Civil servants win redundancy pay fight

11/05/10 10:58 am By Nick Johnstone

Government cost-cutting plans were yesterday hampered by a High Court victory for the Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS) over civil service redundancy pay.

Yesterday, Mr Justice Sales ruled that a two-day  judicial review held in the High Court last month had found the previous government’s new civil service redundancy measures, designed to save £500m over three years, to be unlawful.

The largest civil service union argued that changes to the civil service compensation scheme, which governs payments in the event of redundancy and early retirement, would have made it easier and cheaper to cut tens of thousands of civil service jobs and privatise  public services.

The ruling means the next government, when it is established, must reopen negotiations with the union if it is to agree a new arrangement that protects existing members’ rights.

The PCS has also argued consistently that the government had no authority to act independently, without PCS agreement.

PCS members had taken a three day strike in March over the changes, including on budget day (24 March).

PCS general secretary Mark Serwotka said: “This ruling is a huge tribute to them for mounting one of the most impressive campaigns this union has seen, in the face of some disgraceful criticism from their employer and ministers.

“We have always accepted that changes are necessary but all we ever asked is that they were fair and protected those who have given loyal service. We will now be knocking on the door of the next government to remind ministers they are legally obliged to reach an agreement with us.”

Richard Arthur, head of trade union law at Thompsons Solicitors, which represented the PCS, said: “The law says that the government can’t change redundancy rights which have already accrued for civil servants unless the unions agree.

“As the judge said, this was unsurprising in the circumstances of civil service employment. PCS did not agree to the new scheme and so it was found to be unlawful.”

Leave your response!