NEWS Online Thursday 24th November 2011
LEAF continues fight for lecturers' rights
What lecturers faced in 1990's is now facing entire public sector
Pay, conditions of service, pensions and prospects all under threat.
30 November action is about core issues.
If rights are lost they will not be regained.
LEAF has fought since 1995 for the right of lecturers to benefit from the collective terms and conditions they enjoyed prior to the transfer of colleges from local authority control to 'independent' corporation status in 1993.
Lecturers' pay, conditions and status were trashed from 1994 onwards
Following the transfer, which was governed by European law on the transfer of businesses, the UK government set about in a systematic manner to undermine the terms and conditions, as well as the pay, of FE lecturers. The purpose of this exercise, as the white paper which presaged the act made clear, was to reduce costs while at the same time increasing student numbers, thus bringing about a lower unit cost
Indefinite pay and promotion freeze ensured compliance
Lecturers who refused to sign new contracts of employment had their pay frozen by their employers. This pay and promotion freeze was nationally co-ordinated, and had substantial government backing and support. Those who thought that their contracts were safe under European law were to be bitterly disappointed. The pay freeze has been maintained to this day -18 years!
Closures of colleges and job losses followed in the years ahead
The upshot of the attack on lecturers' contractual rights was that college lecturers' pay has declined to two thirds of the level of that of teachers in similar roles. The conditions of service are much inferior and fear and loathing pervades the sector.
What happened to lecturers will be visited on other public sector workers.
Pensions changes will inevitably be followed by changes to terms and conditions of work, and further pay restraint or even wholesale restructuring. The actions to remove all schools from local authority control will open the way to huge contractual change. This will lead to a decline in the pay and status of many teachers, and the closure of many schools and centres, as the financial squeeze starts to yield 'results'.
Can the lessons be learned?
We in LEAF have always said that what happened to lecturers was not merely an isolated event, and that there were ramifications for all public sector workers. This warning was largely ignored by the other unions representing teachers, local government workers and health care staff. Actually, the state that lecturers have been reduced to is now a benchmark for the government's aim to reduce the pay and status of the entire public sector.
How do we counteract the attacks on employment rights?
It is important to stress that public sector work is valuable and integral to the work of the entire economy. It is not an expensive addition. Public sector workers make up around 6 million out of 30 million workers. The argument that their pay and conditions is 'responsible' for the economic mess the country is in has to be firmly countenanced. The argument that all public sector pay and pensions are 'paid for' by the private sector is false and divisive. It must be challenged whenever it emerges.
So must any notion that reducing pay, pension rights and conditions is the route to national prosperity. It is not and never will be.
LEAF is striving to raise the issues of rights following a transfer still after all these years, and is at this moment considering further action. We can and will put our expertise at the service of other public sector and private sector workers and unions. The reduction of pay, pension rights and conditions of service is not inevitable and can be defeated. LEAF is playing its part in defending employees' rights.
New actions to be launched soon
LEAF will shortly take up again the issue of the rights of workers to benefit from transferred rights in the courts. Lecturers and teachers facing TUPE transfers to new employers will be interested to know how this fight is to be carried forward.We will bring news as soon as we have it.
NEWS Online Friday 1st July 2011
The fight for pensions matters
Public sector pensions are affordable, and they are not excessive
LEAF will work to defend our pension rights
If the old saying that 'truth is the first casualty of war' is applied to the current pensions dispute, then the coalition government will be found guilty from the outset of manipulating truth and spreading misinformation.
The purpose of the government and media campaign is to soften up public sector workers to accept that the reduction of their pension rights is inevitable and right. It is neither, and every argument that the rights must be reduced must be countered. LEAF will play a major role in supporting the arguments of the public sector workers. We know what happens when pay and pension rights are frozen. The results are a generational disaster for employees and their dependants.
Public sector pensions are modest, not excessive
Public sector pensions are not excessive, and they are not easy to build up to a reasonable rate. Setting aside the huge pensions payments given to the very best paid senior employees in the state sector, which are not directly relevant to the issue of most people's pensions , and which are themselves dwarfed by the pension payments to the highest paid private sector heads, most public employees retire on pensions which are barely above income support levels.
