BBC unions call for more talks
Pickets at Edinburgh on May 23.
Unions have called on BBC Director-General Mark Thompson to convene a further meeting with officials on an ACAS peace plan.
The decision came at a meeting in London today, May 31, where BECTU, NUJ, and Amicus, representatives from BBC sites across the UK debated an offer tabled by the BBC after all-night talks four days earlier in a bid to end strike action over planned cuts and privatisation.
Although the offer contained concessions sufficient to justify consultative ballots in BBC Broadcast and BBC Resources, both threatened with sell-offs, the meeting believed that the BBC had not gone far enough to avoid compulsory redundancies elsewhere.
Unions have called for a meeting with Mark Thompson to discuss a framework in which divisional level negotiations on compulsory job cuts could go ahead, without denying unions the right to take further industrial action if the outcome of those talks was unsatisfactory.
Read union letter to Mark Thompson
In a joint statement issued after the May 31 meeting, unions warned that the dispute, over roughly 4,000 job cuts at the BBC, which has already led to a one-day strike on May 23, was not over.
Read joint statement from unions
BECTU's Assistant General Secretary, Gerry Morrissey, said: "We welcome the proposals in relation to the privatisation of BBC Resources, and the guarantees that are expected on behalf of members in BBC Broadcast if it is sold off.
"However, on the issue of compulsory redundancies there is still a significant gap between the unions and the BBC, which we hope will be bridged by divisional-level talks on the details of the cuts. If not there will be renewed industrial action."
BBC management had hoped that the ACAS offer would be accepted by representatives, or put to members of all three unions in a consultative ballot, although the unions' negotiating team had made no commitment to recommend it to the May 31 meeting.
Union response to BBC ACAS offer of May 27
- Offer does not resolve dispute, say unions
- But no further industrial action planned at present
- Members in BBC Broadcast and BBC Resources vote on offer in postal ballot
- Meeting with DG on job cuts demanded by unions
- Framework sought for divisional talks on redundancies with scope for further strike action if necessary
There were calls from some areas for outright rejection of the offer, and the announcement of further strike dates. Planned action on May 31 and June 1 had been called off as a gesture of goodwill by unions after the BBC tabled its ACAS peace offer following the May 23 stoppage.
In an effort to keep dialogue going, however, the unions agreed to call for a meeting with the Director-General, and officials emphasised after the meeting that they were determined to have "meaningful negotiations" with the BBC if at all possible.
But, if the suggestion of a summit meeting with Mark Thompson was turned down, the response of unions would be to resume industrial action before any directorate-level talks took place, and accuse the BBC of refusing to engage in constructive discussions.
If the BBC is willing to continue with talks about avoiding compulsory cuts, the unions will agree to a trawl for volunteers for redundancy in the many departments which are trying to shed staff, partly to meet a 15% cut in budgets across the board.
Although there is no plan yet for a consultative ballot of union members on the BBC's ACAS proposals, ballots will now be run in BBC Broadcast Ltd and BBC Resources, both facing privatisation, where concessions have been offered.
In Broadcast, the BBC has promised that by June 10 staff will know clearly whether their terms, conditions, and future pension rights will be protected, as demanded by the unions. The four final bidders are known to be meeting the BBC this week, and management have indicated that the union demands for three years protection of terms and conditions, and the provision of a final-salary pension scheme broadly comparable to the BBC's own, were likely to be agreed.
In BBC Resources, which could also be sold off, management have offered a two-year postponement of any sale, and have confirmed that no decision has yet been made about privatisation, including the outside broadcast section, which would now be covered by the two-year delay.
The outcome of the meeting was conveyed to BBC management shortly after the joint statement was drafted, and unions are waiting for a response.
Comments received
An acceptance of the joint Unions' request for further discussion would give Mark Thompson an opportunity to demonstrate his willingness to consult and involve staff in the radical reshaping of the BBC he feels is necessary.
It could reassure licence-fee payers that BBC Management are prepared to listen and act on reasoned views and opinons that come from others.
