The next meeting of the Amicus Greater Manchester IT Branch will discuss a presentation “Defending Our Pensions” from our branch secretary, Derek Wise. Derek was our union pensions rep at MAN05 until he retired, and is now active in the Manchester TUC Pensioners Association.
6pm-7:30pm, Thursday 6th April
Upstairs in the Hare & Hounds pub, 46 Shudehill, Manchester City Centre. M4 4AA. The venue is near the Shudehill Metrolink station and the spiral ramp to the Arndale car park.
All branch members are welcome to attend. The meeting will also hear workplace reports and deal with normal branch business.
The government is asking for comments on its plans for pensions. Have your say here: http://www.dwp.gov.uk/debate/consult/.
As part of the relocation to Central Park, many of us are receiving a disturbance allowance for extra travelling. To continue the allowance after 1st April, the company has asked people to re-apply using a web site.
Unfortunately, the web site only accepts whole numbers of miles for travel distances. HRdirect have confirmed that “if you have rounded it up then you have completed it correctly”.
For daily travel, a rounding error can quickly add up, so make sure you’ve claimed it correctly.
Amicus is organising regional equality forums for:
· Young Members (evening of Tuesday 11th April), contact Prestwich Office Tel: 0161 798 8976 for further details.
· Disabled Members (evening of Tuesday 11th April), contact Prestwich Office Tel: 0161 798 8976 for further details.
· Black and Ethnic Minority Members (evening of Tuesday 25th April), contact Southport Office Tel: 01704 546 500 for further details.
· Lesbian, Gay, Bi-sexual & Trans Members (evening of Tuesday 25th April), contact Prestwich Office Tel: 0161 798 8976 for further details.
It would be helpful if you also let the local group know so that we can help you participate in these areas of the union’s work.
Amicus celebrated International Women's Day in March by launching its first e-equality Newsletter. This day is celebrated all over the world and in many countries it is designated as a national holiday. This is something that Amicus is campaigning for as the UK has amongst the fewest bank holidays, alongside some of the longest working hours in Europe. We believe that a bank holiday on International Women's Day would celebrate and highlight the contribution that women have made and continue to make around the world.
If you would like to receive this by e-mail on a monthly basis please contact Amicus with your email address.
On Monday night, --name of company HR head removed-- wrote once again to some of the Manchester workforce. For those who HR excluded, we have published his letter on CafeVIK.
Employees saw through the “Bogus ballot” and the climb-down from HR is clearly welcome.
However, this does not mean the company is now doing what employees want. They still intend to impose the bog-standard pay review on one part of the Manchester bargaining unit, while they have caused an entirely avoidable delay for the rest of us, even if the eventual deal is backdated.
More seriously, the company is also trying to exclude those getting the bog-standard pay review from all the benefits of union recognition. We aren’t out of the woods yet.
Members can help distribute the latest “One Per Desk” leaflet across the Manchester sites this week.
We’ve also published this leaflet on CafeVIK for HOM99 staff and those working off site.
To see an electronic copy of our paper one-per-desk leaflet on "Pay Comparators", click here. This leaflet was produced for our Manchester Central Park and West Gorton sites.
A key theme of Amicus campaigning in Fujitsu over recent years has been the need for published pay scales as part of an open and transparent pay system.
We are pleased to report a breakthrough.
Amicus can now provide Fujitsu’s pay comparators to members.
This information can help you:
· discuss your pay and benefits with your manager, including when you’re promoted
· check whether pay reviews are being applied fully and fairly to you
· make informed decisions about possible role changes, (e.g. to develop your career, during redeployment or reorganisation)
· decide whether to complain if you suspect you are being treated worse than colleagues
· understand how typical Fujitsu pay rates have changed and how they compare to the external job market
· choose assignments
A briefing pack of information is being sent to Amicus members’ home addresses this week. The information will cover the overwhelming majority of Fujitsu employees, but sadly some roles are not covered.
Amicus will continue its campaign for a fully open and transparent pay system. Pay comparators to be published for all staff to see. Pay pots, benefit levels and the processes around them should not be secret.
In the meantime, the company is keen that this information should not be given to non-Amicus-members. The information was provided for collective bargaining purposes in Manchester. Amicus is asking members to respect the company’s wishes and not pass the information on, to avoid jeopardising access to pay information in future years.
Many of your colleagues who are not yet Amicus members will be keen to see the information. Please tell them about this breakthrough and invite them to join. They will then be able to request their own copy. Membership forms are available:
On CafeVIK,
Or on the Internet
It is also now possible to join online.
This success has only been possible because of union organisation. It was achieved as a result of a legal claim asserting rights arising from union recognition in Manchester. Considerable resources from Reps, Officers and our legal advisers were required to achieve this result. Your subs helped pay for this victory and for the wider campaign it is part of. Members across the company distributed leaflets, took part in pay surveys and helped with the campaign in many other ways.
Every member can be proud of the part they played.
As always, anyone requiring individual advice should contact their local Amicus Rep.
If you are an Amicus member in Fujitsu but don’t receive the briefing pack within a week of this email, please contact our membership secretary (details on the bottom of every union email newsletter). Please include your full name and home postal address, as well as your base Fujitsu location. If you can, please provide your Amicus membership number (printed on your membership card).
Amicus has learned that HR is encouraging line managers to get employees to vote in their “bogus ballot” (you don’t have to).
HR’s note shows they don’t care which way employees vote. This isn’t surprising, as employees lose either way. As one employee poetically put it in a reply to the company “I cannot vote for either of the choices you have given me because you are asking me to cut my throat or shoot myself, abstaining is letting you make the choice for me”.
What HR wants is a high turnout, so they can claim employees wanted the negative consequences from either choice.
If the way the question has been posed leads a majority of those who do choose between the two undesirable options will choose “implement”, the company will probably try to claim that employees had asked them to break the recognition agreement! In reality neither option offered by HR involves the company honouring its agreements.
No doubt HR will also contrast the turnout in their bogus ballot and their (gross) underestimate of the attendance at the Amicus AGM. As if taking an hour and a half to participate in a serious democratic process and clicking on an email voting button were really comparable.
