BILLY HAYES SPEECH TO SOLENT BRANCH AGM

[TrueBlueTerrier]

http://www.billyhayes.co.uk/permalink.p ... 43_0_1_0_M" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

My speech is as follows:

It is a privilege to address your AGM.

Firstly, I want to discuss the forthcoming General Election. This will condition all the work of the Union for the coming five years.

As you know, the Union is affiliated to the Labour Party. Normally, there would be no difficulty in the national union supporting the Party’s General Election campaign.

However, the Union’s policy has been changed by the conflict of the Government’s policy on Royal Mail.

A Union conference policy was passed in 2008 which obliged the Union to get a comprehensive settlement on the disputed issues on Royal Mail.

These include:

• No privatisation of Royal Mail
• The maintenance of a pension scheme and a solution to the pension’s deficit.


If these issues are not resolved the Union will not fund the Party’s general election campaign.


Now since 2008, the CWU has had a successful campaign to prevent Royal Mail being privatised.


We have also been lobbying on the pension scheme – and we are hopeful of resolving it. But to date we haven’t. So as we stand, we will not be funding the campaign.
This is unusual – and we will continue to review the position. If we don’t get the pensions resolved, we may well just end up supporting individual MPs and candidates.

Now I raise this in the full knowledge that a Tory Government would be a disaster for CWU members and the working class.

I know this is controversial, and I would be interested in your views on this.

The national union has some serious financial problems developing.

The modernisation of the telecommunications and postal industries is leading to the loss of a large number of our members through redundancies, natural wastage, etc.


On current trends the union will lose around 45% of its income within five years.


Obviously we are engaged in the drives to organise new workplaces – and to back-fill recruitment in workplaces where we have recognition.


But building the union in new sectors is going to take a long time. In the meantime, we have a financial squeeze which we must address.


The NEC is moving sharply on this. Among the options we may well be placing before annual conference in May are:

• A reduction in the size of the NEC.
• A reduction in the size of the Industrial Executives.
• Conferences to be held every two years, rather than every year.
• Holding all the Equality Conferences on a single weekend.
• Abolishing the Death Grant.

All of these are controversial, perhaps some more so than others.

But if the Union is to survive we will have to make some of these changes – or similar policy shifts.

Behind all these problems is a wider debate:


• What sort of Union do we want?
• How will we look in five years time?

Of course, we will have to maintain and improve those things that the membership have come to expect as the basis of membership:

• Wage bargaining
• Pension oversight
• Workplace representation
• Protection from bullying and harassment, and so on.

But, how we do our work is going to have to change.

As you will know, the Union has been heavily involved in the campaign around Digital Britain and the Digital Economy Bill.

In the last months of this Parliament there is a crush on legislation. As a consequence, the Government is having to carefully assess what it can actually get through Parliament before the Election.


One result is that they are looking to possibly simplify the Digital Economy Bill. We have been pressing for a number of amendments to this Bill.


So under this legislative crush, we have had to concentrate on the key amendments we are looking for. We are coordinating with other unions in the TUC and Labour Party on this.


So what are our priorities?

Firstly the universal broadband commitment should be strengthened to achieve a legally binding universal service obligation. This hasn’t been agreed by the Government at present. Consumer Focus were working on an amendment to the Bill to include a universal broadband obligation. But to date we have got no commitment on this.

Secondly, we want a legal requirement for OFCOM to promote workforce training in the telecommunications industry, as it is required to do in the broadcasting industry.

We have drafted an amendment on this issue but we have not been able to secure an agreement on getting this moved. We may be able to achieve this in the Lords but we will fall back to the Commons if necessary.

The third thing that we are particularly keen to achieve is a next generation access fund which is supported by the mobile telephone operators as well as fixed line operators.

The Government said they do not believe it is appropriate to apply the levy to mobile operators because these operators contribute to broadband infrastructure through the 3G licence fees.

