ACM Resources - Responses

Consultation on Providing Statutory Rights for Union Learning Representatives

Please use this pro forma in responding to the consultation paper

Name: Nadine Cartner
Organisation: Association for College Management
Address: 18 Dynevor Road, London N 16 0DJ

Completed forms should be returned to the address below by 27 July 2001.

Consultation Unit
Level 1B
Castle View House
Runcorn
Cheshire
WA7 2GJ

The Department may, in accordance with the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information, make available, on public request, individual consultation responses. This will extend to your comments unless you inform us that you wish them to remain confidential.

Is your response confidential?

Yes

Please tick ONE of the following boxed that best describes you as a respondent
(Please tick only one option)

Employer

Employee

Representative body

Union learning Rep

1) Do you agree that these are the right criteria for determining who should qualify as a union learning representative? 1b) Are there any other criteria you think should be included?

Yes

Comments:

The Association is in broad agreement with the stated criteria. We believe that initial training is vital for Union Learning Representatives to counsel their colleagues effectively, and to win credibility with employees and employers.

We suggest that attendance at annual or regular training updates should be a third criteria for determining who should qualify as a union learning representative.

2) Do you agree that matters such as the number of members represented by a union learning representative should be left to the union to determine?

Yes

Comments:

The Association feels that where the existing arrangements for the work of union representatives work well, they should be extended to the work of the ULRs. This would have the virtue of consistency and transparency. Thus on this issue we agree that the number of members represented by a union learning representative should - in line with the current arrangements for shop stewards and others - be left to the union to determine.

3) Do you agree with the proposed entitlements for union learning representatives?

Yes

3b) What other entitlements to time off, if any, should they have?

Comments:

In line with our answer to question 1, the Association believes that ULRs should have paid time off for annual or regular updating.

3c) Should a code of practice provide guidance on the practical application of these entitlements?

Yes

Comments:

The ACAS code of practice on Time Off for Trade Union Duties and Activities, which gives practical guidance on the entitlements of shop stewards and union members, has worked well. As we stated above where the existing framework that regulates and supports the work of union representatives works well, it should be extended to the work of ULRs. It seems sensible therefore to ask ACAS to revise its existing code and incorporate advice on the implementation of the entitlements for ULRs.

4) Do you agree with the proposed protections for union learning representatives?

Yes

4b) How should the issue of facilities be treated?

Comments:

At present Union Learning Representatives enjoy a lower status and less practical support than union representatives such as shop stewards. By placing the status of ULRs on a statutory basis we anticipate that this imbalance will be addressed. However we recommend that the situation is monitored for a period to check that ULRs are receiving a reasonable and equitable level of practical support.

5) Do you agree with the government's proposals on using employment tribunals to enforce the entitlements to time off and protection for union learning representatives?

Yes

Comments:

Since this arrangement works well (albeit it is little used) for enforcing existing entitlements to time off for trade union duties, it should be adopted in this instance too.

6) Do you agree that training should be mandatory but accreditation voluntary?

Yes

Comments:

In the view of the Association analysing learning needs and advising on appropriate learning opportunities is a high level skill (witness the problems experienced by New Deal clients when this advice was ignored). Trained and qualified ULRs will ensure a high level service to union members, and for this reason ACM believes that accreditation should be mandatory.

7) Do you agree that union learning representatives should have statutory backing in unionised workplaces only?

Yes

Comments:

Given that we are largely talking about harmonising the arrangements for ULRs with the existing arrangements for other sorts of union representatives, it makes sense to restrict statutory backing for ULRs to unionised workplaces only.

However it's important that comparable initiatives are designed to improve learning counselling and learning opportunities for people in non unionised employment.

7b) Should there be another basis for defining those workplaces where the statutory entitlements apply?

Yes

8) Do you agree that union members should be entitled to unpaid time off during working hours to consult their union representative, and that they should be protected from any discrimination on the grounds that they have taken advantage of these rights?

Yes

Comments:

8b) Should union learning representatives provide services to non-union members where this is agreed between the union and employer

Yes

Comments:

The Association believes that the new legislation should not forbid the ULR offering counselling and support to non union members. It could provide positive benefits for non union members. However we feel the final decision should be the result of negotiation between the employer, the union and the ULR.

9) Do you agree that small firms should not be exempted from the scope of the proposed legislation on union learning representatives?

Yes

Comments:

The Association considers that it is essential that small firms are included in the arrangements. However in practice many small firms are not unionised and although we think these proposals offer positive steps forward with work based learning, they will not, of course, embrace all employees and other strategies must be developed to ensure the inclusion of all the workforce.