Reps have had a very positive response from employees to the email response we sent out early yesterday morning and to the opportunity to chat to Reps yesterday in the MAN34 restaurant.
HR’s underhand approach is clearly alienating many employees, and more membership forms are coming in. Please take the opportunity to ask a colleague to join Amicus.
Abusing democracy
HR’s “bogus ballot” really is a remarkable model of “democracy”...
1. Having told employees that the decision would be taken at the Amicus AGM, the company didn’t like the result, so organised its own “bogus ballot”.
2. The company won’t have to ask employees to vote a third time, because they’ve loaded the question to ensure that they like all the answers. Unlike at a union meeting, no employee could put forward an alternative.
3. The company didn’t even send the email to those it is trying to exclude from recognition and who would suffer first. They company is breaking the agreements already, regardless of their ballot result.
4. The company didn’t send the email to anyone paid over £38,081, even though they are affected by the attack on recognition too.
5. Unlike Amicus at the AGM, the company didn’t provide pay comparators to allow staff to make an informed assessment of the offer.
6. HR can see which way individuals vote.
7. Employees have to rely on HR to tell us the result. If either of the options was actually sensible, we feel sure that staff would question the result, especially after reading their “numerically challenged” estimate of attendance at the AGM and the other glaring inaccuracies in their letter.
Of course, where there’s no union recognition, the company doesn’t even make this pretence of democracy – it’s just “One Boss – One Vote”.
Abusing line-managers
It seems quite unfair that HR should ask line managers to take part in hoodwinking their staff. Line managers have as much to lose from the attacks on employees’ rights as anyone else. Many already resent the way they are often asked to justify to their staff the outcomes of company decisions in which they have little or no say.
The company’s “implement” option would put yet more unreasonable demands on line managers. To hit the payroll cut-off date, managers will have very little time to carry out pay planning – a recipe for more cock-ups. It’s worth remembering that part of the petition signed by well over 400 Manchester staff said:
“avoid delaying the pay review or making managers rush its implementation. Negotiate seriously with Amicus in good time for an agreed pay deal to be implemented by managers by 1st April 2006.”
Both “bogus ballot” alternatives are good examples of HR only listening to what they want to hear.
Last night the company launched its anticipated attack on union recognition in Manchester, under the guise of a "ballot" about the pay review.
Amicus quickly sent a response to Manchester employees, which you can read on CafeVIK.
The response from employees so far has been encouraging, with many quickly realising that the company’s “bogus ballot” was asking them to choose between two ways to lose.
Amicus is not advising employees whether to vote “IMPLEMENT”, to vote “DELAY” or to abstain. Neither of the options presented by the company reflect what employees really want.
Quite a number of employees have copied us on responses to the company complaining that the question is loaded and doesn’t offer any options reflecting their views.
It’s clear from Roger Leek’s note that the company wants to interpret anyone who isn’t an Amicus member or doesn’t attend Amicus meetings as an ardent opponent of the union. Nothing could be further from the truth. Union members and non-members share the same opinions about the issues that affect them at work – we all want decent pay and conditions, job security, reasonable working hours and to be treated with dignity at work. The key difference is that union members are doing something about it.
In the current climate, non-members can no longer afford to enjoy a “free-ride”, benefiting from union recognition without contributing. The company is treating their position as support for attacking the union and reducing employees’ rights.
The company has made sitting-back a strategy for defeat.
At the recent AGM, members resolved to:
1. Explain the issues to our colleagues
2. Recruit our colleagues into our union, to help them defend their rights
3. Take an active part in our campaign to defend our rights
Now is the time for every member to put this into practice, or risk losing their rights. Now is the time for every non-member to join, or risk losing their rights.
You can get membership forms from the Internet, CafeVIK, from your Reps or from Union Noticeboards.
Don’t forget that Amicus reps are available throughout the day in the MAN34 restaurant to answer questions and listen to views. Why not bring along a colleague with you?
We’re pleased to report more new members joining today – perhaps not Roger Leek’s intended outcome!
This week we’ve had a good example of the importance and breadth of the issues covered in the “recognition talks”. Amicus had initiated discussions with the company about jobs and redeployment, focussing on the staff currently on HMRC and Libra in Manchester, whose jobs are at risk. A meeting on 7th February agreed:
Redeployment process
It was agreed that (in the language of Annex 1) jobs were at risk from the Datacentre, HMRC and Libra situations, but the company was not contemplating any redundancy dismissals.
Annex 1 is draft, and not in force, but in some ways is more helpful than the current Security of Employment Agreement (SEA) on the redeployment process.
There was discussion about redeployment/reassignment and which applied in different circumstances. It was agreed that a robust process was helpful, whatever view one took on this question.
Sulayman to pull out section 4 from the latest Annex 1 draft, change three months back to six, add a header saying this was just for this exercise and put it in the context of there being no formal agreement about whether this was redeployment or reassignment. Also to make clear that for HMRC at least the result of non-redeployment would be TUPE to Capgemini, not redundancy from Fujitsu. Once agreed, this would form the basis of how the current situation is managed.
Amicus duly drafted a document from the relevant sections of Annex 1 (one of the draft documents under discussion in the “recognition talks”), but the company is now backtracking on the agreement from 7th February. Yesterday we received an email saying that “we do not believe the process to be appropriate for our current situation on HMRC, and latterly, on Libra”.
It is ironic that the company is couching its efforts to attack the union in the language of individual choice, while rejecting a redeployment process that ensures that individual employees can make informed choices about which alternative jobs are really suitable for them.
SUMMARY
1) Annual Report
Amicus has pursued a range of key issues affecting employees and building the union in the process.
2) Report on Union Recognition and Collective Bargaining
This covered both the talks on new agreements, and the company’s latest attack on employee rights.
The company is trying to turn the bargaining unit into a closed and rapidly dwindling group, excluding many Manchester staff.
This has serious consequences across a wide range of issues.
3) Pay report and vote on pay offer
Breakthrough on access to pay scales.
2006 Manchester pay talks and pay offer.
Members rejected the pay offer, mainly because it would divide the workforce and exclude many people. Talks will continue with the eventual deal backdated to 1st April 2006.
4) Motion
Members decided to defend their rights and union recognition.