Average pension payments for teachers are no more than around £13,000 per annum, and this is usually taken only at age 60. In some areas of the public sector the average pension is even less. In the NHS it is £7-8,000 and in local government around £4,000. The Government wants to worsen even these pathetically inadequate retirement payments in order to reduce public sector liabilities.
The Myths and the Facts
It is a myth that pensions are over-generous. They are paid for by the employees and with few exceptions are generally modest. The money paid to pensioners is spent by them on living and returns immediately to the economy
It is a myth that they are cheap to buy. It takes 40 years to qualify for a pension and payments in public sector schemes are usually around twice that of the private sector. If you take a pension early it is severely reduced in most cases
Pension payments in the public sector are very modest, reflecting modest pay. For the lowest paid, they are a poor reward for a lifetime of work.
It is a myth that the public sector is 'paid for' by the private sector. Both sectors are interdependent and one could not work with out the other. It is a not-often stated fact that by occupying children for 11-15 years by teaching them and looking after them, school and college teachers enable their parents to go out to work and earn their living. Without their service the private sector economy simply could not function as it does now.
A long, hard road to a pension just gets harder
To qualify for a full pension, most employees have to work for 40 years. At present a full pension would give a pension of half the final salary. Most teachers do not qualify for full pensions at age 60 because they do not start work at the age of 20. Even a starter straight from university is usually 23 or 24 years of age before they begin paying contributions.
Since 2008, the teachers' scheme (which FE lecturers are members of) has allowed new entrants to the scheme to draw a full pension only at age 65. This and other changes allowed government liabilities in future years to drop by around £60bn or more. Apparently it's not enough! The proposal now is to further worsen the entitlement by compelling all workers in the public sector to wait until they are 65 or 66 years old ( and for younger workers until they are 68 or 69 years old) , before they can pick up their pension. Not only that, but they want to turn the pension into a career average calculation. This will, at a stroke, reduce the pension entitlement of 5 million public sector workers. Even further, they are proposing to require employees to pay considerably more in order to qualify for this reduced entitlement. The entitlement will be adjusted using a lower inflation measure to limit any future benefits too. We calculate that these changes will yield more than £400bn of reduced liabilities to the Treasury. Every penny of this will be squeezed out of public sector workers and their families.
Is there really a pensions crisis ?
In confirming ex-Labour minister John ( now Lord - of course) Hutton to carry out an 'inquiry' and report into public sector pensions, the Coalition government wrote the answer into their question ; should public sector pensions be reformed? Hutton duly reported that in his opinion the system had to be reformed to ensure it could continue. Ignoring the fact that governments have for years regarded their own employees' contributions as a source of revenue funding, and have thus left schemes with absolutely no funds whatsoever that they might invest for future returns, Hutton has decided that the best way to address the problem is to make workers pay even more contributions (which the government will be free to plunder as it always has done to meet its ongoing commitments) in order to get less. What we have in proposal then is really simply a massive tax hike for public sector workers and a reduction of their salaries, since pensions in this framework are merely deferred salaries. What would happen if Hutton's proposals were to become a reality is that the government would simply be encouraged to further raid the higher pension contributions they have imposed, and use the money for other purposes. At some point in the future they would return to the issue of pensions, with further proposals to reduce or remove entitlements.
It is the State which has turned pensions into a 'Ponzi' Scheme - not employees
Governments have long regarded pension contributions as a no-quibble source of income for themselves. They have raided private sector and public sector funds periodically through the years as a source of 'readies'. By turning pension schemes into tax-collecting vehicles they have cheapened the value of everybody's pensions, and undermined the commitment of working people to saving for retirement. When David Cameron says that the schemes will go 'bankrupt' if they are not reformed, he is guilty of either ignorance about how the schemes operate, or of breathtaking hypocrisy. The teachers' scheme, like many, has no funds under control whatsoever. All money paid in is siphoned off by the government for immediate spending. It is the state which is responsible for this unsustainable mess, not the teachers or other public sector workers.
If teachers representatives had been able to control funds, which the state could have underwritten, it is unquestionably the case that the funds, properly invested, would have easily been able to support the present system, or even a more generous one, into the indefinite future. The figures and analysis can support this argument. That's why you don't often hear them.
