Union claims MoD morale at all-time low
Defence unions say morale among civil servants in Bath is at an all-time low.
Nearly 300 workers at the Ministry of Defence offices at Ensleigh in Lansdown staged a two-day strike this week in protest at changes to redundancy arrangements.
-
The protest - part of national industrial action - came as the 3,000 MoD workers remaining in the city digested the news that their jobs may all be switched to Bristol.
The PCS union says around 90 per cent of its members at Ensleigh, which deals with the supply of defence equipment, joined the stoppage.
The strike action also involved Jobcentre staff, tax workers, coastguards, Border Agency officials, courts staff, and driving test examiners.
The union says the changes will see staff “robbed” of up to a third of their entitlements in a move aimed at saving £500 million.
The Government says the shake-up will bring the civil service in line with other parts of the public sector.
PCS Ensleigh branch secretary Kevin Kilcoyne said he feared the changes were a prelude to more job losses at the MoD, which he said had shed 43,000 posts since 1997.
Last week, it was revealed that the MoD was considering severing its 70-year link with Bath by closing down all three of its offices in the city.
It has stressed that its favoured option is to shut Foxhill and Warminster Road and keep Ensleigh open, but the emergence of the option has alarmed unions and politicians.
Mr Kilcoyne said: “This is not helping with morale. Morale has never been lower.”
He added that concern over the supply of equipment to troops on the ground in zones such as Afghanistan had never been greater.
“If you cut the backroom, it does affect the frontline.”
He said of the redundancy changes: “With civil and public service jobs increasingly at risk, this is a cynical attempt to cut jobs on the cheap which will ultimately damage the services we all rely on. The cuts to the redundancy scheme will see loyal civil and public servants lose tens of thousands of pounds if they are forced out of a job.
“The Government claims it cannot prevent bankers’ bonuses being paid because they are contractual, but appears happy to rip up the rights of its own workforce and change the law to do so.”
Cabinet Office Minister Tessa Jowell said the new deal was "fair for staff and taxpayers".
She said: "It is very disappointing that the PCS has decided to take industrial action, especially given that less than one in five of their own members voted in favour of strike action, and that, overall, this figure represents only around 10 per cent of the total civil service workforce.
"The public will find it difficult to understand the PCS continuing to protest on their own against a package which brings the civil service into line with the rest of the public sector and still offers more generous terms than much of the private sector."
The proposals ensure that those earning £30,000 or less – 80 per cent of all staff – will still received between two and three years' salary if made redundant. Higher earning civil servants will have redundancy pay capped at twice their salary.
PCS has more than 300,000 members in more than 200 departments and agencies.
Meanwhile, shadow defence secretary Liam Fox has added his voice to the concern over the possible transfer of all Bath jobs to the giant Abbey Wood complex in Bristol.
He said he would continue to discuss the issue with the Conservative Parliamentary hopeful for Bath, Fabian Richter.
“This is clearly a huge decision with potentially serious implications for the people of Bath and the surrounding area.
"This is another example of Labour’s piecemeal cuts to defence prior to conducting a much-needed defence review. We are adamant that big decisions like this must not be made ahead of the urgently needed strategic defence and security review.”
38 Comments
View all
by PJ, Bath
Thursday, March 11 2010, 8:08PM
“The reason I highlight this practise is to illustrate the real reason for MOD overspends that the press and public see as the product of wasteful civil servants.
An overspend that will cost the workforce their jobs in the name of economies to "balance the books".
There will be a mass culling of MOD jobs post-May and the government are laying the foundation for it now, with the cuts in compensation for redundancy.
You think the forces are under resourced now? Wait until the government start 'balancing the books' after the election.”
by JC, Bath
Thursday, March 11 2010, 6:39PM
“Not sure what all this has to do with the story. Major procurement is dealt with at a very high level, and contracting out or PFI (Like buying a house on a credit card) are done to satisfy political dogma. If you read quality Press, you will see the same old Companies cashing in, same tactics every time, and yet Ministers still allow them to bid for work. The Civil servants in this story are the PBI, doing the best they can for the Forces, with very limited resources, ever moving goalposts, and abused by people like the alphabetically challenged C Rying.”
by Jan, Bath
Thursday, March 11 2010, 4:12PM
“Dave do you work for the procurement department in the MoD as you seem to talk like you on the 'inside' as it were?”
by Dave, Weston
Thursday, March 11 2010, 3:14PM
“Of course companies exploit weakness - its their role. They are not moral beings, they are legally obliged to work in their shareholders interests with any wider societal interests being very much secondary.
