Tuesday 25 August 2015

Latest From Napo 76

I've only just noticed that Ian Lawrence posted a blog on Saturday:-

Sodexo come back to table as Minister responds to unions concerns

At the end of another full on week, and as reported in BR 88-2015, the probation unions have now secured further talks with Sodexo on their early severance scheme. The discussions will take place this Monday and Tuesday have come about as a result of a meeting between the NNC Joint Secretaries the parties, and the MOJ contract compliance directorate.

To recap on how we have got to where we are, members will recall that Sodexo and the unions were directed to enter into negotiations about Sodexo's plans to offer a severance package which had initially been presented as an attempt to vary the terms of the Enhanced Voluntary Retirement Scheme. The unions entered into those talks in good faith but Sodexo decided to offer a voluntary severance scheme in its place which they have refused to improve.

The position has become even more complicated now that we have received a positive response from the Secretary of State to the letter that we sent following our meeting with him last month. I will publish this at the earliest opportunity, but as it raises a number of issues which are central to Napo's approach to next weeks talks I am asking that members bear with us for a few more days.

Unions seek halt to Severance exercise

Given the issues that have arisen over these last few weeks and the Ministers interpretation of Sodexo's contractual responsibilities in his letter, the unions have asked Sodexo to pause all procedures on the severance programme for one month to allow for genuine negotiations. Disappointingly (but somewhat predictably) this was refused, hence our latest advice that members do not sign the settlement agreements yet (the generic document is being considered by our legal advisers).

Sodexo's approach to this whole episode has been a communications disaster to say the least; one which has caused massive confusion and resentment across the CRC workforce within the six contract areas. This was the principle reason for members agreeing to be asked to take part in a formal industrial action ballot.

We have insisted that the talks next week include:

  • The interface between the proposed Voluntary Severance payment and release of pension for those aged over 55. The unions still maintain that Sodexo have got this wrong and that people are being induced to sign away their rights.
  • Serious points of clarification over several aspects of the proposed settlement agreement and the totally inadequate offer for financing individual legal advice
  • The intention to change Compulsory Redundancy terms in Cumbria/Lancs and Northumbria CRC's. 
  • Crucially, Sodexo's contractual compliance with MoJ (Gove's letter appears to raise some questions about this and where it is clear that he has instructed his officials to monitor developments).
  • The overall job cuts agenda and the unions concerns that this is unsustainable in terms of service delivery and public safety.
  • Failure to apply SCCOG/NNC job evaluation procedures to redesigned structures/jobs. 
  • The TUPE implications of the transfer of functions to Sodexo Salford.
Protecting your position


We have told Sodexo that we will continue to advise members who are involved in the expression of interest process add the caveat to all your communications that: "this is without prejudice to any improved outcomes that may emerge from the national negotiations I understand are still proceeding between Sodexo and the unions".

In light of Sodexo's track record for shifting the goalposts, none of us are able to predict what will happen in next weeks talks. We will give you as much definitive information as we safely can, but please bear in mind that our priority is bringing the CRC employers and Sodexo into territory in which we hope it may be possible to find some form of accord.

As always we enter this process in good faith, but remain ready to seek redress via industrial action if members believe that this remains the only other option. Its time for Sodexo to start resolving the mess that they have created.

You can help by sticking with Napo, supporting the work and efforts of your local representatives and telling others why they should sign up with us.

More news on a range of issues will follow later this week

36 comments:

  1. Once again....there's something we have but we can't let you see it yet...WHY?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thorny subject. Are NAPO members of NPS prepared on masse to support industrial action for Sodexo CRC s. ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. People seem to think that life and the future in the NPS is fine and dandy. It's not !!! and NAPO and previous 'colleagues' appear to have little or no interest. OK, redundancy is not yet on the cards but is probably getting closer. T&C's changing and not for the better, horrendous workloads and expectations that things can change and be achieved without any apparent evaluation of what is actually possible, was anything discussed or agreed with Napo ?

      Delete
  3. By 4pm today, unless anything changes significantly - and it will have to be SIGNIFICANT - I'll have met with HR about VS & all but signed off on the "least worst option", i.e. 40% of original EVR (VS) is better than 25% (CR).

    Unions' actions appear too little too late for some, and that will include me if they don't get their collective bargaining finger out of their collective a-hole. I've been supportive of my union throughout, but this is now verging on dereliction of duty to members.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think Ian Lawrence's advice given in his blog is very wise and presumably legally sound & will not disadvantage members (or others) who use it,

      I strongly encourage any non memebers to join Napo or Unison or GMB today to gain individual protection and to add to the strength of what the Unions are trying to do - that seems to be to stop Sodexo and presumably the other employers reducing the terms and conditions in ways that have not been agreed with members.