Should you support the fight to save pensions ?
We think it's a no-brainer. We further advise you to look at what happens to pay, pensions and prospects if drastic changes, which are never explained or projected into the future, are allowed to be rolled out. FE lecturers now 'enjoy' the worst terms and conditions of any group of employees in the education sector. The 'new professional contract' forced on the profession in 1994 has led to endemically low pay ( 30% less than comparable teaching salaries), few prospects, the end of real professional development, and of course, due to the link between salaries and pay, permanently reduced pensions.
The same will happen to all public sector workers if the pension changes are introduced. The next piece of the jigsaw will be local bargaining and lower or frozen pay, thus reducing the final pension liabilities further.
What can you do? ?
Talk to all your colleagues and give them the FE example to chew over. Support the unions' fight to keep pensions, and join any initiatives that can take the argument forward. We in LEAF intend to put our expertise and support at the disposal of other public sector unions and workers, and we will report on these initiatives in the months ahead. Email us your views and experiences
NEWS Online Saturday 30 April 2011
LEAF continues fight for justice for FE lecturers
New legal challenges to pay and career freeze planned
Teachers in academies warned to beware of contractual changes
At its annual general meeting recently LEAF members agreed to continue the fight to achieve justice for the lecturers in further education colleges who have suffered pay and career blight since the disastrous experiment of incorporation which began in 1993.
FE lecturers are the poor relation of the education family
It is clear that LEAF's prediction in the mid 1990's that the consequences for FE lecturers' prospects of agreeing to give up protected terms and conditions would be catastrophic . Unfortunately the recognized union at the time, NATFHE (now UCU) , thought that it knew better. It organized 'local contracts' which did not have the national contract protections, and lobbied to have them accepted across the sector. The 'silver book' national contract (similar to that held even now by schoolteachers - note this point ! ) was abandoned, and the staff who remained on it were forgotten. This move led directly to the founding of LEAF.
Pay is 40% lower than comparable rates in schools and universities
After 17 years it is clear to even the dimmest observer that the move to new contracts and local bargaining ( a misnomer since there was no 'bargaining' on pay and conditions - merely enforcement) has been an unmitigated disaster for the sector and the productive staff who work in it. The pay is so low ( at the lecturer/ senior lecturer level that is - senior management salaries are obscenely high) that anyone who can leave does so as soon as is practicable. Those left behind struggle with impossible workloads and onerous conditions. The promise of 'professional autonomy' made by the college employers at the time they pushed the new contract on to staff has been shown to be the cynical lie we in LEAF said it was at the time. A bonded servant does not have 'professional autonomy'. The prospects into the future are for further deteriorations in pay and conditions at he productive level and a continued atmosphere in the colleges of fear and loathing. If you had been hoping for things to 'improve' without intervention then you must have realized by now that this is a forlorn hope.
What is LEAF planning to do about it?
In the last year, LEAF's legal challenge to the pay and career freeze reached the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). Our claim was that the pay freeze imposed on the remaining 'Silver Book' staff was unlawful, since it was a blanket policy not provided for in law or the contract, and was not a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. Although referenced to 'Silver Book' staff, the action was aimed at advancing the interests of all lecturers, since it sought to reaffirm the legitimacy of the national terms, and the right of lecturers to benefit from them. In a hearing some months ago, the case was dismissed on the grounds that there had been a gap of more than six months from the end of the actions in the UK courts and the commencement of action at the ECHR.
Our claim is still valid and will be pursued
The ECHR decision made no comment on the content or validity of our case, but merely ruled that the claim should be struck down as 'out of time'. In fact, the claim had already cleared several earlier hurdles as a 'valid' claim and the substance of the claim was due to be heard. We were ( and remain today) very confident that our claim is correct and will be successful. We also know that the UK authorities and the colleges are terrified at the prospect of having to deal with LEAF on this basis, since we seek to re-draw the employment contract picture in FE to achieve a fairer and more balanced situation in which the professionals we represent can thrive and do justice to their students.