That being the case, it is for the civil service to enforce contracts which would only need to happen a couple of times before companies quickly get the message that if they bid low, they better be able to deliver cheap because they will be made to do it.
In any event it doesn't excuse poorly spec'd contracts which mean the civil service has to re-open negotiations later rendering any budget control void.”
by PJ, Bath
Thursday, March 11 2010, 2:37PM
“Dave,Weston. Contracts entered into by the MOD are often blamed for the shortcomings of the end product.
Whilst I agree MOD contracts should be better and there is ample room for improvment, it remains the case that UK companies exploit the contracts to the nth degree and make huge profits doing so.
When did you last hear of the government taking a company to court for breaking their contract? The government do not spend public money suing public companies, it's just not the done thing, so they take the hit from companies who see the MOD and local government as a blank cheque.
Shoddy UK workmanship and shoddy UK IT. Both at huge mark-ups and profitting at the taxpayers' expense.
Name me one major project that was tendered realistically by companies and not underquoted to get the contract with a view to upping the costs once awarded to them. No I thought not.
The problem of having to chose the lowers quote has been the problem for years. One that is only now being changed to reflect true "value for money" which may not be the cheapest taking into account all factors.”
by Dave, Weston
Thursday, March 11 2010, 1:51PM
“But the red tape goes both ways - anytime a public sector organisation wants to improve its practices, it has to undergo months of cap in hand negotiations with workers (via unions).
This dispute is a classic example - a change is needed to enable worker resources to be managed to match needs and available funding. As things stand there is little saving to be made by getting rid of unproductive staff because of the rate of redundancy pay. It cannot be in anyway logical to have a situation where its cheaper to pay someone to do nothing than to get rid of them, and yet the workforce are putting what is effectively red tape in the way of modernisation.
It isn't just the powers that be - some of this nonsense comes up from ground level as well - trouble is you can't get rid of the trouble makers because the whole workforce would walk out!”
by Jan, Bath
Thursday, March 11 2010, 1:25PM
“Dave, I would imagine the civil service is subject to a lot more rules, policy and red tape than the private sector.
This I would agree is an issue and a major problem because it appears that even if civil servants wanted to act in a certain way, over the top red tape prevents them from doing so.
I would suggest that is the problem of the people at the top issuing these guidance and not the front line worker who everyone seems to blame.
I think this bashing of front line civil servants is a disgrace and I for one would stand up for them.
Its a typical case of people in glass houses should not throw stones. If people dont like the way the civil service is run then why dont they apply and join and make it better? Oh yeah nobody would want to work on the front line with such a small wage and red tape suffocating them!”
by Dave, Weston
Thursday, March 11 2010, 1:14PM
“PJ & Jan - whilst the private sector does indeed profit from cost overruns on public sector projects, it only does so because of the apparent inability of the public sector to tie up contracts.
If I sign a contract with someone to carry out a specific piece of work, I will expect him to do that, or I will haul his backside into court to make him deliver on this contract - the court has the power to make him do it or to make him pay me compensation for not doing it. He only has two ways out of that - firstly if the contract isn't put together competently, or secondly if I change my mind half way through, and leave him room to hold me to ransom to get the extra work done.
So the question is - are the civil service not putting together enforceable contracts, are they too meek at enforcing them, or are they poorly specifying work and allowing wriggle room. Whatever the private sector do, it is the outcome of one of those three options - all of which point to incompetance in procurement.
A contract is a contract in law and provided both sides set out their position at the start there is no room for a private sector company to bump up the prices - they only do it because the civil service leaves the door open.”
by Jan, Bath
Thursday, March 11 2010, 1:04PM
“When I say private sector I am really just talking about the banks. I made the mistake of taring everyone with the same brush. A lot of people do that on this site ;)”
by Jan, Bath
Thursday, March 11 2010, 1:00PM
“I could not agree more PJ. The private sector are highly incompetent, money grabbing profit barons. The civil service DOES NOT WORK FOR PROFIT
It is the private sector compaies that take advantage and the deflect their mistakes by blaming the civil service.
ANYBODY with half a brain could work that out. Obviously not many people can but we should assume them ignorant or just plain stupid?”