The motion means that Amicus will ballot Manchester members for industrial action. Meanwhile, Amicus will offer talks with the company and ACAS, giving the company yet another opportunity to settle the dispute by agreement.
The members resolved to explain the issues to colleagues, recruit them into Amicus, take an active part in the campaign and campaign for a massive “yes” vote in the industrial action ballot.
5) Review of Group Rules
6) Election of Reps, H&S Reps, Union Learning Reps
Karl Dobson and Tony Hopwood join the reps committee – welcome.
Mike Bamford didn’t stand for re-election as a H&S rep – thanks go to Mike for all his efforts over many years.
7) Prize Draw for Recruitment Competition
Congratulations to our six winners from across the UK.
8) Pension strike at MAN05
Council workers at MAN05 likely to be on strike 28th March.
...
Reps highlighted some of the key developments during the year.
2005 pay deal
People in the bargaining unit had benefited from a better deal than those outside. As the company says:
“last year the company committed and spent considerable funds to address pay anomalies for individuals and groups that resulted in a better and fairer pay parity across the Bargaining Unit.”
Outside the bargaining unit many people had had zero rises.
There had also been problems, especially where the company had not implemented all of their promises – a problem Amicus was helping members to pursue.
Relocation, Health & Safety
Most staff had relocated to Central Park’s bright new buildings. As the venue for the AGM showed, the facilities are far from adequate in many respects.
Amicus Health & Safety (H&S) reps had been very active in raising issues and carrying out inspections in an effort to improve the working environment. Some serious problems had been found, such as deliberately blocked fire escapes and wiring problems. Progress was being made on many of these points, but (as at other sites) the company still doesn’t have proper processes for managing health & safety; H&S reps often find themselves tackling symptoms of this underlying problem.
Growing
As well as people joining the union, several new people have got more involved in the union over the last year, including new Reps, H&S Reps and Union Learning Reps. This is important for the future.
HMRC, Libra, MAN05 closure
Each of these situations where jobs are at risk is different, but Amicus has been promoting a common approach to ensuring staff are smoothly redeployed into jobs they are happy with.
Amicus has taken relevant parts out of the draft “Annex 1” agreement (which has been almost agreed with the company over several years but never signed) and proposed that the company uses them for these situations to give everyone a clear process to work with. The response so far has been positive and an update is expected soon.
Union Learning Reps
For the first time, Amicus has “Union Learning Reps” (ULRs). Legislation created this role a few years ago, but we hadn’t had any here. The HMRC and Libra situation focussed minds on the importance of skills, training and learning to enable people to be redeployed into good jobs. We now have two ULRs who can help.
Out of Hours Working
Members in IS-Compute Services had found that their payments for working standby were being reduced or that their workload was being increased with no matching increase in pay.
A grievance late in 2005 secured a promise from the company that people would be properly paid according to their contracts for the work they did. Many members stand to gain thousands of pounds from this success.
There have been problems with patchy implementation. Members were urged to complain to their managers if they still weren’t getting what they were entitled to, and to contact their reps if they have outstanding issues.
Staff on the Sirius RIM team in Liverpool, Wakefield and Manchester have been told that there is no longer a requirement for shift working, resulting in a loss of shift allowance. Quite a lot of misinformation had been circulating, for example that the change was a result of discussions or agreements with the union. This has been refuted by both Amicus and management. Discussions are beginning in search of an agreed solution.
Prior to the meeting, Amicus had emailed out correspondence including a statement from the company. This was also distributed at the meeting.
Employees’ rights were under attack again.
The company had prevented the January talks on recognition etc reaching a conclusion on the agreed timetable, despite Amicus warning that this delay would impact on pay and other issues. This follows the company moving the goalposts several times over the last few years whenever agreement seemed near.
Now the company was making its attack on employees’ rights, disguised in the pay offer.
The company pay offer only covered people who were at MAN05 or had moved directly from MAN05 to Central Park. It excluded new starters, people who moved to Central Park from elsewhere, and nearly all HOM99 staff.
The effect would be to change the recognition agreement from covering an open group that individuals moved into or out of if they relocated, to a closed group that people could move out of but nobody could join. The company were trying to set up a “one way door” leading away from union recognition.
The company’s approach would already have reduced the size of the bargaining unit massively compared to its size in 2005, a decline that would continue rapidly.
The change was a clear breach of the promises made in the Company Announcement on Xmas Eve 2004.
Being covered or not by union recognition affects a mass of different issues, including redeployment, redundancy, pay, benefits, pensions, health & safety, learning, TUPE, individual representation etc.
Members were offered copies of a document on CafeVIK which explains union recognition, collective bargaining and what a difference being in/out makes.
Being covered by recognition and collective bargaining gives you more rights, whether you choose to be union members or not.
Being a union member helps you exercise your rights, whether you are covered by recognition and collective bargaining or not.
Pay information
Amicus had been campaigning for several years for all employees to have access to the “pay comparator” information (commonly known as “pay scales”) used by managers in determining their pay.
Amicus members can be proud of recent progress in this area. A legal claim using rights arising from collective bargaining in Manchester had resulted in offers from the company on disclosure. Members’ overwhelming rejection of the last company offer had produced further movement.
Amicus was able to provide a substantial pack of pay information to members at the meeting. In order to avoid jeopardising access to information in future years or exposing reps to complaints from the company, members were strongly urged to respect the company’s wishes and NOT pass the information on to anyone else.
Members can be proud of the fact that their subs, their organisation and their determination have produced a real breakthrough on this question.
Some members looking at the figures discovered that they had been demoted without their knowledge, or been given false information by the company about how their pay compared with the comparators. These examples show why openness and transparency is so central to any fair pay system.
Though the data was disclosed for collective bargaining in Manchester, Amicus is currently examining how pay information can be communicated to Amicus members across the company in the next few weeks. As always, anyone requiring individual advice should contact their Rep.
Access to the pay comparators is a real benefit of membership, and members were urged to take the opportunity to talk to colleagues and invite them to join.
Members were shocked to learn that between 2003 and 2004 the package for the highest paid Fujitsu Services director went up from around £1m to £1.7m. The increase is nearly double the company’s budget for pay rises for people in the Manchester bargaining unit this year. This puts the notions of “Sharing In Success” and “affordability” in perspective.
