ISU Membership Circular 08.02.2016
The ISU are aware of rumours which have been circulating over the weekend on Social Media that parts of the Secondary line for Border Force face privatisation. This rumour has been doing the rounds off and on since the publication of a report from the Centre of Public Studies in early January but appears to have hit social media over the weekend and has caused members concern. This ISU has not been made aware of any plans to privatise the secondary line; but we have asked senior BF officials to confirm the position to staff in order to allay fears.
Only a brief update on the debacle of Pay 2015. The promised data, including things like the actual the cost of AHW first requested back in August 2015, still has not been provided. No reason or explanation has been given for the delay. Nor have we been offered any further meetings with the negotiating team. Despite the statements made to staff claiming that HO are eager to resolve the issue their actions suggest somewhat less appetite to engage.
AHW – Individual contracts.
We have been assured that individual AHW contracts are – or should be – available throughout the business. We are also well aware that this has not in the past been the experience of staff. However we are assured from the Permeant Secretary and the Head of Home Office HR that this is entirely possible.
Members who want to individual contracts to reflect lower levels of flexibility, weekends, nights etc. should approach their line managers in the first instance. Please take a local rep with you and keep the NEC Liaison officer appraised. The ability to gain increased elements may be more limited; but as some officers wish to reduce their commitment there will be others willing to increase theirs.
AHW Rates – Victory for the ISU.
Members in one particular area – it would not be fair to name it – were wrongly notified of their AHW rates 6 months ago when beginning a period of adjustment for fairly significant rate reduction. The error was mathematical – the hours shown on the notice of change were correct; but that maths applied to it was not. Following ISU intervention, corrected notices have been served and fresh period of adjustment has begun. This has been an excellent example of staff raising concerns and managers, albeit at a national level, responding to it. The local reps are to be congratulated for their support of members.
PST3 (largely in BFN)
The NEC had intended to provide an update on the position of BFN approach to PST3. However this has been subject to further developments today and a full update will be provided shortly.
The ISU position remains that you cannot be compelled to supply medical data classed as sensitive and protected under Schedule 2 of the Data Protection Act. Staff threatened with disciplinary action, redeployment or anything else should advise managers that they are awaiting union advice. If you feel that the matter is urgent or imminent please contact your local rep without delay.