed it was just 85,000.

I will not set out here all the ins and outs of exactly which civil servants - according to age,  grade, pay, length of service are affected when and to what degree by the proposed cuts in our Civil Service Compensation Scheme (CSCS - but let us just call it the redundancy pay scheme). Suffice to say, far too many face losing between a third and a half of their contractual entitlement if the government wins this fight.

The PCS leadership conducted one of the most extensive consultation exercises last October-November, explaining the proposals to members and asking whether they were prepared to take action. In my branch (the largest in the ministry of justice) our members, in office after office, agreed that they would take strike action if necessary (so long as it was civil service-wide, not just Ministry of justice) and that such action would best be taken in the run-up to the general election, not after.

Two caveats here - this was the conclusion of those who attended the workplace meetings (just about 50%) and only after half an hour of debating through the pros and cons. The problem was reaching the other 50% - a point to which I will return later.

The NEC duly balloted the membership during February on taking discontinuous strike action, which was supported by a two-to-one majority on a 34% turnout, and on “action short of a strike” (ie an overtime ban), which was backed four to one.

There has been a lot of media coverage of the March 8-9 strike (PCS also has members in privatised sections that are not affected by these proposals, so not the entire membership was called out). From what I have seen, faced with the predictably hostile questions, general secretary Mark Serwotka and other picket line interviewees responded well.

In my branch the mood for action over pay in November 2008, in the midst of a full-blown recession, fell through the floor and I am glad the NEC called it off. That avoided a disaster of strikebreaking and mass resignations. However, over the CSCS attacks we managed to build better support, but the mood was still pretty down. But in little over a week, through newsletters, leaflets and chatting to colleagues, our reps had improved the mood from barely 50-50 to 70-30 or even 80-20 in favour of action - not as good as on some previous occasions, but a hell of an improvement over 2008. I suspect the same applies across many departments, once you get past the hype and spin merchants.

So in most of the offices in my branch support for the strike was pretty good. We raised £1,300 by bucket collections on picket lines, had newer, younger members out who have never been on strike before, and persuaded ex-members who had resigned over the 2008 strike to rejoin. We now have some promising new activists if we cultivate and mentor them.

But there was a downside. For example, in a workplace where the two reps were away on pre-booked annual leave and were therefore not picketing their offices, the staff went in. It was the same in two other offices where we do not have an active rep.

This brings me to the 50% of members who will not attend union meetings and do not read union literature, however much PCS pumps out (a lot). There is a significant minority of union members who have accepted the Tory argument that you can ignore majority votes for action with impunity. A number were also influenced by a civil service conduct policy (emailed to all staff on the eve of action) threatening pickets with dismissal proceedings if they said anything that caused strikebreakers to lodge a complaint. But despite this in the Manchester Civil Justice Centre (my workplace), where the MOJ’s chief executive, the north-west regional director and the Greater Manchester area director are all based, fewer staff went in than had been expected.

The rally held in Manchester on the Monday, addressed by PCS vice-president and Socialist Workers Party member Sue Bond, was well attended. Support was expressed by a Fire Brigades Union official, a Fujitsu striker, a National Union of Journalists activist and a speaker from Unite Against Fascism (who plugged the national anti-English Defence League march in Bolton on Saturday March 20). The Hazel Blears Must Go candidate standing for the Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition in Salford was reasonably well received - two of my members from Salford immediately stated he would get their vote. The next speaker was a PCS activist from the Labour Representation Committee who urged us to reclaim the Labour Party. Silence!

Sue Bond confirmed that the NEC is planning to call further strikes - one day each week throughout March, when our action had to be concentrated for maximum impact on the government in the pre-election period.

I think I spoke for a good number when I stated from the floor that the NEC had better have strong evidence that further action will be supported so soon, given the qualms many members had about taking two days in one go (100,000 civil servants are on less than £15k per year). I said that if the NEC just commanded action without ensuring that support had been built up on the ground, that could be viewed as too much, too soon. It could undermine all the hard work we had done for the current action and drive some members into the ranks of the strikebreakers, however reluctantly. We just cannot be seen to deliver less support next time than this time. Other speakers endorsed this - no-one said their members would be up for further action unless they were fully prepared for it. A speaker from the department for work and pensions made the call I usually make - for intelligent use of paid selective strike action as the next step, but was met with the usual dismissive comments from Sue Bond.

The London rally in a Westminster Cathedral meeting room (a smaller venue than normally used by PCS in London) attracted approximately 300 strikers. They were addressed by Mark Serwotka, RMT general secretary Bob Crow and a speaker from the NUJ. While there were some inspiring speeches from the top table, there was no time for speakers from the floor. I am told by a London PCS activist that many members in the capital are also less than keen on further action so soon. Mark was collared afterwards and asked for selective action to be considered.

I heard him make two great points in media interviews. He said that the government claims it has to pay bankers’ bonuses because they were contractual, yet they are ripping up civil servants’ contractual rights to redundancy payments. He also pointed out that due to government cuts in tax offices £130 billion in tax revenue remains uncollected. I also heard a PCS picket respond to the usual “How can civil servants justify retaining generous redundancy payments compared to the private sector?” with: “That argument leads to a race to the bottom. By that logic everyone should be on the minimum wage!”

It is obvious that the government wants to cut redundancy pay because it is planning more redundancies (100,000 civil service jobs have already been lost through ‘natural wastage’: ie staff leaving and not being replaced) and to make privatisation more attractive to outside bidders.

Activists understand this. We recognise the threat and the need for action. Our members have responded pretty well (I strongly suspect out of loyalty, not enthusiasm) but are unsure about losing more pay, given the government has not yet budged an inch.

A significant number of passive members has been more convinced by disingenuous treasury propaganda than by PCS literature. The employer can reach staff via their PCs daily, whereas PCS has to issue bulletins which are often received days later (often too late).

PCS has once again led the way and once again other unions affiliated to the Labour Party want to deliver their members’ votes for Brown against Cameron rather than for any strike action pre-general election. This leaves me in the difficult position of agreeing we need to fight the attacks before the general election, and I, like others, have worked so hard to get our members this far, but am unconvinced that further action in March is deliverable to the level of the last two days.

I fear the NEC has backed itself into a corner by insisting on constant action throughout March. This is too important to take a gamble on - the NEC must encourage honest reports from branches, not just spin from favoured reps in order to arrive at a correct assessment of the support there is (or isn’t) before fresh strikes are called.

I do not want to have to pick up the pieces if further action is a flop. The current strike took far too much effort to deliver to allow us to presume continued support so soon. I for one do not want to see that effort wasted.