But our view is these operators stand to benefit from investment in next generation access/fibre networks from public funding.

We therefore think there is a good argument on this. To date we have not achieved support from the Government on this policy.

We will of course continue to press on this.

Now I have raised three separate areas for discussion, but I am quite happy to take questions on any issues which are of concern to you about the Union’s work and policies.

Thanks for listening.


WH/SB/JM
22.02.10

[POSTMAN]

On current trends the union will lose around 45% of its income within five years.

That is very bad.

Also did anyone on here go to the AGM?

[Big Daz]

A reduction in the size of the NEC.
• A reduction in the size of the Industrial Executives.

That is good!!!

The current PEC members will have to work harder due to less places if they wish to be re-elected in 2011. Some of them will go. This could just well revitalise PEC elections and the PEC itself.

Knock it down to 10 and watch the 10 who are elected in 2011 work their socks off knowing there are plenty of potential replacements waiting in the wings.

[dvbuk55]

I have a few more suggestions for Billy Boy - who won't be around in five years - take a wage cut, cut staff at HQ, cut out the crap that is nothing to do with union business, cut back on expenses, forget all conferences but the main conference, sell London HQ and down size in a less expensive part of the country - this is recession and will be a long one. There is a need to recruit and recruit and recruit BUT they have to show that it is worthwhile to join the union and recent years have done nothing to emphasise that.

[smarterdarter]

"On current trends the union will lose around 45% of its income within five years."

and 60% of its members

[smokerjim]

I have a few more suggestions for Billy Boy - who won't be around in five years - take a wage cut, cut staff at HQ, cut out the crap that is nothing to do with union business, cut back on expenses, forget all conferences but the main conference, sell London HQ and down size in a less expensive part of the country - this is recession and will be a long one. There is a need to recruit and recruit and recruit BUT they have to show that it is worthwhile to join the union and recent years have done nothing to emphasise that.

Excellent post dvb - Billy was quick to wag his finger at Crozier for his wages, not so quick to anounce a cut to his 6 figure salary, also while it is noble to help trade unionists overseas, lets worry about the union situation at home.....concentrate on maximising the union membership in RM, PF, all the DSA companies, as well as BT and all the communication companies. Equally, while it's good to have areas of the union dedicated to the female, gay, black, asian, disabled, etc, now's the time to rationalise - have all those areas reduced to one.

I don't agree HQ should not maintain a presence in London.....imo they need to keep the PR & political lobby side of the union in the Smoke, simply because the majority of national & international media as well as poitical decision making all happens here in the smoke ( and because most of the political decisions come from Brussels, not Westminster, getting lobbyists in place over there might be a good idea.....even if ALL unions join in to pay for it with the TUC ) The remainder of HQ activities should be based somewhere in the middle of the country ( it seems silly that a national union can be based more than 3-4 hours drive from the majority of it's members! ).

Cut all the dead wood ( excessive salaries and unnessasary staff - sorry, but if we have to work harder with fewer, than the union should do the same, especially if it is done fairly from top to bottom, campaigns irrelevant to the membership ( CWU TV? ), high property costs, ) and concentrate on the core values of the union, and that should be a good foundation for the Union's future,

[stokes11eg]

Well Billy, ifyou had been on the ball and fought from the start to stop this 'modernisation' you would not be losing your membership.And is your threat not to fund the Campaign has come around because your hoped for seat looks like it is slipping away?
Mind you, I expect there may be a change of heart, between now and the Election---------

[Big Daz]

The threat to not fund the campaign came from Conference of 2008, problem is the CWU is making the love affair with Labour last untill the bitter end rather than a clean break!!!

[machineman]

I have a few more suggestions for Billy Boy - who won't be around in five years - take a wage cut, cut staff at HQ, cut out the crap that is nothing to do with union business, cut back on expenses, forget all conferences but the main conference, sell London HQ and down size in a less expensive part of the country - this is recession and will be a long one. There is a need to recruit and recruit and recruit BUT they have to show that it is worthwhile to join the union and recent years have done nothing to emphasise that.

