Public services in the aftermath of the economic crisis: how social dialogue influences changes in public sector employment relations in the UK Stephen Bach Alexandra Stroleny King’s College London

Introduction 2010: Conservative-led Coalition  focus: fiscal consolidation qualitative: familiar Conservative Party themes of outsourcing, local pay and deprivileging PS IR quantitative: sharp reductions in public expenditure  PS employment cuts + incomes policy based on a two year wage freeze  limited scope for workforce engagement & dialogue with PS trade unions

Austerity - Drivers 1.Deficit  speed & depth 2010 Comprehensive Spending review: -Aim: deficit reduction: 2009: 8.4% of GDP  2015: 0.4 % 2. Ideology + underlying economic assumptions No consultation with TUs + employers prior to announcement of wage freeze -three quarters of deficit reduction linked to public spending cuts

Planned cuts to UK spending: historical record – IFS 2012

General Government Employment – OBR: March Forecast

Measures - Wages 2- year pay freeze ( & )  2 years: pay awards - 1% cap across all areas of PS, staff earning £21,000 or less: some protection progression arrangements - annual pay increments  average PS pay still growing in nominal (but not real) terms Pension changes  30 th Nov strike  some concessions  dispute settled in local gov, partly in civil service, remains unsettled in NHS

Local Government LGA (Local Government Association) NJC (National Joint Council for Local Government Services) Local auth. = greatest formal employer autonomy + discretion over how match pay scales to national negotiated pay spine  ‘single status’  national framework (‘Green Book’) -some local variation – Part 2 vs. 3

Local Government 2010  staffing reductions, changes in allowances for working anti-social hours, reduced mileage rates for car users, reduced sickness entitlement & annual leave explicit trade-offs offered to workforce reg. contractually entitled incremental progression  staff ballots – different outcomes Section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992

Case Studies Southampton City CouncilOxford City Council Background (Political Control; Location) Conservative, South-EnglandLabour, South-England Social DialogueNoYes Union exclusionYesNo Employment ReductionManyFew Pay ReductionsYes, unilaterally imposedYes, by agreement Changes to terms & conditions Yes, unilaterally imposedYes, by agreement Degree of concession bargaining LowHigh Communication & participation No  TU: industrial actionYes, through many channels

Challenges Employers  more assertive: austerity => seeking changes challenge of maintaining staff engagement & morale HR capabilities to manage change effectively ? TU  weaker (membership + density => fall) options: 1.concession bargaining 2.not engage with employers 3.Attempt to mobilise & risk marginalisation

Conclusion Quantitative: job cuts, wage freeze; shrink state Qualitative: expansion of a variety of providers, erode national systems of collective bargaining Social dialogue: Nationally – limited Locally - variations