Employer Partnership Agreeents
To Partner or Not? by Jackie Green PCS Senior Vice President
The concept of employer / union partnership agreements has been around for a long time, but the term is being bandied about a lot in union circles at the moment. FDA and Prospect in particular have recently signed up to one with the Cabinet Office, however PCS Democrats think they are a bad idea.
Meaningful Consultation
That is not to say we should refuse to work constructively with employers. Quite the opposite we strongly support collective frameworks with meaningful consultation and proper structures. Having those in place allow unions and employers to build relationships, to negotiate and resolve issues while working together for the betterment of our members working lives.
But PCS is not the employers partner. It is our responsibility to represent members and defend their interests. That means challenging the employer as necessary. And sometimes members interests don't align with the employers. That is the nature of the relationship - especially when you see spreadsheet management in practice with systems like LEAN, and now AI work allocation and workforce monitoring to supposedly drive up efficiency (which in practice takes away workers dignity and opportunity to think for themselves).
It is an ongoing problem for PCS that the Cabinet Office led Government People Group draws up HR policy, talks to PCS about the detail, and then sends new policy "products" to Departments, who then say they can't negotiate on the contents. That is not meaningful consultation let alone negotiation.
Workers are not Stakeholders
A cooperative relationship isn't necessarily anti-worker. For example, a union might negotiate with an employer over training, health and safety, technological change, or avoiding redundancies. Cooperation can give workers influence they otherwise wouldn't have.
But the 30th June 2026 Cabinet Office agreement Prospect and FDA signed repeatedly describes the Cabinet Office and unions as “trusted partners” and says workforce issues should be approached “jointly and in partnership” where possible.
However if the Government wants to cut jobs, restrict pay, increase workloads or change working practices, the union's job is to organise workers to resist it, not to assume that a mutually acceptable solution must exist. And, the agreement doesn't actually give workers enforceable rights. The document spells out that there is:
- no central collective bargaining;
- creates no legally enforceable obligations or expectations; and
- creates no duty of consultation.
That begs the question what does the Government actually have to do differently because of this agreement?
In theory the unions receive greater access and an opportunity to influence policy, but the Government hasn't given them a legally enforceable veto or bargaining right over the policies being discussed. That can make partnership look more valuable to those unions officials and government officials than to individual workers.
PCS was quite right to not go there, and should refrain from doing so at a Departmental level. Furthermore it is disappointing that other unions in the Civil Service have accepted there will be no central collective bargaining. That principle is a key component of our campaign for national pay bargaining with harmonised pay levels. Their signing up to that makes our job far harder.
Why I Joined PCS Democrats and Why H&S Matters
By Terry Hunt
My name is Terry Hunt, and I am proud to be a member of PCS and part of PCS Democrats.
Like many PCS members, I joined the union because I believe that when we stand together, we have a stronger voice. A union is at its best when it listens to its members, represents their views, and works tirelessly to improve working lives. That is what attracted me to PCS Democrats. I share their commitment to democracy, accountability, transparency, and putting members first.
Throughout my working life, I have developed a strong passion for health, safety and welfare in the workplace. Every member deserves to come to work knowing that their wellbeing matters, their concerns will be listened to, and that they will return home safely at the end of the day.
Health and safety is about far more than policies and paperwork. It is about people. It is about supporting colleagues who may be struggling with workload pressures, stress, mental health challenges, workplace conditions, or other issues that affect their wellbeing. It is about creating a workplace where everyone feels respected, valued, and protected.
This is what drives me to take a leading role in health, safety and welfare within PCS. I want to be a voice for members, helping to ensure that concerns are raised, addressed, and never ignored. I believe that every member, regardless of their role, grade, or workplace, deserves strong representation and support when they need it most.
PCS Democrats share my belief that PCS should be a union that works for all members. We are strongest when we listen to each other, treat each other with respect, and focus on the issues that matter most to working people.
Whether you are a long-standing PCS member or someone looking to become more involved in your union, I encourage you to consider joining our community. We are committed to building a union that is democratic, member-led, and focused on delivering positive change; not listening to outside influences that have hidden agenda's.
Most importantly we are committed to listening to and supporting every PCS member.
Together, we can build safer workplaces, stronger representation, and a union that continues to put its members at the heart of everything it does.
National Women’s Forum Takes Action
Update from Ginnette Gantschuk, HMPPS & MOJ GEC
Democrats members attended the PCS National Women’s Forum on 7 August, and received a report from Senior National Vice President, Jackie Green, on the events at the TUC Women’s Committee earlier this year.
Discussions centred on a TUC motion "Tackling the Far Right and the Weaponisation of Women and Girls’ Safety" (Composite 8). This focuses on how misogyny and gendered hatred are used by the far right to divide communities and undermine women’s rights. The motion highlighted misogyny as a core feature of far-right ideology and examined how gendered hatred is used to recruit and radicalise supporters.
Members attending also explored how violence against women and girls is frequently exploited to create division, while advocating policies that seek to restrict reproductive rights, control women’s bodies and reinforce traditional gender roles.
Next up was a review of ongoing work on ‘The Treatment of Women’. It was agreed to continue a dedicated working group to drive this agenda forward that Jackie led last year.
