Commission for Developing Scotland’s Young Workforce

Having had, an admittedly quick, read of the Wood Commission’s interim findings it’s a bit disappointing that there are no recommendations to tackle gender segregation in workplaces and modern apprenticeships or low employment rates for people from BME communities and people with disabilities.

Wood Commission’s interim report offer recommendations on the “educational offer to young people“ with the next session on employer’s support still to come. The recommendations are somewhat predictable, schools and colleges to develop better links with local businesses, and more focus on economic development. Nothing new here: businesses want the public sector to ensure young people are ready to become workers.

What is disappointing though, is that tackling inequality does not appear to be core to the commission’s thinking. The foreword says that “An appropriate title for our school/college vocational initiative would be ""attainment for all", enriching school education with clearer and more open routes for all young people,” but we will have to wait for the second half of the study to find out their the results of their plan to “look to make meaningful recommendations to improve employment outcomes in relation to gender, disability and ethnicity.” The issues Scotland’s people face from discrimination on the grounds of gender, disability and ethnicity should have been central to this report. Allowing discrimination to prevent people reaching their potential and so contributing most to our society and economy should have been to use the jargon “mainstreamed” into the commission’s work.

The fact that the interim report only mentions gender in order to park it for another section does not fill me with much confidence about their recommendations. Equalities issues need to run through all of the work done to improve workforce development; they are not a separate issue.

UK Government's 'Red Tape' review of equality duty

The UK Government has published its review of the Equality Duty under the ‘Red Tape’ challenge programme. As Scotland has its own public sector duty this report mostly focuses on the English duty.

The main conclusion is:

“The Steering Group believes it is too early to make a final judgement about the impact of the PSED, as it was only introduced in April 2011 and evidence, particularly in relation to associated costs and benefits, is inconclusive. While the Steering Group has found broad support for the principles behind the Duty, the review has found the main challenges lie in its implementation, which varies considerably across the public sector.”

When you read the report it churns out much of the predictable ‘Red Tape’ ideology in its high level messages. However, when you dig deeper the most notable feature is that business interests largely ignored it. The annex of those submitting evidence shows that virtually no business interests even bothered to submit evidence. Strange when we were told this review was necessary because of the concerns of business.

As TUC General Secretary Frances O'Grady said:

“This review has exposed the government's Red Tape Challenge as a waste of taxpayers' money. The fact that businesses have failed to engage with it shows they are far too concerned with real issues like access to finance to humour a futile political exercise. The review has however highlighted where the public sector duty has made a difference to people's lives. It was the duty for example that halted the government's disgraceful 'Go Home' vans, which drove through London over the summer. Ministers should use this review to help public bodies share best practice on how to use the duty more effectively.”

The report does make at least one useful point that also applies in Scotland. Far too many Equality Impact Assessments are just ‘tick box’ exercises. However, the solution to that is a more rigorous process and better data collection.

A thousand council workers to fund one fat cat pension

The hypocrisy of top bosses is highlighted by the TUC's annual Pensions Watch survey. The  average pension pot for a FTSE 100 director increased by £400,000 last year to £4.73m - with one director alone amassing a huge pension pot worth £22.2m.

I was reminded of a TV interview earlier this week when the fat cats union, the CBI, were responding to calls for expanding the Living Wage. He solemnly lectured that these are hard times for all of us. Well self evidently they are not for his members. The UK's top bosses continue to enjoy platinum-plated pensions, with most still able to retire at 60. The average accrued pension is 25 times the average employee occupational pension £10,452 a year. Of course, these are the same fat cats who lectured us about 'gold plated' public sector pensions

The latest PensionsWatch findings show that rather than exercising restraint on their remuneration packages, Britain's top bosses are simply finding new ways of rewarding themselves. As pensions don't even bother with pretence of performance-related, there is no justification for this growing pensions divide. Private sector companies should follow the lead of the public sector and ensure that all staff are entitled to the same pension terms and conditions, irrespective of their seniority.

With millions of people joining workplace pension schemes over the next few years through auto-enrolment this divide will come under ever closer scrutiny. It's time companies created a level playing field when it comes to their pension schemes.

