2013 Approved Energy Conference Motions


Motions (as amended)

approved at the

2013 Energy Service Group

Conference

Monday 17th June 2013

Liverpool

Motion 1Conference and Seminar: Pooling Our Resources

The motion, submitted by the Scottish Electricity branch, was NOT CARRIED

Composite ACall Centres

Submitted by the United Utilities branch, the National Women’s Committee and the National Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Committee

UNISON welcomed the publication of the call centre charter, launched last year at this conference. The Charter was based on research on call centres and call handling operations by Professor Charlotte Rayner of Portsmouth University (report author), who has a distinguished career in research into workplace bullying.

The Charter seeks to establish a decency agenda, allowing members to work effectively and efficiently in a safe working environment and calls on all employers who have UNISON members working in a call centre or in call handling operations to commit to improving the standards which those staff operate under. This includes ensuring that staff are able to take sufficient breaks away from the workstation and are not monitored to an unreasonable extent. Conference notes, however, that at a time when employers are cutting back on costs and resources, including staffing, there is increased pressure on employees to respond and deal with calls quickly.

This Conference further notes that:

a)An increasing number of UNISON members, particularly within the Energy service group work in a call centre environment face poor working conditions and practices including restricted access to a toilet.

b)In some call centres employees are expected to logon to PC equipment prior to shift start time and be ready to take calls at 8.00am with no pay for being there 10 minutes prior to start time, which equates to over 1 weeks unpaid time over the course of a year.

c)The introduction of systems such as Totalview Telephony gives employers even greater access to monitoring of employees, with promises that the system gives “a complete overview of the status of the employees” and that “employees always know where their colleagues are.” Whilst such systems promise better service and cost savings for employers, there is also the potential for management abuse, in micro-managing staff and monitoring their activity to an excessive degree. This can lead to increased stress, bullying and harassment, particularly when managers are themselves under pressure to meet unrealistic targets.

d)Though practices in call centres have improved over the past 10 years, there are still disproportionate levels of workplace stress, bullying and harassment which in turn leads to a higher than average level of sickness absence. While any worker can be subject to bullying, conference recognises that some groups of workers are particularly likely to experience bullying and harassment, including lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) workers.

This Conference therefore calls on the Energy Service Group Executive, working with appropriate committees and sections in UNISON, including the Business and Environment Equal Opportunities Working Party, the National Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Committee, the other self-organised groups and Young Members Committee to:

i)Promote the call centre charter to branches, and encourage them to negotiate with employers to sign up to the charter;

ii)Ensure that branches have the necessary advice and guidance to support them in negotiating reasonable working standards in line with the charter.

iii)Devise an easy to understand checklist in regards to what falls within the Working Time Regulations to allow branches to challenge such inappropriate instances as those listed.

iv)Specifically develop the equalities dimension of the Charter.”

Motion 2The Next Step For Meter Readers: Training Support For Our Displaced MeterReaders

The motion, submitted by the East Midlands Regional Energy Committee, FELL because there was no-one at the conference to move it.

Composite BPensions

Submitted by the Manweb branch and the Scottish Electricity branch

This Conference notes that the Government is proposing to allow companies to override the pension protections which were implemented when the electricity Industry was privatised. These guarantees were one of the few protections won by trade unions during the Thatcher government’s relentless drive to privatise public services. The 1990 Electricity Regulations prevent private employers from reducing the benefits or increasing the pension contributions for “Protected Persons”.

In most cases this has meant that all members of the final salary schemes, protected and non-protected have enjoyed the same protections as employers have been reluctant to introduce two tier pension schemes. This proposal would also affect employees in the rail and coal industries where similar protections were conceded at privatisation.

With the introduction of the new single tier state pension in 2017 the government will be removing the contracting out provisions. Contracting out allows employees and employers to pay reduced National Insurance contributions and opt out of the State second pension, known as SERPS or S2P. Once contracting out is ended employees and employers will have to pay full NI costs - an extra 1.4% for employees and 3.4% for employers on all earnings between £5k and £40k.

Whilst employees will be expected to shoulder the full burden of their increased NI payments, the employers have protested to the government about their increased costs and demanded the right to push these costs onto employees via reduced pension benefits or increased pension contributions. The “Protected Persons Regulations” are an obstacle to this and the government is therefore proposing to allow employers to override them and claw back increased employer NI costs from pension schemes in the electricity, rail and coal industries.

