Longer version
Shorter version
Longer version of article
The Left Unity PCS General Secretary’s “lockout” of the Coalition for Change led PCS National Executive Committee has come to an end, but not definitively.
The ostensible reason for the lockout was that the GS, Fran Heathcote, objected to the NEC adopting new (actually less bureaucratised, more membership focused), standing orders (SO) by simple majority. But her unprecedented nuclear response was an assertion of lasting GS authority over the NEC and the democracy of PCS.
Heathcote has brazenly sought to demonstrate that the PCS bureaucracy can live without the NEC, Conference decisions, and membership democracy. She continues to hold the threat of further “lockouts” over the head of the NEC. Although bound under contract and rule to work at the direction of the NEC, Heathcote plainly has a different sense of her powers.
On Tuesday 7 July the NEC met for 13 minutes (!), effectively only with Heathcote’s “permission”.
The purpose of this micro meeting was to:
• Vote for a statement advanced by Heathcote, including LU’s Standing Orders (SO), as the only basis upon which she was prepared to “permit” the meetings of the NEC and its sub-committees to be “recognised” and supported, and its decisions implemented, by the staff of PCS.
• Authorise industrial action over restructuring and redundancy by members in Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO).
The Coalition led NEC, including the Independent Left which Solidarity recommends, was right to put support for FCDO members ahead of the immediate issue of the NEC’s SO, albeit the defence of PCS democracy must continue.
The PCS FCDO members had surpassed the legally required 50% ballot threshold for industrial action, with 78% of voting members supporting strike action and 97% supporting action short of a strike. This excellent outcome built on the April ballot result, which fell narrowly short of the strike threshold but still produced very large majorities for action. National failure to back to FCDO members would have been incredibly damaging within FCDO and across PCS.
As it was, the authorisation was disgracefully delayed by the GS. The ballot closed on 22 June. The NEC’s National Disputes Committee (NDC) could have quickly approved FCDO action on its behalf but, in a sign of bureaucratic and factional indifference to the members and PCS’s democracy, NDC members and the wider NEC had to learn of the ballot result from PCS’ social media.
The President, IL’s Bev Laidlaw, repeatedly asked PCS staff to organise both NEC and NDC meetings. But Heathcote would not recognise and allow support for any meetings unless the NEC first adopted LU’s SO. It was a reckless, hyper-factionalised, position which posed a risk to the legal notification of action to FCDO management and augured confusion and disruption for members.
Misusing PCS’ arrangements, Heathcote took legal advice as to whether she could authorise (and by extension reject) industrial action on her own initiative, i.e., whether she could usurp the roles of the NEC and NDC. She was predictably told “no”, but her focus was on her NEC lockout, not on FCDO members.
It was only at this point that Heathcote/LU expressed a desire for “talks”. They knew that preventing PCS FCDO authorisation would place them in a bad light; that the President was in close touch with PCS FCDO; that they either had to “persuade” the NEC to vote for LU’s SO and other positions or be able to blame the NEC for rejecting their “compromise” statement, when they themselves have full HQ control of communications with members.
The GS used the NEC’s anxiety to support FCDO members as leverage to secure her statement. The President put her name to the GS’ statement and the NEC Coalition majority voted for it to:
• Enable the NEC to support membership action in FCDO and elsewhere.
• Seek to launch a national campaign over pay and jobs.
• Enable the President to obtain independent legal advice concerning NEC SO (the one “concession” in the statement).
The NEC will shortly meet again in a full meeting, albeit on Heathcote’s SO. What next? The NEC:
• Has previously taken decisions to implement last May’s Conference decision to campaign for a national claim for a 10% pay increase, £18 p/h minimum wage, pay progression, and a job security guarantee. It must now build on those decisions, seek to engage the government in productive talks, and move to action if need be, engaging members throughout the process.
• Must try to do so despite the weeks that have been and will continue to be lost and despite Heathcote and LUeffectively signalling their opposition to the Government. Heathcote has spent weeks choking PCS’s democracy and the prospects for a national campaign.
• Seek to spread and to link “local” disputes, such as those taking place in MHCG and FCDO, and coordinate responses to the growing, Treasury and Cabinet Office driven, threat to jobs - DWP announced office closures on 25 June that will affect nearly 5,500 staff - rather than leave branches and “bargaining units” to fight in isolation from each other.
• Obtain PCS funded legal advice on a range of matters relating to the so-called SO issue.
• The NEC should not “self-police” in the face of the ongoing threat of further lockouts. It was elected on a platform for change and it must take such decisions as it needs to. The Coalition should prepare now for rank and file activity in case of further lockouts.
Shorter version of article, as in printed paper
The "Left Unity" General Secretary’s “lockout” of the Coalition for Change led PCS National Executive Committee (NEC) in the PCS civil service union has come to an end, but not definitively.
The ostensible reason for the lockout was that the GS, Fran Heathcote, objected to the NEC adopting new (less bureaucratised, more membership focused) standing orders (SO) by simple majority. But her unprecedented response was an assertion of GS authority over the NEC and PCS democracy.
Heathcote continues to hold the threat of further “lockouts” over the NEC. Although bound to work at the NEC’s direction, she plainly has a different sense of her powers.
On 7 July the NEC met, effectively only with Heathcote’s “permission”, to:
8 Vote for a statement advanced by Heathcote, including LU’s Standing Orders (SO), as the only basis upon which she was prepared to “permit” the meetings of the NEC and its sub-committees to be “recognised” and supported, and its decisions implemented, by PCS staff.
Authorise industrial action over restructuring and redundancy by members in Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO).
The Coalition led NEC, including the Independent Left which Solidarity recommends, was right to put support for FCDO members ahead of the immediate issue of the NEC’s SO, albeit activists must continue the defence of PCS’s democracy.
The PCS FCDO members had surpassed the legally required 50% ballot threshold for industrial action, with 78% of voting members supporting strikes and 97% supporting action short of a strike. National failure to back the FCDO members and this brilliant result would have been incredibly damaging.
The GS used the NEC’s anxiety to support FCDO members as leverage to secure her statement and SO. Her behaviour was reckless and hyper-factionalised, and posed a risk to the legal notification of action to FCDO management.
The President put her name to the GS’s statement and the NEC Coalition majority voted for it to:
• Enable the NEC to support membership action in FCDO and elsewhere.
• Seek to launch a national campaign over pay and jobs.
• Enable the President to obtain independent legal advice concerning NEC SO (the one “concession” in the statement).
The NEC will shortly meet again. It:
• Must build on its previous decisions to implement last May’s Conference decision to campaign nationally for a 10% pay increase, £18 p/h minimum wage, pay progression, and a job security guarantee, despite the weeks that have been lost.
• Seek to spread and to link “local” disputes, such as those taking place in MHCLG and FCDO, and coordinate cross “bargaining unit” responses to the growing threat to jobs.
• Obtain PCS-funded legal advice on all matters relating to the democratic crisis.
• Must not “self-police” in the face of the threat of further lockouts. The Coalition should prepare now for rank and file activity in case of further lockouts. §
Comments?We welcome replies, corrections and debate pieces. Contact us