Now’s the time to talk to politicians about your pay
Prospect is urging all members affected by the public sector pay cap to keep the pressure on government to change its policy by writing to their local MPs, via this link.
After two chaotic government U-turns on public sector pay policy, deputy general secretary Garry Graham has pointed out that the vast majority of civil servants are not covered by the review bodies and their pay is due to be negotiated over the coming months.
“Members are angry that the prime minister and the chancellor can find funds to shore up their political positions – but can only offer vague assurances to public sector workers who have endured years of pay cuts.
“If the prime minister and the chancellor are serious about that guidance no longer being fit for purpose they need to take action now to allow meaningful negotiations to take place.”
Mike Clancy, the union’s general secretary, wrote to the prime minister on 19 June to call on the government to lift the 1% cap on public sector pay and revise the Treasury’s pay remit guidance to civil service departments and agencies.
Clancy said the Treasury’s pay guidance for civil service departments and agencies was “not fit for purpose and needs to be revised to reflect the will of the electorate and the needs of the workforce”.
He also called for “a truly independent and evidence-led review of pay and reward for the civil service and the wider public sector”.
Clancy pointed out that, unlike other public servants, many Prospect members have also seen the removal of “progression” pay, which has compounded the position.
He said pay and benefits in the civil service and the wider public sector now lag significantly behind those available for comparable jobs in the private sector and the gap is forecast to widen.
“Employment in the civil service and the wider public sector is becoming increasingly synonymous with low pay, long hours and unmanageable workloads,” said Clancy.
You can read the web story here and download our poster ‘I’m worth more than 1%’ here.