Our appeal to you
We are now ready to take our cases back through the UK courts to bring this long-standing grievance to a conclusion. To help achieve this, you should join and support LEAF. LEAF will represent your professional interests at work, and your longer-term professional interests in terms of pay and career. LEAF does not hold a political fund and does not therefore lobby on behalf of any political party or organization. Indeed, we think our independence is our strength since we can challenge government thinking on teachers' contracts without the accusation of political bias which is leveled against other organizations. In our experience of the FE dispute, there is no advantage in supporting one party over another in respect of contractual matters.
NEWS Online Wednesday 27 October 2010
LEAF fight for FE lecturers continues
Apologies for the hiatus in reporting on developments in LEAF’s campaign for FE lecturers’ pay and conditions. We have continued to seek a way forward 17 years after the trashing of lecturers rights following a transfer of employers.
Readers will recall that our essential case is very straightforward and simple.
Silver Book conditions and pay reviews had to be maintained in law
We say that following the transfer of college staff from local authority employment to that of the newly-created independent corporations in April 1993, the lecturers were entitled to continue on their protected collective agreement Silver Book contracts and enjoy those terms, at least until the collective agreement ended or was replaced by a new collective agreement.
We say that the pay and career freeze, introduced by the employers the year after incorporation against any staff retaining their Silver Book terms and conditions breached the lecturers’ European (and UK) law rights.
Discrimination against FE staff cannot be justified
Quite apart from the fact that the collective agreement was never terminated or ended by a new agreement (that is why some staff are still working to those conditions), the practice of a blanket discrimination against staff holding pre-transfer contracts cannot be justified by reference to any legal right, practice or by case law.
The 17- year pay and career freeze is a grossly disproportionate action which is not justified by reference to any lawful policy objective and is not proportionate in any way to the objectives sought by the Government and college employers.
LEAF’s legal challenge
LEAF has challenged the pay and career freeze with the European Commission following the failure of a tribunal test case in the UK courts on a similar issue related to contracts. Despite some initial success, when the commission appeared to agree that the proper operation of the European Directive required that Silver book staff should not be treated differently by that fact alone, the Commission eventually fudged its position and declared that our complaint was for the UK courts to address.
Human rights
Leaf challenged this decision with the EU Commission and eventually lodged a case with the Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, alleging unlawful discrimination in respect of trade union rights relating to collective agreements, as well as the issue of a fair hearing. We were encouraged by a positive appraisal of our case by a leading barrister specialising in employment law.
Regrettably, the court has within the last year pronounced against our case on a technicality, citing a gap of more than 6 months between our last action in the UK courts and our first application to the ECHR. The ECHR did not rule out our application on this basis initially, and interestingly, the judgement - of two sentences - did not seek to challenge the validity of our substantial argument: that a discrimination which has no objective basis cannot be justified in law. Actually, no court in the UK or Europe has yet succeeded in disproving our essential case. We firmly believe it is sound and correct.
Our next move
Following the decisions by the Court and Commission, we are now exploring the basis for an action in the UK courts, alleging unlawful discrimination against an entire category of staff. We are now taking legal opinion on routes forward, and hope to have a view very soon.
Eighteen years is a long time, and most of the Silver Book staff have either left their old jobs or the profession. However, the injustice has not been remedied and we believe that all the present ills of FE can be traced back to the disastrous decision to remove lecturers’ collective agreements. We have a duty to speak out for them and the present members of the profession who are enduring pay freezes, job losses, contract changes, oppressive management and many other difficulties.
We are still fighting for FE lecturers and still representing individuals in their dealings at work. We will give further and frequent updates in the weeks to come.
As 2010 sees the funding picture darken considerably, the issues we raised back in the mid 1990’s have continuing relevance to lecturers today. Unless challenged, what happened to the FE profession will happen to many other groups of public sector workers in the next few years. Only we are challenging on this vital issue.
NEWS Online Saturday 24th of October 2009
LEAF AGM Expresses Confidence in Campaign for Justice for Lecturers
A discussion on the status, pay and conditions of lecturers concluded that LEAF's campaign in the European Union represented the only realistic prospect for a better deal for lecturers in the sector.
After discussing the claims that LEAF has lodged with the European Court of Human Rights and the European Parliament, it was agreed to press on with the claims in the expectation that developments will occur in the next year which will vindicate LEAF's long campaign.