The internal median figures for 2004, 2005 and 2006 showed that typical Fujitsu pay for many roles had not gone up much, and in some cases had actually gone down. This could be for a variety of reasons. It illustrated the fact that a 3% “pay pot” is nowhere near equivalent to a rise of 3% in pay for particular jobs.
2006 pay talks
The pay claim and company offer had already been circulated. To make it easier to analyse, Amicus provided a table breaking down the offer against the elements of the claim.
The talks had not been very productive. The company’s view of scope was so confusing that the company had not even been able to work out who they thought was included. This had made realistic costing of the various options impossible.
There were, however, positive elements in the offer.
For example, helpdesk employees on D1-4 scales would be paid on their scale for the first time. Members were advised to check that they knew which scale they were on, and to seek advice from a rep if unclear.
The company is not offering any increase in the D1-4 scales this year.
Though the response on the working week was disappointing, it did mark a first step away from the creeping spread of 40-hour contracts that has been happening.
In previous years the company had been willing to make firm promises on helping people paid far below the “pay comparators”, but because individuals had no access to the comparators it was unenforceable. Now that members would have access to the comparators, the company seemed reluctant to make firm promises.
The main concern about the pay offer was that it disguised a major attack on employee rights, by dividing the Manchester workforce, with both halves losing out in different ways. The company was doing exactly what well over 400 Manchester employees had asked them NOT to do in the recent petition, which called on the company to:
a) avoid delaying the pay review or making managers rush its implementation. Negotiate seriously with Amicus in good time for an agreed pay deal to be implemented by managers by 1st April 2006.
b) fully honour the promise in the company announcement of 24th December 2004 that the MAN05 agreements would carry over to Central Park. It would be wrong to attempt to divide the workforce by denying rights to new employees or those moving from elsewhere or to use such attempts to delay the pay review.
Accepting the pay offer would mean accepting a divided workforce, changing the entire basis of union recognition to a closed and rapidly dwindling group.
The consequences of undermining union recognition were drastic. For example, the company generally now only gives employees outside the bargaining unit 30 days warning of potential redundancy, compared to 90 days for those inside. The extra 60 days mean more chance of getting a job inside or outside the company, as well as 60 days more pay when you needed it most. This was just one example, from many in the document on union recognition and collective bargaining that Amicus had published.
Members voted unanimously to REJECT the company pay offer. This means that talks will continue and the eventual deal will be backdated to 1st April.
It seems likely that the company will press ahead with implementing the imposed pay deal on those it is trying to exclude immediately from the bargaining unit:
- New starters
- Anyone who moved to Central Park unless they moved directly from MAN05
- All but four HOM99 staff
Following the vote, Amicus has informed the company and is seeking dates to continue negotiations. Amicus will be seeking to:
· Ensure that nobody in the bargaining unit loses out by having the non-negotiated deal imposed on them
· Secure an improved offer, negotiated on the basis of realistic costings
· Secure a sensible agreed solution on the scope of recognition and collective bargaining for the future
The pay offer is intended to divide the Manchester workforce.
The company intends to carry out a third-rate pay review (as for those on other sites) for those it is trying to exclude from union recognition. It probably won’t tell these people the other consequences of being excluded (unrelated to the pay deal) – they may even pretend that getting the pay review on time is an “advantage” of being outside!
By making a pay offer they knew would be unacceptable, the company has ensured those covered by it can’t get their pay review on time, just as Amicus warned.
We anticipate the company trying to blame Amicus for the delay and spread all sorts of misinformation in an attempt to pressure members to accept a shoddy deal on union recognition for the future.
Members have an important part to play in countering such misinformation by talking to colleagues.
The attack on union recognition and employee rights is very serious. The petition signed by well over 400 Manchester staff and the massive majority in the Consultative Ballot had not been enough to make the company stick to its agreements and promises.
Employees have successfully fought off such attacks in the past and we can do it again.
The company had chosen to delay any deal on recognition so that it would impact on pay talks, then chosen to make a pay offer they knew members could not accept.
The company’s actions appear to be a deliberate attempt to upset employees in Manchester and delay the pay deal. Reps expect the company to use the controversy over the delayed pay deal to launch an “expression of wish” – asking each employee which part of a divided workforce they want to be on. There is no basis for such a scheme in our current agreements and it would be another example of the company trying to impose its views rather than negotiating seriously.
Every member needs to help explain the situation to their colleagues.
The following motion was passed unanimously:
*********
Attack on employee rights
Amicus had written to Roger Leek in October 2005, setting out how the company was breaking agreements on union recognition and other matters. The union proposed a “works conference” meeting as a last attempt to resolve the issues through negotiation, and negotiations duly began.
The negotiations stalled in January 2006 when the company sharply changed its view on how agreement could be reached.
Under the negotiating procedures in our current recognition agreement, neither the union nor the company should take “coercive action” while an issue (in this case clearly including the scope of recognition) is under negotiation.
The company has chosen to make a 2006 pay offer in line with its latest view of who should be covered by union recognition and collective bargaining, excluding many of those who should really be covered. They intend to impose a pay deal on those they want to exclude. The company will be taking coercive action by imposing its own view while the matter is in the negotiating procedure. Negotiations cannot be in good faith if one party is already implementing its desired outcome.
This means that the pay offer is a disguised attempt to change the scope of union recognition to exclude new starters, exclude people who move to Central Park (other than directly from MAN05) and exclude nearly all HOM99 staff. The effect would be to divide the workforce and turn the group with recognition into a closed and rapidly dwindling group.
Excluding people from union recognition and collective bargaining has effects across a wide range of issues, including redeployment, pay, benefits, pensions, redundancy, health & safety, training, out of hours working, TUPE transfers and contract changes. These issues dwarf the significance of the company delaying our pay review (which they have promised to backdate to 1st April, as in 2005).
Amicus tried to separate the recognition issue from the 2006 pay review, but the company refused. In effect, the company is trying to divide the Manchester workforce into two:
1. An included group. Their pay rise is delayed. The group shrinks rapidly over time so that their additional rights become harder to defend.