Not only will this mean employees could be hit by increased NI contributions and reduced pension benefits, it also sets a dangerous precedent in allowing the Protected Person Regulations to be overridden

Conference calls on the Service Group Executive to:

i)Oppose this measure and lobby the government to have these proposals dropped.

ii)Campaign for employers to pay their share of the increased NI contributions and oppose any attempts to reduce pension benefits or increase contributions for any employee.

iii)Make contact with other unions affected by this measure to encourage a joint campaign against these proposals.

iv)Write to all Energy branches explaining the potential impact to members and seeking their support for this campaign.

Motion 3The Impact of the Regulator on Pay and Conditions in Utility Companies

Submitted by Energy Executive

Conference notes the critical role that both Ofwat and Ofgem play in regulating the privatised utilities. It also notes that despite the role of the regulator, profits within the utility businesses have increased to record levels making the owners and key executives very wealthy.

Despite the increased profits members have seen their pay and conditions attacked over a number of years. This is most evident in the pensions that members in the industry receive. Most members in the industry will have in the past received a defined benefit scheme as standard giving a degree of certainty for them when they retired. Today very few defined benefit schemes in the industry remain open for new starters and some are now closed altogether. This is a deplorable situation which will lead to considerable insecurity for members when they approach retirement.

The difference between a defined benefit scheme and defined contribution scheme is immense. Companies make huge savings when they switch from a defined benefit scheme to a defined contribution scheme. This saving is actual money not paid to members and in reality reflects s a huge wage cuts for thousands.

This situation we note is being encouraged by the regulators who see attacking pension provision and wider pay and conditions as quick wins to make savings and drive down cost to energy consumers. This is clearly the preferred approach rather than tackling the profiteering by the owners.

This green light to the utility companies has not delivered any real gain to consumers as costs to them have continued to increase.

This conference calls on the Service Group Executive to:

i)Formally raise these concerns with the regulators in a robust manner. It should be made clear to them that UNISON members are not the reason why energy prices have risen so much and driven so many households into fuel poverty.

ii)Raise this issue with the Energy Minister to ensure our concerns about the regulators actions are registered.

iii)Via Labour Link and other appropriate channels within UNISON, raise this issue with opposition spokesperson to ensure our concerns about the regulators actions are registered.

iv)Co-ordinate our concerns with other trade unions in the utility sector to ensure that any response is as effective as it can be.

Motion 4New Human Resource Initiatives

Submitted by the Scottish and Southern Energy branch

In recent years the industry has seen the widespread introduction of new human resource initiatives. These include performance management, personal improvement plans, revised sickness policies. Such policies are introduced on the pretext of modernisation and improved efficiency.

Academic research shows there is little economic benefit from such policies and confirms the view that they are mechanisms introduced to reduce the workforce and to disregard statutory requirements. These policies have been seen to encourage managers to disregard equalities legislation. They also develop spurious assessment criteria to increase stress on staff and force them out without statutory compensation.

Conference calls on the Energy Service Group Executive to:

i)Conduct further investigations as to the true nature of these policy changes.

ii)Issue guidance to stewards and members facing the introduction of such changes.

iii)Publicise abuses of such policies.

Motion 5Recognising Problems With Regard To Hot-Desking

Submitted by the Western Energy branch as amended by the Energy Executive

As energy companies strive to maximise their profits, we note with concern the use of ‘’hot-desking’’ as an employer tool to avoid investment in work space.

This is particularly true of call centre operations where staff is accommodated on a first come first served basis. However the use of hot desking is now more widespread and affects large number of our members who are forced to desk share simply to avoid unnecessary additional business costs.

Hot desking has two distinct disadvantages. Firstly there is a health and safety issue where staff work in close contact with their colleagues often resulting in an uptake of airborne related illnesses. Secondly the denial of quality personal space has an adverse effect upon our members’ well-being who often feel they are treated as the equivalent of battery hens and may find this experience de-humanising.

We call upon the Energy Service Group Executive - in conjunction with the any relevant party - to conduct a survey into to how prevalent the use of hot desking has become and to highlight our growing concerns over health issues and the denial of personal space at the workplace which is adding to stress to our members.