A Public sector Pay freeze? We've had one for 16 years!
The news from both Labour and the Conservatives ( with the Lib Dems trying to outdo both) that public sector pay would be frozen from 2011-2012 brought guffaws of ironic laughter from LEAF members. Not that this is a laughing matter. The pay of the remaining Silver Book martyrs (those who took their EU law rights in 1993) has been frozen since September 1993. For those who had to relinquish their rights and sign a college contract, pay freezes have been a normal part of life in the incorporated sector for 15 years. Most colleges have failed to meet recommended pay deals over the past 15 years, with only a very small minority paying the recommended increase every year.
It's only one year, after all. Isn't it?
Our message to public sector workers who think that a pay freeze of one year might be a 'price worth paying' for job security and financial stability is ... it never works out that way! You will find it harder to get the freeze ended than it was to accept it. The pay of FE teachers has continuously declined by comparison with schoolteachers for over 15 years, as colleges used their ability to determine pay increases to... decline to offer it! Not only this, but job losses, re-structuring, downsizing and a culture of oppression has become the dominant experience for staff in the sector. You have been warned! LEAF has clear advice to any group of workers who face the set of circumstances we have faced. We are here to offer support and help to all staff in the situation of pay and career freezes.
Schoolteachers beware. You are next!
What happened to FE lecturers in 1993 is now set to repeat itself for the 500,000 or so schoolteachers over the next few years. LEAF has always warned its teacher trade union colleagues that if the government was allowed to break agreements on pay and conditions of service by trashing the national collective agreements of lecturers they would later, if not successfully challenged, move on to impose the same solution on schoolteachers and other public sector workers.
Regrettably our colleagues have not always listened to our advice or heeded the warnings from our history. The move to make most schools independent of state 'control' ( by means of academy creation), announced by Michael Gove at the Conservative Party conference last week, heralds a move away from national pay and conditions of service bargaining. Gove is an ideologue who seldom allows reality or common sense to impinge upon his theorising. Although the proposal has been presented as tackling underperformance and setting schools 'free' of local authority control (bizarrely at the same time as they state the need to empower local authorities to make local decisions which suit local needs), it actually is about destroying collective agreements, saving money, and creating a kaleidoscope of different schools with different aims, purposes, outcomes, results and methods - a type of educational feudalism, in fact.
Schoolteachers' pay structures and careers will head the same way as those of lecturers
South that is. If you don't believe this, study what has happened in the FE sector since 'incorporation'. Nobody considering the present proposals of all parties can be excused for not knowing what is likely to happen. It's all happened before in the FE sector over the past 20 years. The move to make every school an academy is simply the incorporation model as applied to schools. There is no real pretence anymore that a 'sponsor' plays any financial role in the school, and the requirement to commit resources has been dropped. It has very little to do with standards. Nobody in FE even tries to argue that standards improved following incorporation. Strip away the false argument about standards and what you are left with is opted-out schools which will be funded centrally in an era when massive savings are to be made in public expenditure. The funding regime will be controlled rigidly by the government through whatever quango it brings into being to perform this function. It doesn't take a genius to see what will happen next. The schools sector is in for a rough time, and teachers and their representatives need to analyse and consider every utterance of government spokespeople in order to respond correctly. We in FE have learned the hard way that what they say is not necessarily how things shape up. But there is a way to respond, and we believe that we have the means and the expertise to ensure that an entire generation of school pupils are not short-changed as were their FE student counterparts in the 1990's.
NEWS Online Saturday 3rd of October 2009
LEAF AGM 2009
to view AGM presentation click here
NEWS Online Tuesday 11th of August 2009
LEAF members and supporters(Important Briefing)
BRIEFING ON STATUS OF LEAF COMPLAINTS TO EU PARLIAMENT AND EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS (ECHR) FOR FULL ARTICLE CLICK HERE..
LEAF has been contacted by the Petitions Committee of the European Parliament, which has confirmed that it is now re-examining our complaint first lodged with the European Commission in 2007. In response, LEAF has now supplied the Committee with a substantial body of evidence to back our claim that the government and FE employers conspired to remove the lecturers’ rights to continue to benefit from their collective agreement rights, contrary to the Acquired Rights Directive (ARD).