2. An excluded group. They may get a pay review on time, but it is the second-rate pay review imposed on most of the company. Of course, this pay review doesn’t guarantee any rise at all. They are excluded from all the extra rights that come with union recognition and collective bargaining.
It is not in the interests of any employee to allow the company to divide us and erode our rights.
We, the Amicus members, resolve to instruct our Reps and Officers to:
1. Register a Failure To Agree in the recognition talks.
2. Mount a vigorous campaign in defence of employees’ rights, applying pressure through the use of Amicus contacts with the media, local and central government, customers and potential customers.
3. Ballot us for industrial action, up to and including strike action. The ballot should include all members employed by Fujitsu Services and based at MAN05/33/34/35 plus HOM99 members who had identified themselves as having a MAN05/33/34/35 admin base for the 2006 pay review.
4. Consult HOM99 members living within 30 miles of MAN05/33/34/35 who are not covered by point 3 to ask if they want to be included in the ballot, as they would be likely beneficiaries of a positive resolution to the dispute.
5. In order to try to find a resolution before any industrial action, offer to hold talks with the company, with ACAS acting as conciliators.
We, the Amicus members, resolve to:
1. Explain the issues to our colleagues
2. Recruit our colleagues into our union, to help them defend their rights
3. Take an active part in our campaign to defend our rights
4. Campaign for a massive “yes” vote in the ballot
*********
The proposed rules (which were circulated on Monday) were adopted.
The following were duly elected:
[Base location; Name; Role(s)]
MAN05; Martin Rees; H&S Rep
MAN33; Dave Francis; Rep
MAN33; Iswar Mistry; H&S Rep
MAN33; Lynne Hodge; Rep, H&S Rep
MAN33; Michael Thomas; Rep
MAN34; Alan Child; H&S Rep
MAN34; Andy C Smith; H&S Rep
MAN34; Ian Allinson; Rep, H&S Rep
MAN34; Isabel Hay; Rep
MAN34; Kevin M Davies; H&S Rep
MAN34; Martin York; Union Learning Rep
MAN34; Phil Tepper; Rep, H&S Rep
MAN35; Aaron Donnelly; Union Learning Rep
MAN35; Dennis Morris; H&S Rep
MAN35; Karl Dobson; Rep
MAN35; Tony Hopwood; Rep
MAN35; Sulayman Munir; Rep
MAN35; Zahid Ramzan; Rep, H&S Rep
HOM99/MAN35; Colin Robinson; H&S Rep
HOM99; John Lacey; Rep
The newly elected representatives have since met to elect officers:
Senior Rep: Ian Allinson
Deputy Senior Rep: Lynne Hodge
Chair: Sulayman Munir
An update on various other roles and the new Areas Of Responsibility for H&S Reps will be circulated soon.
Amicus has been running a recruitment competition for Fujitsu employees across the UK and Ireland. New joiners and the members who recruited them were entered into a draw.
The draw was held at the AGM, and the six winners have been contacted.
One person had recruited so many members he was actually drawn twice, but kindly agreed to only take one prize. The winners are:
1. A new member (HOM99) - £50
2. A recruiter (MAN34) - £300 holiday voucher
3. A recruiter (MAN33) - £50
4. A new member (BRS06) - Bottle of champagne
5. A new member (HOM99) - £25
6. A new member (MAN34) - £25
Congratulations to everyone who has helped build the union – keep up the good work.
About 1.5 million people covered by the Local Authority Pension Scheme are being balloted for strike action in defence of their pensions. This includes members of Amicus, UNISON, TGWU and GMB.
It was noted that worsening private sector pensions had been used to justify attacks on public sector pensions, but that since those attacks began, many private sector employers had seen it as a green light for another round of attacks. For example, IBM announced the closure of its Final Salary (Defined Benefit) scheme to existing employees. Everyone therefore has an interest in the outcome of the dispute.
Fujitsu employees are not part of the dispute over local authority pensions.
There are now a significant number of employees of Manchester City Council working at MAN05, and it is therefore likely that there would be picket lines at MAN05 if the strike action goes ahead. The first strike day is expected to be 28th March.
Amicus has asked Fujitsu for a statement that no sanctions would be taken against any Fujitsu employees who chose not to cross a picket line, just as many employees of other companies had respected our picket lines in 2003. The company has promised to send us some words to cover this situation, which we are awaiting.
[Since the AGM we have learned that Amicus members involved in the dispute voted by 90% in favour of the strike(s).]
AGM **3pm TODAY**
3pm - 4:30pm
Wednesday 15th March 2006
MAN33, first floor, East wing
This meeting is for all Amicus members employed by Fujitsu with a contractual base of MAN05/33/34/35 (including those based at HOM99 with an admin base of one of those sites). You are entitled to attend in work time.
Don’t forget that members at this meeting will:
. Receive and discuss pay comparator figures (commonly known as pay scales), available for the first time
. Vote on the company pay offer
. Decide on a response to the company’s attack on employee rights and union recognition
. Elect representatives for the coming year
Be there to have YOUR say.
AGM Agenda
1. Welcome and introductions
2. Annual Report
3. Report on Union Recognition and Collective Bargaining
4. Questions & Discussion on Reports
5. Pay report
6. Questions & Discussion
7. Vote on pay offer
8. Motion
9. Review of Group Rules
10. Election of Reps, H&S Reps, Union Learning Reps
11. Prize Draw for Recruitment Competition
12. AOB (items notified in advance)
13. What next
Additional information
The company has asked us to make their views known to the AGM to ensure members can make informed decisions. Your reps are going one better by circulating them to you in advance, to ensure all members are aware of what the company is saying.
Motion
Only one motion has been submitted, which is from your reps committee. We are circulating it in advance to give you a chance to think about it and come along and express your views.
We could not circulate it earlier because the content depended on events over the last couple of days.
On Friday we received a pay offer from the company. As anticipated, this only covers some of the people in the bargaining unit. This would effectively begin derecognition of the union, marking a massive attack on employees’ rights on a wide range of issues.
You can read our pay claim and Friday’s company offer on the “Amicus The Union” community on CafeVIK.
It is vital that there is a big turnout for Wednesday’s Annual General Meeting (AGM). This notice includes some of the material for the meeting.
