Evaluate or discriminate? Why job descriptions matter

I was interviewed by "Inside Housing" magazine for an interesting piece published last Friday titled "What's in a name?"

A small Housing Association in High Wycombe, called "Red Kite" had asked its staff to write its own job descriptions and create their own job titles.

The belief behind this is that social housing organisations tend to be "stuffy" and "hierarchical" and need to empower their staff to improve services. A view to be honest that I have more than a little sympathy with.

However, in the  article I admitted to being a bit of a "sourpuss" about this idea. While workers need to be at the centre of any consultation about job design or job descriptions, it is actually a complex and difficult subject. As a trade union steward "I have seen real problems where there have been poorly defined job descriptions,’ he adds. ‘People are paid very different amounts of money for doing very similar jobs".

This is a huge issue if you believe in gender equality at work.  It can be prescriptive and a little bureaucratic but the hard truth of the matter is that unless you have an equality proofed job evaluation system, based on job descriptions you will see women (and other discriminated minorities) being paid less for equal work. As sure as eggs is eggs.

There has been a move recently away from such assessments towards "spot salaries" or so called "market rates". While market rates have been used as a defence against equal pay claims, it is not by any means a complete defence. "Market rates" can be inherently unfair (and therefore potentially unlawful) since they just reinforce any existing gender discrimination in the market.

Equal pay claims have cost employers in the public sector hundreds of millions of pounds in recent years. When it first started no-one expected this. The private and "not for profit" sector had better watch out since it is clear from the press (Supermarket giant ASDA has 1500 claims against it) that the "no win, no fee" lawyers are going after them.

So evaluate or discriminate. If you do discriminate then be prepared to pay the price in reputational and financial terms.

Job descriptions really do matter.

(picture of striking women machinists working for Fords as portrayed later in the film "Made in Dagenham")

UKIP: More Tory, than the Tories

I find it is amazing that people don't "get" that UKIP is such a right wing Ultra Tory Party.

Check out their millionaire Banker leader comments on "Working Mothers Worth Less Than Men"

hat tip picture Mr Rayner

Made In Dagenham

This is a mover trailer for a new BBC film made about women who worked as machinists for the car company Ford in the 1960’s and who successfully fought for equal pay with men. I haven’t seen the film but bearing in mind my previous post will SERTUC women’s committee one day be also organising walking tours around the Ford Motor plant in Dagenham? I do hope so sometime soon. I do like this historical connection between now(ish) and then.

Make Equality Happen – Mandatory Equal Pay Audits

“Will you make history as a great reforming government, bringing equality law up to the standards of the 21st century?”

UNISON’s Director of Organising and membership, Bronwyn McKenna, posed this challenge today at the Labour Party conference.

See Press Release here

There is an Equality Bill going through Parliament and UNISON believes that this could finally deliver equal pay for women. What needs to happen is that the bill includes mandatory equal pay audits. At the moment the Government apparently favours a “voluntary approach” towards audits.

I think that the arguments Bronwyn presented demolish the case for any further voluntarily measures. Enough is enough, is this country really serious about getting rid of pay discrimination or is it just going to be leave things to further fester?

Bronwyn points out “Asking employers nicely will not tackle entrenched discrimination,”. Employers have had since 1970 to start paying women fairly. “They have not volunteered to do it yet and they will not volunteer now. The bill must make audits mandatory, along with sanctions that have real teeth if the law is not followed.”

“It is impossible to right historic injustice on the cheap,” Ms McKenna told the conference. “We welcome government measures to allow councils to release money for equal pay but really, nearly 40 years after Barbara Castle’s Equal Pay Act, it is unacceptable that we are still failing to find all the money needed to pay women – women who are core Labour voters – fairly.”

Current equal pay laws are complex, weak and ineffective, she said: “We know that women are paid 17p an hour less than men; 40p in the case of part-time women.” Yet only 126 won equal pay cases last year – “enough to fit comfortably onto two double-decker buses or one bendy bus in London.”

The legislation must be updated, Ms McKenna stressed. It must comply with European law, and it must allow hypothetical comparators. Equality is at the heart of everything UNISON does, Ms McKenna told the conference. And equal pay is an issue that really matters to the union’s one million women members, the members for whom it is taking tens of thousands of equal pay cases.

Labour governments have always led the way on equality legislation, she said, “and this government is no exception, bringing in life-changing civil partnerships, equality duties and other measures.”

Now it must act on equal pay.

Some of the usual suspects opposed to mandatory audits

UNISON Wins £76 a week pay rise for Hospital Cleaners

A good news story. The UNISON branch at St Georges Hospital, Tooting, South London has won a £76 per week pay rise for 350 private contract hospital cleaners employed by ISS. This is a massive 36% rise for some of the lowest paid hospital staff in London. They now have a minimum wage of £8.21 per hour, up from £6.03.

Local Labour Party MP Sadiq Khan was thanked for his help in the campaign. A good example of "joined up" working I think.

From UNISON press release

Michael Walker UNISON Regional Officer said; “This is a great victory for some of London's most important but often neglected group of hospital workers "This interim agreement represents the culminations of months of campaigning and lobbying by UNISON, we are pleased that the UNISON campaign has not only secured the support of medical and nursing staff, but also of local Members of Parliament, most notably Sadiq Khan MP for Tooting".