      That advice is repeated in the blog.

      In view of this comment at 07.50 (which seems not to recognise what Ian Lawrence has advised) and the time pressures maybe Jim Brown, will highlight it in some way as it may make a significant difference to those who feel under pressure to submit applications for severance for fear of ending up with worse.

      " Protecting your position

      We have told Sodexo that we will continue to advise members who are involved in the expression of interest process add the caveat to all your communications that: "this is without prejudice to any improved outcomes that may emerge from the national negotiations I understand are still proceeding between Sodexo and the unions". "

      Delete
    2. Andrew - been there, done that, advice followed. I'm now at the sharp end of meeting with HR & being presented with a legal document to sign. There's no more scope for stalling. We're beyond xpression of interest & into the mechanics of exiting.

      The unions don't seem to have grasped how imminent this is, tea & cakes & more fiddling while the CRCs burn to the ground.

      Delete
    3. Andrew, can you please advise what individual protection any of the trade unions can offer? NAPO are too busy trying to save what little money they have left to pay the GS and his cronies generous redundancy packages. After all the last GS got 100k for being a disingenuous adulterer. I wonder what IL can look forward to?

      Delete
    4. Is there an argument that the contract was signed under duress?

      Delete
    5. I do not believe Unions can prevent an employer behaving illegally, unwisely or insisting on unfair terms are not inserted in an individual's contract of employment.

      I do not believe the Unions can offer individual protection as far as members signing away their own rights.

      Trades unions should provide protection to individuals if they come under individual scrutiny for professional matters such as their actions being investigated in regard to an SFO. Such protection is unlikely to be available otherwise unless it is included in a personal legal protection scheme.

      Unions can better negotiate terms with an employer the more members they have - I realise I am stating the obvious, so it is still in the interests of existing members to encourage colleagues to sign up today - even if they resigned yesterday.

      Again stating the obvious - the clue is in the word - UNION!

      I cannot see how a member is prejudiced if they add the caveat advised by Ian Lawrence to any agreement they are asked to sign and I presume/hope (I am not qualified to be definitive) a refusal to allow such a caveat by an employer would be considered unfair by a court.

      Do not take my word for it.

      It is an horrendous situation to be in and I think reveals the depth of poor employment practice that some who the MOJ have contracted with are prepared to go.

      Delete
    6. Anon 08.34 – on duress, not unless they are pointing a gun at your head or something similar.

      Delete
  4. 7:25, unfortunately members can't support our comrades in CRC due to teacher's anti union laws making secondary action illegal. Notwithstanding that the recent history of tiny ballot turnouts tells us that they won't strike to save themselves let alone anyone else. I note that the turnouts in the recent sodexo CRC's indicative ballot remain secret in the "member led" NAPO. They wouldn't even tell the NEC what the turnout was in the first indicative ballot for action in the TR campaign. They would only tell individual reps what their branch numbers were.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Members not in CRCs can support members in CRCs in a host of ways - BUT it would be illegal for them to take industrial action in support.

      Supportive action is more likely to be effective if it is coordinated - Trades Unions could coordinate supportive action (I am almost sure) similar to the way they campaign for other professional matters - such as the ridiculous charges now being imposed in the courts, although I am not sure there is yet an active campaign about that from Unison & Napo & the GMB.

      Delete
    2. NAPO members not in CRC can support those effected by not crossing picket lines. It's no more complicated than that.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous said...
      In response to the comment regarding "won't strike to save themselves', as a CRC PO, and in the knowledge of the majority of those who did vote for strike action in my area, it was the people most at risk of losing their jobs or those interested in the VS for genuine reasons that made up the ballot of 98% in favour. It would appear that the majority of those who are 'safe' in the CRC and don't want jeopardise their future with Sodexo just didn't bother voting, hence the relatively low ballot turnout. Therefore, you are close to the truth of the matter but it is our colleagues that won't strike to save us.

      Delete
  5. Well, the 'talks' should be concluding today so hoping that the unions will release some relevant updates by tomorrow at the latest! Delay signing any agreements until the very last minute comrades, just remember if you sign the agreement you sign away your rights to any future claims. As previous posters have highlighted, your home insurance policy may well cover legal expenses for employment matters. I know mine does and I fully intend to use it if the unions don't do their bit.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Aaaarrrgggghhhh, the deafening crash of silence. Not a peep, other than every CEO in every Sodexo area releasing identical emails denying talks between Sodexo & the unions will have any effect.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yet Napo give the impression of confidence, not sure I have faith in what any Sodexo CEO emails particularly given their strings are being pulled by Sodexo Chiefs!