I find this hypocrisy particularly galling at present as I am spending much of my time renegotiating the Scottish Local Government Pension Scheme. Not because it needed any renegotiation, but because the UK Government decided to interfere in Scottish pensions on the back of the gold plated campaign by these hypocrites. Lets also not forget that Nick Clegg was one of those shouting about gold-plated pensions. 

The changes I am negotiating all have to be cost neutral. No prospect of a £400k increase in total let alone for one person. The average pension in payment in Scottish local government is £4700 - barely bronze plated. That means it takes 1,000 council workers pensions per year to fund the pension pot of one fat cat.

If you need any further example of how unequal our society has become - look no further than pensions.

Just pay your taxes

It seems that Mike Russell is exploring ways of encouraging philanthropists to take on a role is Scottish schools. The cabinet secretary was speaking this week at a conference organised by the David Hume institute. Lindsay Paterson presented his report: Outstanding Students and Philanthropic Contributions in Scottish School Education” at the event. Here Professor Paterson lays out ways in which “the imagination of the philanthropic entrepreneur can be brought to bear on providing opportunities for outstanding students to flourish”.

It’s great that people want to give money to support Scottish education but there are also risks. Lindsay Paterson is right to say that we have to retain democratic accountability in policy making. The Herald also rightly raises concerns about whether such a scheme will widen the existing gap between top and bottom. Too many children fail to achieve their potential.

What happens to pupils with outstanding talents isn’t really the issue in Scottish education. The outstanding students in Scotland already match the outcomes of the highest achievers in international comparisons. Last week at another conference on inequality in education I learned that in maths the highest achieving children match those in Hong Kong but at the other end of the scale we rank alongside Turkey. The issues are why the outcomes are so poor for those from deprived backgrounds and how to raise their attainment. As Mike Russell said “promotion of greater social justice and greater equity in educational outcomes for all our children and young people” should be the priority for government initiatives. Fresh ideas and energy are always welcome but schools need adequate secure funding, (not tied to the whims of big money donors) and education professionals, trained to high standards in order to achieve these goals.

Another way forward would be if those who have lots of money who want to support our schools just pay their taxes at a decent rate. That’s how we maintain democratic control over spending. They wouldn’t get a flashy building or fund with their name on it but they would be able to help a lot more children reach their potential.

More Business Rates Cuts

The Scottish Government has annouced it plans to allow councils to adjust business rates relief. Business rates and reliefs are set for all Scotland by the Scottish Government and funds distributed to councils under a set formula. The new plan will allow authorities some scope to vary the relief they offer local businesses. The Government claims this is both a boost for business and significant empowerment of local authorities. This plan highlights the Scottish Government’s commitment to reducing business taxes. We are more concerned with having enough money to pay for public services.

Another question is: is this really as Derek MacKay claims
“allowing them to respond to the needs of their communities”?

All that is actually being offered is a choice over where and how much councils can reduce business rates. Nowhere are councils being allowed to increase their income. Earlier this year UNISON showed how council’s were increasing charges to residents in the face of budget cuts. Businesses benefit from local government services and should pay towards the costs of delivery like the rest of us.

Instead of a national system where councils can choose where to make reductions it would be better to allow local authorities to set their own business rates. This would give them a valuable leaver for both economic development and funding to pay for services and infrastructure. Local control would be a much simpler and cheaper system to operate rather than a complex set of local reliefs. That really would be allowing them to respond to the needs of their communities.

Scottish Government unveils programme for coming year

The Scottish Government has published its legislative and other activity programme for 2013/14 - 'Empowering Scotland'. This briefing highlights the main legislative proposals that impact on UNISON members.

Budget Bill

The annual Budget Bill provides Parliamentary approval for the Scottish Government’s spending plans. The draft spending plans are usually published at the end of September and will address the further spending cuts imposed by the UK Government in the Chancellor's June statement. This will include some £400m of revenue cuts with the consequential impact on services and jobs.

Revenue Scotland and Tax Powers Bill

This Bill will establish Revenue Scotland as the tax authority which will be responsible for collecting taxes devolved to Scotland in the latest Scotland Act from 1 April 2015.