Remember that we will be able to hand our pay comparator figures (what most employees know as pay scales) to members at the AGM. Why not ask a colleague to join the union now, so they can come along and find out how their pay and benefits compare? Also, you and the new member would both be in time to be entered for our recruitment competition.
There’s a public meeting in Manchester on the case against War and Occupation:
Central Hall, Oldham Street, Manchester City Centre
Speakers include Tony Benn (President of the Stop the War Coalition), Lindsey German (Convenor of Stop the War Coalition), Mohammad Ali (Islam Channel)
There will be demonstrations around the world (including Iraq and the USA) on Saturday 18th March, the third anniversary of the invasion of Iraq. For more information see www.stopwar.org.uk.
Local transport can be booked online at www.mancsagainsttanks.org or through the Manchester CND office on 0161 273 8283.
Wiring problems
Our notice on 8th February reported:
It appears that a wrongly wired mains supply caused a potentially serious incident this week at Central Park. We do not know whether other mains power supplies on the site have the same fault. We believe the fault rendered circuit breakers useless and left live power on circuits that were switched off. We have raised this with the company, but had no meaningful response yet. If you are doing work involving cabling etc please take extreme care for the time being. Unplug rather than switch off if possible.
Health & Safety reps had a response from the company:
The fault was on a manual change-over switch installed as part of the generator project, these are the ones which allow alternative supplies to the existing distribution board.
The actual fault has been atributed to Human Error. It is believed that a contributory factor is the implementation of new wiring colour coding which is described as “Harmonised” in order to bring the UK more closely into line with the practices of mainland Europe - in tern the Institute of Electrical Engineers have published amendment no2 to BS7671:2001 (the IEE Wiring Regulations).
The original installation was completed by Bowmer & Kirland using the old colours and the new installation has been completed in the new colours thus causing confusion.
I can confirm that the a complete check of all the manual change-over switches throughout the Campus has been completed by one of the site electricians using a piece of a equipment which identifies any discrepancy in polarity and I am please to confirm that the error was isolated to the 2nd floor build room in MAN33.
In addition the fault which caused the incident has been rectified and has been retested to ensure correct polarity.
Fortunately on this occasion no one was injured and the situation was rectified immediately.
Learning from this near miss is vitally important and going forward all works to the electrical supply will be completed by the site maintenance team or an appointed external contractor who will be made fully aware of the two different wiring colour coding systems in operation throughout the buildings.
I would like to take this opportunity to point out that there is no connection between this incident and that which took place in the MAN35 comms room in September of last year.
Your H&S Reps have pointed out that the wiring regulations require that a warning notice be displayed near the appropriate distribution board if both old and new wiring colours are in use in the same building. The latest update from the company is:
I can confirm that the appropriate signage has been produced and is being put in the correct location by our site electrician to warn people of the two different cabling standards - also a procedure has been put in place which runs along side our access permit system to advise contractors who will work on the electrics in writing of the two standards, this is a document which they must sign to confirm that they understand fully the implications and that they as the supervisor/senior person on site will communicate the information to their workforce.
This is another good example of the way that Amicus Health & Safety reps (only here because we have union recognition) improve safety for everyone on site.
We also wonder why the old colours were used in such a new building in the first place.
Though it appears the immediate hazard has been addressed, the advice to unplug rather than just switch off where possible before working on electrical equipment is still worth considering.
We await a further update from the company.
Inspections
We’re still awaiting a response from the company to the reports on the safety inspections carried out at Central Park on 18th January. This response is far too slow.
In the meantime, Health & Safety reps are planning the next set of inspections, which will be on 26th April. These will cover MAN05 and the external areas at Central Park. Please don’t wait until the inspections to raise issues with your management, through 7733 or with your Health & Safety Rep.
Yesterday the company sent out a notice (entitled “Manchester Collective Bargaining Unit - Pay Planning Timetable”) to some employees, purporting to come from HR and Amicus. The company had made changes from the agreed text (which we circulated on 3rd March) without informing or consulting Amicus reps, who have protested strongly at being misrepresented in this way.
How would the company react if Amicus put out a notice with the names of a couple of HR managers on the bottom without agreeing the text with them first?
We are seeking clarification from the company as to who the notice actually went to. In the meantime, if:
AND
AND
Please contact us URGENTLY, as we believe the company is trying to exclude you from the 2006 Manchester pay deal.
The company have made clear that they want to divide the Manchester workforce by restricting the benefits of union recognition to a fixed and shrinking pool of employees. They intend to use the pay offer as the tool to achieve this, despite well over 400 Manchester staff signing the petition calling on the company to:
a) avoid delaying the pay review or making managers rush its implementation. Negotiate seriously with Amicus in good time for an agreed pay deal to be implemented by managers by 1st April 2006.
b) fully honour the promise in the company announcement of 24th December 2004 that the MAN05 agreements would carry over to Central Park. It would be wrong to attempt to divide the workforce by denying rights to new employees or those moving from elsewhere or to use such attempts to delay the payreview.
In anticipation of the company’s attack, Amicus has been seeking the views of Manchester members on what they want to do through a Consultative Ballot.
font color="red">Members voted by a massive 86% majority that they would vote for industrial action in a formal ballot if the company pressed ahead.
It will be clear by the time of our group Annual General Meeting whether the company will listen to its workforce without the need for industrial action. The AGM is:
MAN33, first floor, East wing
This meeting is for all Amicus members employed by Fujitsu with a contractual base of MAN05/33/34/35 (including those based at HOM99 with an admin base of one of those sites). You are entitled to attend in work time.
If your manager might need to arrange release for you to attend, please contact them NOW. If you have any problems getting release, contact your rep immediately. If you leave it until the last minute, we may be unable to help.
Please make sure you attend – the AGM will:
Our notice on 13th December reported the positive outcome to a grievance about standby payments which Amicus has been pursuing on behalf of employees in IS-Compute Services.
The company had gradually been increasing the workload and decreasing the payments to employees.
The outcome of the grievance means corrected (significantly higher) out of hours payments for many employees in IS-Compute Services who are part of the Amicus Manchester bargaining unit.
We believe that the fact that many people were not being paid properly led to managers not addressing excessive hours or under-staffed departments. If the correction of the under-payments encourages managers to address this constructively, that can only be a good thing.
