Strategic pay review - CAFCASS to implement SPR without UNISON membership support

MESSAGE FROM UNISON REGIONAL ORGANISER MIKE BOOTH

I need to correct for the record some inaccuracies contained within the Cafcass letter dated 31 October 2008 placed on the internet.

# Unison forwarned Cafcass, Napo and PCS throughout the SPR process that we were concerned at the incorporation of the Essential Car User Allowance into salary, as this is an allowance for being an essential car user and not wages, plus that part time essential car users would be penalised under the proposed pro rated calculation. All parties ignored our concerns.

# All parties were fully aware that once we had achieved a negotiated SPR package that Unison would need to Equality Audit the package, yes I expected a 6 week turn around, but the legal case of Surtees in which we are awaiting Counsels advice on the relationship between pay protection and potential historical equal pay claims for members is out with my control, and I am obliged to follow Unison national policy and await direction on whether SPR package meets that legal advice prior to balloting members.

THE BULLY BOY TACTICS

Anyone reading the Cafcass letter will see that Cafcass are seeking to force Unison to accept payment of the pay increases and the package prior to a membership ballot. Cafcass is deliberately splitting the tripartite union partnership contrary to the National Partnership Agreement.

One of the major issues for me is the detriment that part timers will face by the pro rated retrospective deduction of the ECUA back to 1 April 2008, as the way this is being calculated will all but wipe out the benefit of the overall wage rise to part timers in 2008, placing them in a position of pay protection.

What the Cafcass letter deliberately ignores, is that I have offered that if this issue can be resolved NOW, then I will not object to the December payments being made, whilst reserving the unions position on SPR subject to our ballot.

Consequently the statement by Jane Booth that Cafcass does not wish to act in discord with unison is a touch disengenous.

CAFCASS RESPONSE TO ECUA ALLOWANCE

Cafcass now are saying that ECUA is actually being removed and not consolidated into salaries, and that this has already been equality impact assessed.

An interesting concept given that ECUA is being paid to bands of staff who in the main are essential car users, and the allowance is consolidated year on year into pay bands?

Oh and lest Cafcass are forgetful, their Equality Audit states ' cafcass proposes to, in effect, consolidate payment of this allowance into basic pay for most of those in receipt. The allowance is to be abolished, but the proposed salaries include an equivalent amount. For these employees there is thus no loss, or gain, so no impact and strictly speaking, no requirement for an equality impact assessment'.

WAY FORWARD

Despite the above disparities, I am hopeful we can resolve the ECUA issue for part timers and allow the December payments to be made.

Overall our Equality Report shows that the SPR package is a good one compared to others within the public sector.

Cafcass has now responded to this Report and I will be seeking national advice on various elements therein.

I next await national authorisation to ballot members as soon as possible.

Michael Booth
Regional Organiser