Government is paying £68,000,000 bill for Union Reps

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Wordsmith, Oct 9, 2011.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Wordsmith

    Wordsmith LE Book Reviewer

    The Sunday Telegraph is carrying a story that the government is picking up a £68 million bill for union reps, including 66 full time and 321 part time Union reps at the MOD!

    Taxpayers pick up £68m bill for thousands of union reps - Telegraph

    Here's what being spent where.





    So there's an easy £68 million that'll be saved from the UK budget...

  2. Auld-Yin

    Auld-Yin LE Book Reviewer Kit Reviewer Reviews Editor


    This has been going on in the NHS for years. It is how that fine upstanding ex-MP, Jim Devine survived. No way he could have held down a 'proper' job :)

    Just to add that they are not paid at the lowest rate either and to add insult to injury, if they came from a section which attracted bonus payments, they retain entitlement to these bonuses even though they are not working towards earning those bonuses.
  3. Have you actually looked at what they are being paid to do? They are there to help the managers not to drop a bollock - at least that's the theory. If that £68 Million saves £100 Million worth of industrial action / tribunals resulting in ever larger awards - because the Civil Service are notoriously good at this kind of thing aren't they - then I'd say it's worth the cost.
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Yawn.

    Never heard of the expression "Pilgrims"?

    Wake up Telegraph

    Guido was running this months ago
  5. Auld-Yin

    Auld-Yin LE Book Reviewer Kit Reviewer Reviews Editor

    So you are saying that Union Reps are not there to support their members, but to support the management decisions?

    Actually you are right to an extent. The responsibilities for union reps go:
    The Union
    The Management
    The Rep themselves
    The Union member - very far down the food chain and just about inconsequential to what is going on!!!!

    And yes, I was a union member but was not popular as I suggested that the union actually did what their members paid them for rather than what the Union demanded!
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Well what the fcuk are they then?

    If they are 'Union Reps' (as described) then they should be paid for by their union members... end of, full stop and underlined several times.

    If they are SMEs brought in to advise the managers on such matters, then surely they should be referred to in that light?
  7. Wordsmith

    Wordsmith LE Book Reviewer

    So the 31 full time and 371 part time union reps employed at Transport for London are saving on industrial action are they? One of the biggest unions in TFL is the RMT run by that well known moderate Bob Crow. They're perpetually going on strike.

    The other way of looking at it is that when Labour was in power it permitted a significant expansion of paid union reps as part of a pro-quid for the unions bankrolling the Labour party. And these self same full and part time union reps are now prominent in orchestrating resistance to the very necessary cuts in the bloated public sector.

    If there is a need for full and part time union reps in the public sector, let the unions pay for them. I resent - big time - my taxes going to pay for this. I would rather the money was spent on additional policemen, nurses and soldiers at the coal face. £68 million pays for quite a few of those...

    • Like Like x 3
  8. The MoD has a union, how does that work then?
  9. I'm aware of one full time shop steward on Anglessey. It must be a hectic job.
  10. considering the high level of competence in management having situations dealt with before it goes to tribunal is probably worth the cost.
    plus a nice tame union causes less problems than a union rep whose not in bed with management.
    when these cretins **** up its expensive look at the shoe smith case. Somebody who actually knew what they had to do would have sucked it up and sacked her properly rather than letting her walk off with squillions.

  11. Except that in the Shoesmith case the cretin was not her direct employer but the Secretary of State at the Department for Children Schools and Families, a certain Ed Balls MP.
  12. Union Reps (inc. Police Fed Reps) should be paid for out of the membership fees, not from the public purse or the employer if a privatised entity. If they didn't do the job expected of them by the membership, they'd be sacked by the membership. They'd soon sharpen their skills if that was the case. As they are employees of the organisation it's difficult to get shot of them and in my experience, too many of them are too far into bed with management and ignore complaints from the membership or at least try to dissuade members making complaints. The management don't want to get rid of people like that, as they serve a purpose and they have the legitimisation of position within a Union. This seriously weakens the employees ability to pursue an action against an employer. They are largely ****ing ineffective at local level, ignorant of employment laws and if they spent half as much time actually working as they do avoiding the activity, they'd spend less energy. And when you see what people like Bob Crow and the others at the top end of the Union scale actually earn, you seriously begin to lose faith in unions.
  13. As far as I know, members pay a monthly fee and get union representation. The same as all other unions from what I understand of it.
  14. So the government subsidises the Unions, and the Unions subsidise the Labour Party?

    What's wrong with this picture?
  15. but if your such a crap manager that you have an angry and pissed off workforce having a tame useless union rep whose supposed to deal with the problems is a bargain:(.
    much better than having to face a pissed off part time unpaid shop steward whose really****ed off and wants your head on a stick.
    course having management that understood employment law and leadership in the public sector would be much better but that's never going to happen is it :(