We are completely confident of our arguments on this critical issue, and you are advised to monitor this website for updates as the autumn unfolds. The writing is on the wall for the FE colleges and the Government, the latter being particularly responsible for upholding EU law. When we win, as we will, there will be 16 years of discrimination compensation to be settled.
LEAF was formed in 1995 in direct response to assault on terms and conditions begun by the government of the time through the changes of the 1992 Further and Higher Education Act.
We took several cases relating to our contention that the new contracts (in the manner in which they were introduced), were unlawful. We were forced through lack of funds to discontinue claims we had made relating to the pay freeze in mid 1990’s, and we lost a case in the EAT and at the appeal relating to the imposition of new contracts for temporary staff. After being refused leave to appeal the latter, we made a complaint to the EU Commission which was also rejected after several years of dialogue. A further complaint to the EU Ombudsman was also rejected. We then complained to the EU Parliament and in 2007 took our case to the European Court of Human Rights. We have not accepted the UK Court’s view or that of the EU Commission, relating to the lecturers’ rights. We insist that their treatment was, and continues to be, unlawful. It takes a lot of confidence to maintain an argument against such overwhelming opposition, but please be assured that we can back up our claims.
WE CONTINUE TO ASSERT THE CORRECTNESS OF OUR ARGUMENT.
We have been accused of arrogance and of ‘flogging a dead horse’ by most of our opponents over the years. ‘Arrogant’ because we insist that our argument is correct. We do insist this, but there is no arrogance in this assertion. Because we are confident that our case is sound, we believe we will win. In recent exchanges with colleges involved in freezing lecturers’ pay and careers, the colleges have in effect confirmed that they have been acting on shared legal advice, and that they have no effective defence for their actions. They should be very worried indeed! We are summarizing the essence of out argument below.
Following incorporation in 1992, the terms and conditions of lecturers transferred from LEA to the independent corporations. These transferred terms and conditions included the collectively-agreed terms of the Silver Book. The lecturers were entitled to continue to benefit from these terms and conditions, which included pay bargaining and pay increases, and promotions and staff development. This right was established by operation of Article Three of the Acquired Rights Directive, and the right to benefit from the full terms of the Directive was conceded by the Secretary of State at the time. Shortly afterwards the new employers wrote to all lecturers in post at the time of transfer, informing them that they intended to dishonor the collective bargaining mechanism which the state had earlier agreed would transfer in full. Thus the breach of the law happened immediately following the transfer.
Without going too deeply into the legal complexities, which we have now set out in full to the European Courts, our argument is relatively simple: it was simply not open to the employers or government to walk away from these contractual terms, or to use the transfer as a pretext for discontinuing with terms which were legally protected.. Despite the fact that collective agreements in Britain are of a voluntary nature, their continued effect as a part of the contracts of the lecturers was preserved by the transfer.
The employers have breached the lecturers’ ARD rights by imposing a pay and career freeze, since the discriminatory action was not a proportionate action in pursuit of a legitimate aim. The case law of the European Court of Justice has established that transferred rights may not be discontinued outside the operation of legitimate (known as ‘ETO’) reasons. It was established by NATFHE in 1992 prior to the transfer and that the impending transfer of April 1993 fell within the jurisdiction of the ARD. The government was forced to recognize this in a legal settlement in October 1992, and pay NATFHE’s costs. Notwithstanding this decision, the employers declared some six months later (but before the transfer) that they would not be bound by collective agreements following the April 1993 transfer. This decision put them outside the law. Regrettably, NATFHE failed to challenge the employers further on this point and meekly allowed them to walk away from the bargaining forum. Essentially, this betrayal led to the creation of LEAF. NATFHE is now history and LEAF was left to fight for lecturers’ rights alone. We are now at the point where we will make a decisive breakthrough on this vital issue.