Mark Thompson is to be congratulated for showing that the Corporation has no immediate need to divest itself of BBC Resources. Let him now pay a similar tribute to other members of Staff who together form the BBC's greatest resource.
Gareth, BBC staff, London UK 31 May 2005
Considering what we achieved on the strike day I think this is quite right. Broadcast & Resources (where I work) have done relatively well in the "peace offer", but our brothers & sisters elsewhere have not. I think our representatives & negotiators are right on target here; I believe we shouldn't rush to accept Thompson's first offer.
Clearly we've got Thompson & his band of zombies on the run, & we must secure the best deal for all the staff as well as for the future of the BBC. Thompson says the "peace offer" is final, but can we trust the word of a DG who's performed so many U turns?
John, BBC staff, Ruislip UK 31 May 2005
I for one am disappointed that the unions did not accept this offer as it made many valuable concessions that may now be withdrawn. Moreover, no company in the 21st century is going to agree to no compulsory redundancies at a time of major organisational change.
Whilst there are some questionable aspects to the BBC's proposals, I have found that many staff do acknowledge that the organisation must change to survive.
John, BBC staff, London UK 31 May 2005
I think that the statement would have been more effective if the threat to resume industrial action were not explicitely stated. This leaves us open to accusations of 'blackmail', 'holding a gun to the head' etc.
The words 'the dispute was not over' and 'the BBC's offer does not address union concerns' are effective without the explicit threat of industrial action.
Mike, BBC staff, London UK 1 June 2005
And so it begins....
The fragmentation of the dispute will only lead to the Management getting their way. I think it should be "all for one" - or not at all.
I feel that the Unions will lose a lot of support for not stepping up the action and calling for more, united, strike action.
Robert, BBC staff, Edinburgh UK 1 June 2005
I'm really proud of the unions for refusing to accept the BBC's first offer. The BBC had made some important concessions on the conditions for the sell-off, but refused to consider the implications of enforced redundancy for the whole of the BBC and its audiences.
A truly "modern" organisation would need to work with its staff to identify and bring about the right sorts of changes for the future. We have only had a tokenistic set of meetings on "new ways of working" and no meaningful consultation about the effects of the proposals.
Ironically, BBC People (who are going to be disproportionately affected by the cuts) are devising high-quality training packages to support this sort of change. But these will be very hard to implement while some of the best staff in the organisation are being made redundant or sold to the highest bidder.
Rob, BBC staff, Nottingham UK 1 June 2005
The guarantees given to BBC Resources and BBC Broadcast staff are merely fair, given that many staff don't want to be privatised in the first place. The remaining staff can take little consolation from the 'offer' as there is little benefit in waiting to January 2006 to be told you're being made redundant in June.
As the unions have pointed out, the redundancies could easily be made voluntary, and the 'essential' savings could easily be made elsewhere. I believe a three day strike is the minimum we should be looking at to make Thompson realise we won't go meekly.
Tim, BBC staff, London UK 1 June 2005
Keep up the pressure;please don't fragment the dispute.One BBC,joint unions,one dispute,mass action,and the sooner the better.
Simon, BBC staff, London UK 1 June 2005
I feel that the BBC has offered negligible concessions and delaying tactics so far. Of course, Mark Thompson is going to say that these are not negotiable. That's all part of the strategy. The union has to negotiate from a position of strength not weakness. Remember that management never makes any concessions until it has to. To state clearly that there is a possibility of further industrial action is merely the clarification of the union's strategy, and using phrases like 'blackmail', 'holding a gun to the head' is just emotional language.
Those people who feel they would just like to take the redundancy package and run need to remember that there is a possibility that they could be turned down, which is the flip side of compulsory redundancy. They should also remember that this might mean that they are among the ones left behind to cope without adequate support.
Finally, not much mention has been made of the fact that the BBC is proposing to use the licence payer's money (yours and mine) to fund this destructive exercise.
Lucy, BBC staff, Bristol UK 1 June 2005
I agree wholehartedly with John from London.
I am also disappointed that the unions did not accept this offer as it made many valuable concessions that may now be withdrawn. Moreover, no company in the 21st century is going to agree to no compulsory redundancies at a time of major organisational change.
