General Secretary (Rule Book)

[Big Daz]

2. General Secretary
1. Every five years the GS shall be subject to election by the entire membership.
2. The duties of the GS shall include:
a) chief negotiator and principal spokesperson of the Union;
b) responsibility to the NEC for the supervision and control of the administration
of the Union and of the Officers and Staff. However, any proposal for the
creation of a new Officer post shall be subject to NEC endorsement;
c) convening and attending all Conferences of the Union and meetings of the
NEC and its committees;
d) assigning duties and directing the work of all other Officers of the Union
including directing the work of Business Co-ordinating Committees and
Officers that do not call for Conference decisions. However, where this
involves a reallocation of responsibilities affecting an Assistant Secretary it
shall require the endorsement of the Industrial Executive or NEC as
appropriate;
e) engaging such staff as may be necessary to conduct the work of the Union;
f) preparing and presenting to Annual Conference an Annual Report of the
Union, also bringing before the NEC the decisions of Annual Conference
and giving direction on these and other matters;
g) keeping the membership informed on all general matters and decisions
including parliamentary, legal, political, industrial and official questions and
keeping a record of such decisions;
h) keeping the records of the Union and collating statistical and general
information for the purposes of the Union, also keeping the Union in touch
with developments in the trade union movement;
i) supplying Conference Standing Orders Committee information as to what
motions or amendments submitted for the Conference Agenda are already
covered by Union policy and which are being actively pursued.
30
3. The GS shall ensure that the Union has a published employment practice. The
employment practice shall be designed to avoid any possibility of discrimination
or unfair treatment in the recruitment and selection process for employees and
potential employees of the Union. The Union’s employment practice shall be
submitted initially, and periodically thereafter, to the Commission for Racial
Equality, the Equal Opportunities Commission and the Fair Employment
Commission for endorsement and/or approval.
4. The GS or the SDGS shall be the Union’s principal representative on the TUC
General Council.
5. When the GS is absent, or at other times when the duties need to be covered
they shall be covered by the SDGS. In the absence of the SDGS they shall be
covered either by the DGS(P) or the DGS(T&FS).

[Big Daz]

Right boys and girls as many of you complain about the performance the current incumbent of the role of GS, so what is it he is doing that is so wrong. What needs changing/deleting/adding in the rule book?

Do you want the role of GS to include blocking agreements going out to vote that might be conterversial, do you want it it overturn democratic ballots if the GS is not satisfied with the turnout level?

Do you want more wording as to what excatly the GS negotiates and how far in to DGS P and T territory the GS role should stray?

Do you want a literal definiton attached to the 1st part of the rules where its says " Every five years the GS shall be subject to election by the entire membership"

[Danelectro]

g) keeping the membership informed on all general matters and decisions
including parliamentary, legal, political, industrial and official questions and
keeping a record of such decisions;
.

Failed miserably on the above.Thats just my opinion but seen as you seem to be totally happy with HQ then im sure you will
put me right.

[Big Daz]

Totally Happy

Never in a month on Mondays!!!

Let me give you a example the CWU political stance towrds the Labour party and the previous governmnent which was drawn from the Labour party. Bonkers totally uttlerly bonkers. I dont support affilation to ANY political party. I support friendship with political parties that are progressive/on the political left. I support far more democracy in the political stance of the CWU. I suport any requests for donations to be consider purley on their merits and in line with a strict criteria that has the support of the membership.

I think you will find however, LTBs are released detailing the decsions taken by the CWU delegation to TUC and Labour party conferences. You may also find some of the info in the annual report of the CWU. Whether the format and frequency of that information is of a suitable standard is another matter altogther but still one that can be used by mbrs to formulate a view point as to how well the appropiate national officers of the CWU are doing in their running of the CWU. (GS,SDGS DGSP DGST&FS NEC)

One also has to respect conference decisions as confeence is the soverign policy making body of the CWU (When in session)

There is a conference motion tracker on the CWU website so members can keep up to date with implementation of conference policy.

Overall neither perfect or imperfect is my view of how well the CWU is being run.

[andy2007]

g) keeping the membership informed on all general matters and decisions
including parliamentary, legal, political, industrial and official questions and
keeping a record of such decisions;
.

Failed miserably on the above.Thats just my opinion but seen as you seem to be totally happy with HQ then im sure you will
put me right.

I agree completely with you. For example: Secrecy clauses, which keep us in the dark about agreements 'till the last minute. And in the case of the last one, not ensuring that every Member even knew the details of what they were voting on. Yes, there were letters recomending the agreement, but they were sparse (to say the least) on detail. And concentrated on the money, instead of the strings attatched.

Now I know that even if they'd sent out the entire agreement to everyone, that not everyone would have read it all. But if the negotiations hadn't been done in secret, then the details would have come out in more manageable chunks, and therefore, people would have known what they were voting for/against. That seems IMHO to be where a lot of the complaints about the latest agreement are coming from: People didn't realise what they were letting themselves in for.

Now I'd consider that a pretty major failing, of a specific duty of the position. Wouldn't you?

I also know that the excuse of the secrecy clauses, is that RM would just leak the more favourable bits of proposed deals, to get them through. But isn't that exactly what the Union did, when it was time to vote?
Surely it's better to let people know early enough for those who would otherwise miss important bits of the proposed agreements, for them to absorb the information, isn't it?
And even if RM DID try to leak just the bits that they thought would get us on their side. What's to stop the Union giving out details of the strings?

[Big Daz]

Normally I would not hold the GS to account for BT2010 secrecy and not sending out a copy of the agreement to members and would direct any criticisms towards Dave Ward and the PEC, HOWEVER as the rule book says g) keeping the membership informed on all general matters and decisions
including parliamentary, legal, political, industrial and official questions and
keeping a record of such decisions; then the GS has to take some of the flak from the membership.

Should the word industrial be scrapped from GS role and lay soley within the remits of DGS(p) and DGS (t)?

The membership should be encouraged to read the CWU rule book and submit thier opinions to their branch committees and the NEC.

Knowledge is wonderfull and sometimes powerful tool.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Should the word industrial be scrapped from GS role and lay soley within the remits of DGS(p) and DGS (t)?

Maybe, but not convinced it has benefits and drawbacks.

Benefit: Would help the GS in becoming more able to work for the Union as an organisation rather than focusing on certain issue. Perhaps the Industrial side may be better passed to the Deputies for each "industrial" area, telecoms, call centres, postal, courier etc.

Drawback: It would make the GS more of a political post than it is now, they would be more involved with "causes", the Unions influence on the publics opinion of members, meeting with MPs and ministers and other Union leaders.

Another question that might arise if we did remove the industrial part of the GS role is would we be better served by a "professional" union leader rather than one that has come up through the ranks.

[andy2007]

I think it's better to leave it in. Because then the GS is in a position to monitor what the DGSs are doing, and INTERVENE when situations like the last 2 ageements happen. To allow it once, is understandable, as we're not the only section of the CWU. To allow it to happen a second time is careless. If it happens again. Then I think serious questions should be directed at our GS, regarding failures in the fulfulment of the role.

[Big Daz]

Not sure if I like the idea of GS making decisions that are the righfull preserve of the membership through a one man one vote set up. That said some clear boundaries as to what agreements can and cant contain to be laid down in the CWU rule book and then if that ignored GS intervenes and asks for a reason. One such boundary could be pay restucturing, if done within existing paybill there is allways the risk of winners and loosers but with new money that risk can be elminated.