It is worth stressing that Amicus reps were not asked to agree any changes to terms and conditions or working patterns for any employees. If we had been asked to, the proposal would (as always) have been put to members to vote on.
Employees outside the bargaining unit may have the same entitlements, but would need to raise individual grievances rather than being covered by the collective discussions. Members who feel this may apply to them should contact their rep for guidance.
Getting the company to carry out the measures they promised has been a slow process. It has not been helped by the company’s reluctance to tell employees or their managers what they had promised.
Some managers have been making mischief on the back of the lack of information from the company to non-members. If you’re in IS-Compute Services, please make sure your colleagues know that:
If you want to know more, please contact rep Dave Francis or come along to the drop-in session on Wednesday 8th March 2006.
Sirius RIM
On Friday afternoon we heard from members that the Sirius RIM have been told of changes to their shift arrangements and that some managers have blamed these changes on Amicus.
The company has not informed Amicus reps about these changes, has not consulted Amicus about them, and has not raised with Amicus any issues or problems that might lead to shift changes.
Amicus has pointed this out to the head of IS-Compute Services who has promised to look into it.
One of the benefits of our recognition agreement is that it requires the company to consult employees through their union before changes in working arrangements such as shift changes.
If at some point in the future the company do wish to propose shift changes for the Sirius RIM, it will be important to ensure that employees are properly represented in any discussions. Members in the department may wish to consider nominating one of their number as a rep, for election at the AGM next week.
The Unsocial Hours Policy (UHP) is available for reference here:
http://www.ourunion.org.uk/icl/uhp.htm
The company is still being very slow at carrying out agreed actions.
Today’s talks made little progress as the company still doesn’t have a consistent view of who they think is covered by pay bargaining and still haven’t carried out most of their agreed actions from the talks on 21st February.
The company still intends to make a pay offer that excludes many Manchester staff who should be covered. For example, the company intends to exclude new starters, people who moved to Central Park from sites other than MAN05 and almost all HOM99 staff.
This would effectively remove union recognition for many people, with serious implications across issues as diverse as redeployment, redundancy, TUPE and individual representation, as well as affecting terms and conditions.
In today’s talks, Amicus presented an impressive petition signed by well over 400 Manchester staff, which said:
We the undersigned call on the Company to:
a) avoid delaying the pay review or making managers rush its implementation. Negotiate seriously with Amicus in good time for an agreed pay deal to be implemented by managers by 1st April 2006.
b) fully honour the promise in the company announcement of 24th December 2004 that the MAN05 agreements would carry over to Central Park. It would be wrong to attempt to divide the workforce by denying rights to new employees or those moving from elsewhere or to use such attempts to delay the pay review.
Thanks to all the members who signed the petition or helped get signatures from their workmates.
Amicus has been running a Consultative Ballot for Manchester members (sent out on 23rd February) on what will happen if the company attacks our union recognition by issuing a pay offer for only part of the bargaining unit. The question is:
“Would you be prepared to vote for industrial action in a ballot on these issues if the union registered a Failure To Agree?”
Your reps intend to announce the result of the Consultative Ballot on Wednesday, so if you haven’t voted yet, don’t delay.
Don’t forget we have a drop-in session on pay and benefits:
11:30am – 1:30pm, Wednesday 8th March
MAN33 G CR3 (MAN33 ground floor conference room 3)
Open to members and non-members
This is an opportunity for staff to get an update on the pay talks (and other issues such as union recognition, out of hours) and influence the Amicus negotiating position.
And our group Annual General Meeting:
3pm - 4:30pm, Wednesday 15th March 2006
MAN33, first floor, East wing
We’ve produced a new “One Per Desk” leaflet which is being circulated. Along with an update for employees and an advert for the AGM, this includes an invitation to our:
Drop-in session on pay and benefits
11:30am – 1:30pm, Wednesday 8th March
MAN33 G CR3 (MAN33 ground floor conference room 3)
Open to members and non-members
Don’t forget our group AGM:
3pm - 4:30pm, Wednesday 15th March 2006
MAN33, first floor, East wing
This meeting is for all Amicus members employed by Fujitsu and based at MAN05/33/34/35 (including those based at HOM99 with an admin base of one of those sites).
If your manager might need to arrange release for you to attend, please contact them NOW. If you have any problems getting release, contact your rep immediately. If you leave it until the last minute, we may be unable to help.
For the first time in a number of years, Amicus will be able to hand out pay comparator information (what most employees know as pay scales) at the AGM, to help you make an informed decision when voting on the company’s pay offer at the meeting. This information cannot be sent out by email, so make sure you’re there in person.
The consultative ballot is another form of pressure on the company. Thanks to those who have already voted. We intend to tell the company the result on Wednesday (8th), so make sure you’ve voted by then. The ballot was sent out by email to Manchester members on 23rd February.
An overwhelming “YES” vote will send a strong message that employees will not allow the company to derecognise the union and take away their rights on redundancy, redeployment etc under the cloak of a pay review.
The company is being very slow at carrying out agreed actions from the pay talks.
It had been agreed that a company notice would go out early this week, explaining the situation to employees and their managers. This has still not happened and no explanation has been given.
For your information, we circulate the agreed draft notice here:
Communication to all employees at MAN05/33/34/35 and relevant Line Managers.
The Company and Amicus The Union are currently in talks to conclude a 2006 Pay Deal for those in the Manchester collective bargaining unit.
Some MAN05/33/34/35/HOM99 employees are covered by the collective bargaining agreement and will have their pay reviewed by their manager on the basis of a pay agreement locally negotiated by the Company and Amicus. Others will be part of the same company pay review process which applies to most UK employees, and are receiving this notice for information and awareness.