NEWS Online Tuesday 10th of March 2009
LEAF case now to be considered further by EU Commission
LEAF's claims now gaining serious credibilty with EU institutions
Readers of this site will know that LEAF's claim that lecturers were subject to unlawful discrimination that has breached their human rights is due to be heard by the Court of Human Rights, probably later this year. We will notify you as soon as we hear further from that court. We have now heard also from the European Parliament, via its Petitions Committee. You may recall that the EU Parliament had earlier turned down LEAF's claims regarding the pay and career freeze imposed on FE lecturers. LEAF wrote back to the Committee in December after taking further legal advice from a leading employment solicitor. The Petitions Committee has now changed its mind and is looking again at LEAF's case, in the light of the new and relevant legal arguments we have placed before them. In a letter dated 18 February 2009, the Committee has informed us that it has referred our case back to the EU Commission for consideration. When a reply is received, LEAf will discuss the findings with the Committee, and seek a referral of our case to the EU Court of Justice.
Three European Bodies are now considering LEAF's case
The European court of Human Rights, the European Parliament and the EU Commission are all now considering submissions made by LEAF. Although the cases have differences in terms of their emphasis, all have a common thread running through them, relating to the unlawfulness of the employers' actions in freezing the pay and conditions of FE lecturers to achieve their transfer to more exploitative contracts of employment. For 15 years now, LEAF has fought against the de-professionalisation of the sector.
We are now poised to win
We are completely confident of the correctness of our claims, and we expect to win the argument. When that happens, we will move on to re-establish the pay and conditions required for all staff in the FE sector. For all the staff who have lost so much, we will ensure that their losses are made good.
LEAF represents your interests
We ask you to give your support to LEAF, which alone represents the preofessional interests of FE lecturers. Look out for further updates on this site.
NEWS Online Saturday 14th of February 2009
LECTURERS' PAY STRUGGLE MUST BE CONTRACT LINKED
Pay rises and conditions are inseparable questions
Only LEAF has the key to the problem
As February begins, lecturers in colleges across the sector are taking action to secure a pay increase formula agreed four years ago with the employers. Needless to say, many of the colleges across the sector have reneged on agreements to increase pay and narrow the gap between lecturers' pay and that of schoolteachers.
Pay gap with comparable workers is a massive gulf
We said 'gap', but in fact the pay of lecturers has fallen far, far behind that of schoolteachers. Yet, following educational and examination reforms, lecturers are increasingly being asked to do work that school teachers are ill-equipped to cope with. In addition to that, the Government appears to want FE to step up to the table and 'equip' Britain's workforce with the skills and qualifications needed to beat the recession and to counter unemployment. This is a laudable aim, and LEAF has repeatedly warned the government of the vital and irreplaceable work carried out by the teachers in the sector. Yet, all this work is apparently to be carried out by teachers working to the lowest pay and worst conditions in the Western world: not if we have any say in the matter though.
First things first
When colleges left the local authority framework in 1993, the colleges’ employers launched a massive assault on pay and conditions. Over the years virtually all staff were brutally forced to work to new conditions, on pain of a pay freeze, sacking, intimidation or marginalisation. The result has been fifteen wasted years for the sector, which has made no progress whatsoever in terms of its historic role in providing academic and vocational qualifications for young adults and older citizens, in skills training and in supporting social education. LEAF has fought back since it was founded in 1995, pointing out that without control of terms and conditions, and a collective agreement, there could be no progress in terms of improving pay and conditions. LEAF is still fighting for your rights and remains undefeated and focussed on the key issues.
We will win this dispute
We support the actions of the brave lecturers who are taking action on pay. However, the key fight must be over the contractual arrangements that govern pay disputes. LEAF has lodged its claim that the pay freeze on staff following the transfer in 1993 was an unlawful discrimination targeted against staff taking their lawful rights. Our case will be heard soon and we expect to win. Had there been no TUPE 'protection', there would have been no basis for the employers to create the discrimination which led to staff giving up their Silver Book contracts. We are confident that the European Court will agree with us that the Acquired Rights Directive, which protects workers in a transfer, cannot be lawfully used to worsen the terms, conditions of service or pay of those who sought its protection. We are sure that the Court will agree with us that a fifteen year unbroken pay and career freeze is a grotesquely disproportionate action against staff holding lawful contracts
What will we do when we win?
