the declining voice products 377 BT staff employed on could be transferred over desktop computer duties time. The selloff would (DNDS) have been trans- severely curtail the potential ferred to Computacenter, a maintain employment non-union computer sys- levels within the division.
When the However, allegedly because was announced in of the poor state of branch January, the CWU Telcoms membership records and the Executive announced lack of time to update them intention to fight the sell-off before the date of transfer, and the terms being offered only the DNDS members for the transfer. directly concerned were While TUPE would apply, eventually balloted. They no-one was under any illu- voted by 4-1 to take strike sion about Computacenter's action against the sell-off. intentions to worsen pay and Further negotiations proStaff are paid duced an agreement which conditions. £14k for jobs which attract included a six year right of return to BT for staff made £25k at BT.
Existing employees are all redundant. by the new on individualised contracts employer; contracts only to and subject to performance be varied with the consent of related pay while the CWU the individual, or of the has far successfully union; an improved money resisted the introduction of purchase pension scheme PRP within BT amongst and union recognition for ex-BT staff. engineering grades.
Computacenter does not Right of return recognise unions for its own There is no right of return employees. Furthermore it to BT in the event of an exproposed to replace immedi- BT employee's deterioration ately BT's final salary index of terms and conditions. linked pension scheme with Any changes in contract the much less favourable terms are in law subject to money Pensions are not subject to purchase scheme. the agreement or agreement of individuals implied TUPE. Staff were denied anyway. But this doesn't take any right to opt to remain within BT as an alternative into account the pressures to which individual employees to transfer, or to take volun- are subjected when "asked" tary redundancy. to change such terms.
Meetings were organised Thesé "improved" terms across The country and will be worthless without promises were made to bal- union organisation across lot the membership in the the whole of this anti-union whole Business Information employer Systems (BIS) division which DNDS is part. As part of denied access to the agree- Branch officers Were of the expanding internet ment. In the national ballot protocol • neiness DNDS the agreement was accepted was seen as an growth area by 3-1 by the members on into which staff working on the recommendation of the executive, but with only 40% voting compared with the 80% who voted for action weeks earlier.
It is clear that despite union policy, the head office negotiating tenm were resigned to the transfer from the start, arguing that the union cannot control the workings of capital, and that their job was to negotiate the best terms and conditions for the members concerned in difficult circumstances.
It is also apparent that there was a lack of will to mobilise the members directly and indirectly affected. A strike should have been called, in accordance with union policy, to oppose the transfer of the work to Computacenter, to demand the right to stay within BT, and to defend the final salary pension scheme.
Even if the chances of winning were slim, at the very legst the memhers involver would have gone to work for their new employer in combative mood, and better able to defend themselves, perhaps with mission to their …new colleagues.
But to do so would have run the risk of confronting the anti-union laws, and more generally to disturb the union's cosy partnership relationship with the employer and the government.
Instead the ballot result indicates demoralisation. BT has now been given the green light by the union to proceed undisturbed with its programme of disposal of the "non-core» elements of the business and its workforce.