This communication aims to update you on the timetable of events (for the bargaining unit) to ensure that you have time to plan for the process.
| Date from | Date to | Action |
| Wednesday 1st March | Tuesday 14th March | HRDirect will email line managers with lists of which of their employees the company believes are in the bargaining unit. Line managers inform HRDirect of any changes. Line managers access via Manager Self Service pay planning spreadsheets to familiarise themselves with contents. Managers do not input any information at this time. |
| Thursday 9th March | Friday 10th March | Company provides signed offer to Amicus |
| Wednesday 15th March | Amicus members vote on Company Pay offer at their Annual General Meeting (AGM) and Amicus informs the Company of the result | |
| Thursday 16th March | Monday 27th March | Line Managers download spreadsheets along with accompanying Pay Planning Guidelines and upload completed pay plan on or before 27th March 2006. |
| Tuesday 28th March | Friday 31st March | Analysis of pay plans by Business Unit and Capability Unit heads and approve pay plans for their areas. |
| Monday 3rd April | Closure of pay planning updates | |
| Early April | Pay Review Letters available for Line Managers to download and distribute. |
Amicus members are encouraged to attend the AGM, which will take place at 3pm-4:30pm on Wednesday 15th March in MAN33-1-E. Managers should ensure they plan now to provide adequate cover so that people can attend.
Pay increases will be effective from 1st April 2006. If the company’s offer is rejected by employees, negotiations will continue and the pay rises will be backdated if they cannot be implemented for the April pay packet.
The timetable allows Line Managers 8 working days spread over three separate weeks to conclude their pay plans and Business Unit and Capability Unit heads 4 working days to review, amend and approve the pay plans for their areas.
Managers are asked to strictly comply with the negotiated agreement. Pay Review Guidelines will accompany the pay plans to assist managers in doing so.
Should you have any further enquiries, please speak to your line manager, HR or your Amicus representatives.
--name of HR Manager removed-- (HR)
Ian Allinson, Dave Francis (Amicus)
You may wish to ask your manager whether HR have given them the information they need. Managers may wish to ask HR.
This emphasises the importance of the “No Delay! Give us our Pay!” petition. Already about half the Manchester workforce have signed it – have you and your workmates? We intend to present the petition in Monday’s pay talks, so make sure you have all signatures returned to Phil Tepper (MAN34) by first thing Monday (6th) morning.
If you recruit a colleague you could both win prizes – our recruitment competition is still open:
www.ourunion.org.uk/competition
Thanks to a generous member the list of prizes now includes a bottle of champagne, as well as the £300 holiday voucher and money prizes.
We expect to close the competition at some point during March, so don’t delay.
The Manchester newsletter on 26th January highlighted the part Amicus was playing in the campaign against the so-called “Bolkestein Directive”, a proposed piece of EU legislation which would have encouraged the under-cutting of protection for pay, safety and the environment.
Tens of thousands of people from across the EU joined the demonstration at the European Parliament in Strasbourg. We are pleased to report that MEPs did remove some of the most dangerous aspects of the Directive. You can read the statement from the European TUC here: http://www.etuc.org/a/2081 .
Congratulations to all the members who supported the campaign – you have helped protect your jobs, terms and conditions, safety and the environment. However, concerns do remain about the Directive, and the legislative process is far from complete.
Our group in Manchester, where members already benefit from “union recognition”, are concerned that the company intends to make a pay offer that only covers part of the Manchester bargaining unit. In effect, this is a threat of step-by-step de-recognition.
If you are an Amicus member employed by Fujitsu Services and based at MAN05/33/34/35 (or HOM99 with an admin base of one of these sites), you should have received a very important email on Thursday 23rd February including a consultative ballot. If you have not (perhaps because you’ve moved location), please contact our membership secretary immediately to update our records and get a copy of the ballot email. If you have received the email, please make sure you vote.
Fujitsu is still being very secretive about its pay system. There has been no announcement of the company pay pot and the pay comparator figures remain unavailable to employees. Amicus recently circulated some approximate figures for some roles, but this is far from ideal.
We are picking up reports that the pay “pot” for April pay reviews is varying significantly across the company, at less than 2% in some units.
And don’t forget that a pay “pot” size is not equivalent to the headline figures you hear in the media for pay rises outside Fujitsu. Pay figures from outside are usually figures for a particular job. The Fujitsu pot is for particular people; people moving up within and between job roles means the equivalent figure for a particular job would be much lower.
Last year we published a story about “Individual Performance Related Pay” at Bodgit & Scarper PLC which illustrates the consequences of an out-of-control pay system.
Our Amicus colleagues at EDS (a company notoriously secretive about pay information in the past) have concluded an agreement on disclosure of information to Amicus to help with collective bargaining. This covers...
You may remember that Amicus had also been helping a number of members across the UK seek pay information from the company under the Data Protection Act. This has been a very slow process, but the Information Commissioner (which is responsible for enforcing the Act) was meeting with Fujitsu on 28th February.
One reason why companies operating unfair pay systems are so secretive is the fear of “equal pay” claims by employees. You’ve probably heard about some of the multi-million pound claims won by Amicus and other unions on behalf of employees. These recent examples from EDS illustrates the smaller scale cases the union also works on:
Following individual grievances raised by Amicus on behalf of 2 women members in late 2004, and after the completion of the EoC questionnaires, hearings were held for both cases. In the first, the grievance was turned down, EDS citing different backgrounds, differences in performance and skills as the reasons for differences in pay. An appeal was lodged and led at Regional Officer level. As a result, the pay of the woman member was increased by 15% and a change to a higher pay grade was achieved. Assurance was given that with the pay increase, our member was within 10-15% of her male colleague. There was a commitment to monitor the member's pay with a view to achieving parity within 12-18 months.
A hearing was held for the second case where our member knew the starting salary of her male colleague because she had been involved with his recruitment. It was higher then her own. Again, the company denied discrimination on gender grounds claiming that EDS pay restraint had caused the differential. However, at the next available pay review, our member was awarded a 19.5% pay increase. Our member was asked by EDS if she wanted to appeal. She asked if this increase had given her pay parity and was told it did. She was satisfied her grievance had been resolved.
Amicus would prefer Fujitsu to agree to our request for a joint “Equal Pay Review”, as recommended by the government and the Equal Opportunities Commission. So far, the company has resisted this idea, but we’re keeping the pressure on.
Amicus is campaigning for Equal Pay reviews or audits to be made compulsory, but the government and its “Women In Work” commission are resisting the call, despite the massive gender pay gap.
If you believe your pay or benefits are lower than that of a colleague of the opposite gender for no good reason, please contact your rep for advice.