      Delete
  7. I told you Ian would come and save the day when he returned to NAPO. Ian is a Union Warrior. He will defeat Sodexo

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is a great help to me as a reader that another has great hope and faith in Ian and describes him as a warrior. I am not sure he has appeared to wandered the planes of union business although some might say squandered. He has not frightened any opposition into submission perhaps spurned them on into attack? Hardly warrior. Not to be put off he has kept a dialogue running although they do not listen. He has had us canvassed for strike action and got a return yet despite Soditall offering nothing he has abandoned strike action . He has also got an opportunity meet sodexo bosses but this may have been to offer them his backside for another kicking. Perhaps had he have promised a legal review and asked for test cases . Pledged to members a clear indication to reject the soditco theft and breach of your job security. Theft of your terms and condition theft of your EVR NOT compulsory redundancy then perhaps he could be viewed as less a buffoon and more a political analysis of what he is helping put us through. All said what can you really say about saving the day? Until he realise he should be organising solidarity Soditall will just sit back and pick off the groups and when the last few are left there will be nothing to support. Perhaps you think warrior means something else ? Any ideas poster just start the list

      Delete
  8. Sarcasm? Difficult to work out in text? Anyway, he isn't a hero according to the emails from CEO's who have said the 'talks' will have no bearing on matters as they stand now! Could be bully boy tactics from CEO's, could be the truth, we'll find out when the unions get round to issuing bulletins....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Do you think NAPO have told us the truth ?

      Delete
    2. I want to believe they have but no!

      Delete
    3. The above comment was in reply to one which asked if I thought NAPO have told the truth, but that comment has disappeared no?? Much like my faith in NAPO!

      Delete
    4. It has disapeared yes as I posted the question.

      Delete
  9. Napo need to put out information NOW on the talks. The SOD..exo model is unworkable so this is not folks jumping off a sinking ship..it's long sunk. The only sane approach is to get out as best one can.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Well according to some of my colleagues in Northumbria crc there was no talks with the union...(email from Nick Hall) and therefore there was no change to voluntary severance

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry about the grammar...flipping ipad

      Delete
    2. Yet the Northumbria NAPO rep sent an email yesterday afternoon with the following "Napo and Unison nationally will be issuing further bulletins once the meeting with Sodexo today concludes". Feeling extremely pissed off with all the lies, whether it's Nick or NAPO I don't know but tell the fucking truth somebody!

      Delete
    3. couldn't agree more| None of them could lie straight in bed| This is a shambles and here in Northumbria we are mighty sick of it. Hope people are keeping all these emails etc for future employment tribunals. I note from colleagues that Northumbria are even pointing folk to a particular solicitor to deal with their severance contracts; what a joke!

      Delete
    4. Anything in the e mail to say how they knew that then? The napo northern situation is self made , there are too many influences within central napo and Northern reps in my view that led a once strong branch right up the wrong path. It is a sorry state of affairs.

      Delete
    5. @ anon 9.12 trouble is an ET can only happen if you sit tight and don't take VS AND you'll have to do it yourself (via an insurance policy or just off your own bat) feeling very let down by both Northumbria CRC and the Union. Can't see N'bria CRC retaining an Investors in People or any of their other accolades, what was once one of the highest performing trusts will struggle to recover their now dismal reputation with their staff. I can't comment form an offender point of view but it would be good to get some honest feedback from them in a few months time!

      Delete
    6. From my experience, Northumbria as was and now the CRC keep getting investors in people etc because staff are too afraid to speak up and say it as it is, often hand picked etc for interviews. Even staff surveys are manipulated and the headlines are those that have shown them in a positive light with the negative areas being ignored. You can make statistics say anything you like! Think back to the 'press your button' briefings, hilarious, when you ask a question that,can only have a positive response then you get a positive response..PR is a funny ole thing, as the saying goes;don't believe everything you read.

      Delete
    7. Investors in People is meaningless. Sodexo has accreditation for its people management skills. The probation Trusts were always excited when they were being assessed for this kitemark. It made no difference to anything except perhaps CEOs who saw it as an ego trip in manipulating a workforce to fall for the performance agendas. But even this was made easy with the ever-willing workforce.

      Delete
  11. I believe in being honest from the start, and not giving false hope to people who are expecting something from you. NAPO do the right thing AND BE HONEST AND TELL MEMBERS : VS IS GOING TO HAPPEN AND EVR IS NOT

    ReplyDelete
  12. No truth in numbria then ? Not surprised.

    ReplyDelete