Community Empowerment and Renewal Bill

The Community Empowerment and Renewal Bill will include measures designed

to: strengthen joint working and accountability in Community Planning Partnerships; strengthen community voices in shaping and delivering outcomes; make it easier for communities to take on public sector assets; streamline the community right to buy; bring clarity to the common good and allotments; and make it easier for local authorities to recover costs in respect of dangerous and defective buildings. UNISON Scotland's response to the consultation expressed concerns that this Bill could lead to further privatisation and centralisation of democratically accountable local services.

Courts Reform Bill

This Bill will take forward many of the recommendations from Lord Gill’s Scottish Civil Courts Review including a new Personal Injury Court. UNISON is concerned that these proposals together with the Damages Bill will downgrade personal injury claims with the consequential impact on health and safety.

Licensing Bill

This Bill will change aspects of alcohol and civic government licensing including new powers to regulate sexual entertainment venues. It will create a new licensing regime for air weapons that have been devolved to Scotland.

Food Standards Scotland Bill

This Bill will set up Scotland’s own food safety and standards body, Food Standards Scotland. Its primary concern should be making sure that food is safe to eat. However, UNISON has identified concerns over the introduction of 'light touch' regulation as a result of lobbying from some in the food industry.

Mental health and adults with Incapacity amendment Bill

This Bill aims to improve the operation and efficiency of the mental health and adults with incapacity legislation for service users and practitioners.

Scottish Welfare fund Bill

This Bill implements the new discretionary Fund to provide vulnerable members of the community with a safety net in an emergency. The Bill will make provision about how the Fund will be delivered, what the public reporting arrangements will be, and how applicants to the Fund might challenge decisions.

Housing Bill

This Bill will end all right to buy entitlements for social housing tenants; create a new Housing Tribunal to resolve disputes in the private rented sector; strengthen the regulation of Letting Agents; increase flexibility for landlords in the allocation and management of social housing; modernise the licensing of mobile homes and park homes; and enhance local authorities’ powers to improve the quality of private sector houses. While most of these measures will be welcomed, the urgent need is to build more affordable houses as set out in UNISON Scotland's Housing Strategy.

There are no legislative proposals on lobbying after the Scottish Government indicated that they would take over the proposals in Neil Findlay MSP's members bill. This is being delayed until later in the parliamentary term.

Current legislation

As well as the new programme of Bills set out above there are a number of Bills that have already been introduced and these will conclude their parliamentary stages in the coming year. These Bills include:

➢ Scottish Independence Referendum Bill

➢ Children and Young People Bill

➢ Regulatory Reform Bill

➢ Marriage and civil Partnership Bill

➢ Public Bodies (Joint Working) Bill

➢ Procurement Reform Bill

➢ Criminal Justice Bill

There are UNISON briefings and submissions on these Bills on our website.

Other Measures

This programme also describes other planned government activity for the coming year. There are three key themes:

➢ accelerating economic recovery and creating more jobs;

➢ creating a fairer Scotland and empowering communities; and

➢ mitigating the impacts of austerity on people in Scotland.

The coming year will also include the independence referendum on 18 September 2014. Unsurprisingly, this is a constant theme within the programme. The programme confirms that a White Paper containing the Scottish Government's detailed proposals will be published in the autumn. No date has been specified in this programme.

Conclusion

This legislative programme and other government activity will have a significant impact on UNISON members. However, the legislative elements are not huge and it is very clear that the focus of the Scottish Government is on the independence referendum.

State pension age and inequality

A new report published by the TUC (‘Life expectancy inequalities and state pension outcomes‘) shows how much pension inequality will grow by 2028 as a consequence of the Pensions Bill going through Westminster. The Bill will accelerate the timetable for increasing state pension age (SPA) to 67. It will now reach 67 for both men and women by 2028, compared to 2036 under current legislation.

This is important not just for the state pension but because the public sector pension normal retirement age is also tied to this legislation.

Trade unions have long argued that it is grossly unfair to increase State Pension Age while vast inequalities in life expectancy exist. We know that inequalities in life expectancy at 65 based on both class and geography are increasing. 

Every increase in SPA reduces the portion of life spent in retirement. But because SPA is universal, the reduction is disproportionately greater among people with a lower life expectancy and as a consequence those people will receive less state pension income. Male managerial/professional workers can expect to receive 17.6 per cent more than routine/manual workers from 2028. For women in the same groups the difference is 20.2%.

As the TUC say, this simply rubs salt in the wounds of life expectancy inequalities.