We will insist that every lecturer who had their pay frozen is compensated for the disadvantages they suffered. This is not only back pay, but the enormously damaging consequences for the ability of the lecturers to pay bills, raise families, maintain homes and develop their careers. If your pay and conditions do not match those of a colleague in the school sector, you will benefit from LEAF's actions. You need to know about LEAF's work now. After that we intend to negotiate a new collective agreement which will cover all lecturers in the sector, which will be binding on the colleges concerned. After that time, the practice of colleges 'deciding ' not to offer a pay increase that has been negotiated, will end. The colleges naturally do not want this, and are terrified at the prospect of LEAF succeeding. But succeed we will.
Join LEAF
LEAF stands alone against the college employers, as the only lecturers organisation representing exclusively FE lecturers. We alone can deliver the decisive breakthrough that will improve dramatically the pay and terms of FE teachers. Soon we will publish our case in full and invite you to comment and support the case. Please keep posted to this site and let your professional colleagues know.
NEWS Online Tuesday 14th of October 2008
LEAF MAKES HEADWAY ON HUMAN RIGHTS CASE
ROBINSON v THE UNITED KINGDOM
Members will be aware that LEAF submitted a complaint to the European Court of Human Rights [ECHR] concerning the treatment of staff who relied on the Acquired Rights Directive to protect them at the point of transfer, but who were instead penalised by way of a pay, career, and pension freeze.
.......
Our complaint to the Court was made under Article 3 [prohibiting inhuman and degrading treatment] and Article 6 [which preserved the right to a fair hearing, including in a civil case when civil rights are the question at issue].
Members will be pleased to learn that by a letter dated 6 October 2008, the ECHR notified us that our case would be heard as soon as is practicable.
This is very important news for our members, many of whom have been the long-suffering victims of those injustices that followed the transfer of further and higher education institutions to statutory corporations from local authority control in 1993.
.........
The determination of LEAF Officers and members has been of critical importance in the Union reaching this stage its efforts to achieve justice. We will keep members advised of the proceedings through the website as we receive further news from the ECHR.
.........
I wish to take this opportunity to thank our supporters for sticking by us in the difficult and turbulent times they have faced since incorporation.
David Evans General Secretary
..........
NEWS Online Saturday 30th of August 2008
LEAF RAISES HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUES IN EUROPE
....
Following the transfer of colleges from local authority control to statutory corporation in 1993, staff that relied on their European law rights for protection of their pre-transfer employment relationship were denied pay increases and career progression; causing them to suffer a life-long penalty in terms of the pensions they could expect when based upon a frozen salary and career prospects.
It is an appalling fact to report that there are a number of our colleagues in their 14th year of having been denied pay increases and career progression.
The contractual changes and the demand that pay be frozen for those who refused to accept a new and worse contract - relying on their ARD [public law] rights to protect their pre-transfer terms -, was planned and controlled by the United Kingdom government. It is a matter of fact and of record that in freezing pay and conditions, the colleges were acting on the instructions of their employer body, in turn inextricably linked to and liasing with the United Kingdom government. The government thereby largely managed their strategy indirectly through the Association of Colleges [formerly the CEF] which organisations received public funds and had key positions filled by public appointment.
....
Following major cases brought by LEAF before the English courts and complaints to the European Commission and other European institutions, we have now made an Application to the European Court of Human Rights in respect of those members who upheld their European law rights and remained on the Silver Book collective agreement.
The submission LEAF has made to the ECHR is that staff affected by the pay and conditions freeze have had their human rights breached under Article 3 [prohibiting inhuman or degrading treatment] and Article 6 [which preserves the right to a fair hearing including in a civil case when civil rights are the at issue].
LEAF remains confident of the correctness of its position and regardless of the United Kingdom’s efforts to stymie our challenges, will leave no stone unturned to achieve justice for those of it colleagues who have been so badly mistreated.
....
If you fall into the category described, you should contact our National Officer David Robinson by email at david.robinson100@virgin.net Further information on the progress of our action will be provided in due course.
You can join LEAF today by clicking on this link, or by contacting Janice Warren our Membership Secretary. It could be the most important decision you have made in a very long time.
© LEAF 2005
Keep LEAF members informed of events at YOUR College. E-mail us about any breaking news for inclusion in ONLINE News at leafunion@hotmail.com