Geoff Thorne UNISON Branch Secretary said:"UNISON has worked hard to bring about a minimum wage of £8:21 for all staff employed at St Georges Hospital, whether NHS or private contractors. "This interim agreement represents a sound base to build for pay justice for all health workers""Many of our members were presently finding great difficulty in living on just £6:00 an hour this increase is good for them and their families

Shirley Thompson UNISON ISS convenor at St Georges said:“The cleaning staff at St George's hospital come from all corners of the globe and play a vital role in keeping hospital infection rates down. This interim agreement is an important step in reflecting that vital role and securing pay justice for hospital cleaning staff."

Sunday: First day of Business – who needs a magician when you have so many comedians?

Pleased to get up early (07:30) and go for walk along West Cliff and the beach before breakfast. It was lovely and sunny. Saw two groups of lads (not UNISON delegates) who had obviously been up all night and still wandering around still drinking and looking pretty “rough”.

At Conference there didn’t seem to be that many newspaper sellers and leafleters outside. Inside it was a bit chaotic as delegates and visitors queued up to make last minute changes to delegations and replacements for lost identity cards etc. I found our seats and met up with my branch delegation. We had a brief meeting about the day’s business. The morning order of business was pretty quiet – no big rows. All the motions and composites were supported by the SGE. This actually meant in my view that there were more thoughtful contributions on issues than may have been the case if they had been opposed (as we found out later).

Of course some speakers used the opportunity simply to make statements to slag off the Labour Party whenever possible. No big surprise there! It reminded me of the saying that there are more tears from prayers answered than those which are not. A number of speakers who work in Tory dominated councils complained about the horrendous attacks on jobs and services. There seems to be no linkage to this, no recognition that for all its faults, workers in local government are better off under Labour councils and governments than Tories. In my experience strikes and protests over protecting services and conditions tend to be far more successful in either controlled Labour councils or those councils were there are supportive labour minorities. While strikes in Tory Councils and shires tend to be unsuccessful. There are obviously exceptions to this. But not many.

There was also another passionate speech in support of Fremantle. Business passed by very quickly.

During lunch I went to a crowded fringe on “After the Housing Market fails…” which I will post separately.

The afternoon session was livelier. The main bone of contention was a motion (4 and amendments) criticising last year’s pay claim and the way it was dealt with. This was not unsurprisingly opposed by the SGE. The SGE lost during quite a bitter debate. I need to double check on what the motion will actually mean in practice but I was told on the way out of conference by one old hand that we had effectively voted for strike action every April. We live in interesting times.

I spoke on motion 59 which was on “Pay in the Community and Voluntary sector” (CVS). I admitted to conference that it had been a bit of a shock when I became an activist in the UNISON CVS, how many organisations pay such poor wages, have shoddy sickness arrangement and rubbish pensions. There are very good organisations but they are increasingly being under cut in many contracts by those who will cut terms and conditions. “A race to the bottom”. The motion is in many ways a “back to trade union basics” call to organise, campaign and bargain to bring up terms and conditions for all 60,000 UNISON members in CVS.

At 4:30pm there was a guest speaker Ana Lucia Pinzon, leader of the Colombian public sector workers trade union FENAL TRASE. Ana gave her speech in Spanish (it was then translated into English) but she had by far the best reception from delegates of any speaker that day.

The conference finished at 4:50pm. At 5pm a “Marxist magician” was due on the stage to entertain us. I felt that I had my fill of Marx for the day and would give him a miss. After all, poor chap, with there being so many such comedians all day who needs a magician!

The British summer reasserted itself on the way back “up the hill”. Got soaked.

Equal Pay Matters in UNISON

Quick report back on the London region UNISON briefing on Equal Pay that I attended on Thursday. The meeting was chaired by Gloria Hanson, Regional Convener and addressed by Mike Hayes, lay chair of the UNISON NEC Finance Committee as well as UNISON Finance staff.

This meeting is one of a series of regional briefings that are being held across the UK. UNISON is taking and contemplating legal action against a number of employers for unlawful discrimination over equal pay. It also has to defend itself in a small number of cases from “no win no pay” solicitors who are suing UNISON and other trade unions.

Check out trade union solicitors Thompson’s web site on “equal pay”. Taking such legal action against employers is potentially very expensive and legal costs in employment tribunals cannot be claimed back even if a member wins. UNISON has to decide how these costs will be funded.

The meeting was well attended by branch treasurers and secretaries. We had a really mature and sensible discussion. This is a not only a big issue for UNISON and employers.

The 1970 Equal Pay Act has been “in force” for over 26 years. It is appalling that after all this time there is still a 17% gap between male and female full time employees and a staggering 38% gap for part time workers!

The question surely is why should we face these huge legal bills for simply trying to enforce the law of the land?

(Photo: check out Belgium trade union campaign - "its not the hormonal rages")

Don’t Give Rich Lawyers 30% of your Compensation.

I was pleased to see that UNISON and the GMB are fighting back against so-called no-win no-fee solicitors, who have been touting for “equal pay” business in East London by running adverts in the local press.

This joint trade union advert (right) put out in response, points out that these solicitors can take up to 30% of any compensation they might win. While UNISON and GMB members get free representation.

People should be very, very careful about all no-win no-fee companies. I have come across cases in the past where claimants are told they will not be charged any fees. Then later they had to pay upfront for an insurance policy to cover legal costs if they lose, or where they have been charged for specialist medical reports or even extra for the cost of a barrister. UNISON will pay all these costs.

Often you are “locked” in when you use a no-win or no-fee solicitor and you have to pay them if you want to switch to other legal advisers.