Domestic violence and sexual harassment were discussed. The Forum agreed that it should take the lead on developing policy and workplace risk assessment approaches, drawing on members’ expertise and experience while working alongside the Health and Safety Committee where appropriate, and not the other way round. The PCS NEC H&S Sub Committee is male dominated, and Democrats women believe female voices should lead on this key piece of work. To quote Lynn Henderson's campaign "Move Over Brothers".
The Forum also agreed to continue producing the Women’s Quarterly Newsletter, with content already identified for the next edition. The newsletter remains an important platform for highlighting issues affecting women members and promoting the work being undertaken across the union to advance equality, representation and inclusion.
Looking ahead, the 2026 Pan-Equality Seminar will be held in Leeds on 14-15 November, with the venue still to be confirmed. The Women’s Forum will discuss and agree a theme for the event over the coming weeks but welcome suggestions, so please do send your ideas in.
Where Next for the National Campaign?
A recent statutory ballot in the Department for Education (DfE) didn't reach the required 50% turnout threshold on planned office closures in Croydon, Exeter, Leeds, Newcastle, Peterborough and Watford, impacting over 350 staff.
While PCS members voted in favour of strike action in the ballot which closed on Tuesday 21 July, the turnout was 39.28%. This falls short of the 50% voting threshold needed to legally comply with anti-trade union laws, and means action cannot go ahead.
Lost ballots inevitably have an impact on PCS credibility, both with the employer and members alike. The fact that an earlier consultative ballot also didn't have a 50 % turnout is a strong signal that the majority of members in DfE are not up for a dispute, and starts to look like the cost to PCS of running the statutory ballot was a waste of members hard earned money, and, that no one was actually listening to members.
Why is that Result Important?
Because it's an indicator of members support for industrial action, and potentially sends a signal about the forthcoming struggle. Especially given this is the Deputy Presidents own department, who criticised the Democracy Alliance at every turn for not moving to a national dispute during 2025, despite the strong feedback there was no appetite for one.
So Where Does that Leave the 2026 National Campaign?
Members will know that a motion was passed at Annual Delegate Conference in May stating that a Labour Leadership challenge gave PCS a real opportunity to build and launch a national campaign. The motion called for PCS to:
- submit a national claim on pay and related issues both nationally and at delegated level immediately following the close of Conference
- urgently put in place plans to prepare the union for a major national campaign covering all outstanding matters of dispute with the government
- to reach out through the TUC, TUCG and bilaterally to all public sector unions to discuss
- the possibility of coordinated pressure on the government including by coordinated strike action
- prepare detailed guidance for delegated negotiators to ensure an empty chair is not left in delegated areas if formal talks proceed
- to work through groups to hold members meetings right across the membership to explain and gain support for our claim and the necessary campaign to win
- to meet urgently with those areas who are not covered by the pay remit e.g. commercial sector, devolved areas etc, to ensure maximum co-ordination on pay throughout PCS
- to instruct groups to identify areas of potential paid targeted action to support national action.
The new NEC have facilitated some aspects of it in particular a letter was sent to the Cabinet Office calling for many things including:
- a fully consolidated 10% increase
- pay restoration
- pay progression
- £18ph minimum wage
- London weighting
- scales that rise with inflation et al.
- upwards harmonisation on sick pay
- 35 days annual leave
- a 4 day working week
- a job security agreement.
The motion also stated "Conference instructs the NEC to move to a national strike ballot, disaggregated or otherwise, by the end of September if insufficient progress is made in talks. The NEC is instructed to convene regularly a lay-led organising forum of nominated reps from each delegated area, to ensure branches, groups and sectors are adequately supported as we prepare for a major campaign."
Membership Feedback
PCS Democrats have been speaking to members across the union asking what their views are as we march towards a September national strike ballot. Most said they were not aware this was the policy of PCS and felt more information was needed.
For many members a pay offer needs to come before they are prepared to commit to striking. As many Departments have yet to enter into negotiation, it looks likely that many members will be asked to vote on the list of demands before they know what is being offered to them.
Further membership feedback also tells us that while members understand the demands and often agree with them, all the demands taken together are unachievable in one go because there is no way the Government can afford all of that at once. So we've been asked if the new NEC is simply trying to design a dispute regardless of what comes out of negotiation and without wider membership consultation?
Some areas however are in dispute already. Nearly 40 security officers working at the National Crime Agency under threat of losing their job are being balloted. Members in the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office have escalated their dispute over a restructuring programme. And action short of a strike continues at the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government. Many of these campaigns however are about specific local issues including job threats, different to the list of demands in the national campaign.
What Next?
An emergency NEC meeting has been arranged for mid August to consider responses from Groups and National Branches about local negotiations.
PCS Democrats will continue to support Reps and members as the devolved pay negotiations get going. And we look forward to the lay-led organising forum whenever that takes place (it was supposed to be on the 27th July but none of the negotiators we spoke to were aware of that, and it didn't go ahead).
September is only 4 weeks away, so the Coalition in charge of the NEC have a lot of work to do if they are going to deliver a successful ballot.
In the meantime we will continue to listen to member's feedback to help shape campaigns, so please do keep your views coming.