Whilst there are some questionable aspects to the BBC's proposals, the organisation must change to survive.
Richard, BBC staff, Glasgow UK 1 June 2005
I have to say I don't remember any support when we were reduced in numbers and multiskilled in North Wales. Funny how now it's affecting the larger centres it is becoming an issue!
Steve, BBC staff, Wales UK 1 June 2005
I really feel that not enough prominence is being given to one of the most significant issues for a large majority of BBC Staff. If 40% of production is out sourced to independent companies, whose priority is to make a profit from even the most meagre budget, the the anti BBC lobbyists will have a have a winning argument against the licence fee in ten years time. How can it be tolerated by the puiblic at large that the licence fee is used to make profit to such a degree? If this is implemented I feel strongly that it will be the start of the end for the BBC which could only be a cause for regret for the entire nation.
The BBC must change to survive but must keep the audience and the licence fee payer genuinely at the heart of those changes. Job cuts are necessary and there is not a huge support from non news staff for the union stance but myslef and many others would appreicate if the Uniion would also represent our views and argue more prominently about the 40 per cent.
Susan, BBC staff, Glasgow UK 2 June 2005
I hope there will be more constructive talks as I fear support for further strike action will rapidly wane. Let's not delude ourselves that the last strike had a great effect either. At least it got plenty of publicity but viewers and listeners don't really care about shortened news bulletins and a reduced News 24. They just go elsewhere!
Andrew, BBC staff, Glasgow UK 2 June 2005
I'm in the NUJ. I'd like to congratulate and thank all the BECTU members for their strong support for the dispute. It was great to stand shoulder to shoulder on the picket line! I just wanted to say that I totally disagree with Richard in Glasgow and John in London. Thompson's offer is pitiful. The joint unions were right to reject it.
Richard says that 'no company in the 21st century is going to agree to no compulsory redundancies at a time of major organisational change'.
Two things about that:
1. The BBC isn't a company, it's a public service broadcaster. The licence fee should be a guarantee of quality. These cuts threaten that guarantee and therefore the future of the licence fee itself.
2. The BBC has been through major organisational change before and managed to do it without the scale of proposed cuts put forward by Thompson - and with sensible negotiations with the unions.
I don't think Thompson's ready to negotiate yet and that - unfortunately - more strike action will be needed. But just one day brought him to ACAS. I really believe that just a few more days will bring him to his senses.
David, BBC staff, Glasgow UK 2 June 2005
I think the joint Union statement hit the right note. It's vital we get the detail on Thompson's planned job cuts and fight to protect quality of jobs in the BBC.
It's so important that both BECTU and the NUJ hold a common front and keep the threat of industrial action. The one day strike was a huge success and as the BBC is a relatively young work force staff are prepared to fight for descent careers.
Jason, BBC staff, London UK 2 June 2005
I work for MC&A and support the fight to save production jobs, as it is difficult to square the pledge to make more and better programmes with the action of sacking many of those who make them. However, I feel that some redundancies are inevitable. It may be a political decision but it is a fact that the BBC has to play politics approaching the Charter decision. Personally, the longer the whole dispute drags on, the keener I am to accept the notion of voluntary redundancy, after >20 years at the BBC, a notion unthinkable for me even 6 months ago.
Mike, BBC staff, London UK 2 June 2005
I remember digging Mark Spineless Thompson (Spineless cos he wants to dismember the BBC before New Labour/Rupert Murdoch/Associated Press cause him to have to make a stand) out of the sh** a couple of times on London Plus in 1980s but of course HE wouldn't remember. On the picket line outside TC one of the NUJ girls was phoned "The 6 has just fallen off air YIPEE!" We must all stick together on this and win. WE ARE FIGHTING FOR THE SOUL OF THE BEEB. As you might guess, I feel rather strongly about this. I could leave with a redundancy wodge but what about todays 18-year olds???
Harry, BBC staff, Tonbridge UK 2 June 2005
Comments are no longer being accepted for this item.