Excellent post dvb - Billy was quick to wag his finger at Crozier for his wages, not so quick to anounce a cut to his 6 figure salary, also while it is noble to help trade unionists overseas, lets worry about the union situation at home.....concentrate on maximising the union membership in RM, PF, all the DSA companies, as well as BT and all the communication companies. Equally, while it's good to have areas of the union dedicated to the female, gay, black, asian, disabled, etc, now's the time to rationalise - have all those areas reduced to one.

I don't agree HQ should not maintain a presence in London.....imo they need to keep the PR & political lobby side of the union in the Smoke, simply because the majority of national & international media as well as poitical decision making all happens here in the smoke ( and because most of the political decisions come from Brussels, not Westminster, getting lobbyists in place over there might be a good idea.....even if ALL unions join in to pay for it with the TUC ) The remainder of HQ activities should be based somewhere in the middle of the country ( it seems silly that a national union can be based more than 3-4 hours drive from the majority of it's members! ).

Cut all the dead wood ( excessive salaries and unnessasary staff - sorry, but if we have to work harder with fewer, than the union should do the same, especially if it is done fairly from top to bottom, campaigns irrelevant to the membership ( CWU TV? ), high property costs, ) and concentrate on the core values of the union, and that should be a good foundation for the Union's future,

We do not need a presence in London after all in this modern world of broadband and video conferencing it dosent matter one tad where the office is the money saved on costs ( including cheap loans to the exec to buy there houses ) would be immense and could save this union the Leadership have sat back and watched us get cut and do the same work with less people perhaps what they allowed will now come back and visit them !!!

[dvbuk55]

Well we aren't going to have a meeting of minds on location - though it would be more than possible to conduct business elsewhere.

Now for the point you made of CWUTV - for a communications union within the communications industry the standard of CWU TV is appalling. I believe it cost almost a quarter of a million to set up and was supposed to draw in advertising wtf who's going to advertise?

If you go on the CWU website you can't avoid it because it starts playing immediately, with totally out of date information. Now we go to the camera work - ffs a demented chimp could do better. The subject is way off to the right in every interview, sometimes you only see half a face and mouth with a wonderful view of venetian blinds.

It's time to wind it up and save some money - I don't think anyone could watch a full report. Sack the staff and sell the equipment!

[AnotherLimey]

Only one way for our union to prosper IMO, engage the part timers, make them feel supported and wanted within the workforce, they are a big part of our future and as a workforce and union i feel we let them down hugely at the moment.

[smudger83]

vote yes

[fishtank]

The threat to not fund the campaign came from Conference of 2008, problem is the CWU is making the love affair with Labour last untill the bitter end rather than a clean break!!!

In the 1895 General Election the Independent Labour Party put up 28 candidates but won only 44,325 votes. Keir Hardie, the leader of the party believed that to obtain success in parliamentary elections, it would be necessary to join with other left-wing groups.

On 27th February 1900, representatives of all the socialist groups in Britain (the Independent Labour Party, the Social Democratic Federation and the Fabian Society, met with trade union leaders at the Memorial Hall in Farringdon Street, London. After a debate the 129 delegates decided to pass Hardie's motion to establish "a distinct Labour group in Parliament, who shall have their own whips, and agree upon their policy, which must embrace a readiness to cooperate with any party which for the time being may be engaged in promoting legislation in the direct interests of labour." To make this possible the Conference established a Labour Representation Committee (LRC). This committee included two members from the Independent Labour Party, two from the Social Democratic Federation, one member of the Fabian Society, and seven trade unionists

"and agree upon their policy, which must embrace a readiness to cooperate with any party which for the time being may be engaged in promoting legislation in the direct interests of labour"

Happy Birthday Labour it's just a damm shame you have forgotten where you came from.