Motion 6Energy Affordability

Submitted by Energy Executive

UNISON has a proud and proven track record in campaigning against consumer exploitation by UK energy companies. We have had to make the difficult and often divisive arguments in speaking up for consumers against the vested interest of huge power company giants. This has often placed us in the difficult position of criticizing our employers whilst at the same time recognizing that our representatives have a need to forge a strong working relationship with the same employers to ensure members share in the rewards for their often life time commitment to the Industry.

At the same time we understand and accept the need for long term investment in energy generation capacity from private financiers, often foreign based. This is particularly important in ensuring we support a diverse mix of fuels including eco-friendly wind, tide and solar generation as well as the traditional coal (including clean coal technologies) and oil and gas fired stations.

However despite these considerations it remains clear that Energy prices continue to rise by inflation busting percentage price increases and the big seven energy companies are able to dominate the ‘’competitive market’’ to such an extent that price rises move ever steadily upwards almost at a whim and these companies are easily able to enhance and protect their considerable profits to the detriment of many hard pressed family households.

Fuel poverty is now at its highest ever recorded level. The generally accepted definition of fuel poverty is a household that spends 10% of its income on domestic fuel. In the UK today it is calculated that 7-8 million customers are now in fuel poverty and this affects 10-12 million people living in households.

Our Industry regulator OFGEM is either unable or unwilling to investigate whether the energy markets are being manipulated and the only Government response is an on the hoof declaration by David Cameron that power companies must place customers on the most economic tariff. His quest for popularity was so fast that he had not even discussed it with his Energy Minister and his plans soon unravelled as energy executive after energy executive lined up to slate his initiatives as unworkable. Clearly Cameron’ s vested interest clashed with their own!

We call upon the Energy Service Group Executive to:

i)Highlight the sustained and growing concerns about fuel poverty and to work with lobby groups to raise the awareness of the issue which is particularly unfair on poorer households and householders where home owners have special heating needs e.g. elderly occupants or disability needs.

ii)We request OFGEM to conduct an immediate feasibility study as to how individuals can be supported in seeking maximum clarification of their tariffs to ensure they are not being over charged and can make realistic judgements on tariff values. In this regard tariffs should be made simpler, both to understand and to compare company rates.

iii)Provision needs to be afforded for vulnerable customers to ensure the industry recognizes this group and we call upon the Energy Executive to support branches to encourage their members to contact their energy companies to ensure they are receiving the best deal from their energy supplier. There are schemes that are available to help people who are struggling with their fuel bills such as the Warm Homes Discount Scheme but energy suppliers do not always make this information clear for their customers when it is in their benefit for customers to apply for these payments.

iv)All members should be encouraged to look at their choice they have to change supplier and to seek the best deal around for them and we call upon the Energy Executive to approach the NEC with a view to working with UNISON Welfare to produce publicity that conveys this message to members

Motion 7Green Deal

Submitted by Energy Executive

The conference notes that the Coalition Government launched the Green Deal in Jan 2013. This supposed deal was introduced to encourage households to make their homes more energy efficient by having works carried out with little upfront cost but instead paying the costs via energy bills over a many years.

As well as the potential impact on energy efficiency, the green deal will have a impact on staff employed in the energy industries.

The proposed measures have however led to a great deal of confusion and take up rates are not at the levels required for this initiative to have any substantial impact on the levels of household energy consumed. As a result at a time when more households are being forced into fuel poverty and efforts to reduced environmental damage from energy production continues to be a major issue, the government backed scheme represents a huge and damaging missed opportunity.

This Conference believes the government should reconsider the green deal scheme and look instead at launching a national domestic energy efficiency drive funded by the receipts generated by carbon taxes. This approach is advocated by the energy bill revolution and has considerable wide ranging support.

The conference therefore asks the Service Group Executive:

i)To monitor the take up rates of Green Deal schemes to provide scrutiny of the policy and challenge the results.

ii)To monitor the impact of the Green Deal on staff employed in the energy industry and to seek to counter any adverse effects.

iii)To write to the Secretary of State for Energy asking him to explain the low take up rates of the policy and challenge him on alternatives such as that advocated by the Energy Bill Revolution ‘EBR’.