Select Committee on Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Memoranda


Memorandum submitted by the Public & Commercial Services Union (PCS) (RPA 09)

1  Thank you for you letter of 2nd November in which you have asked PCS to respond to the EFRA Select Committee terms of reference.

2  As the dominant trade union representing staff in the Rural Payments Agency it is difficult for us to respond directly to each of the questions you raise. We are well aware of the magnitude and scale of the change programme and the requirements to make payments under SPS. We are also well aware of the issues that this raises for staff in RPA who have been working under immense pressure working round the clock seven days a week for a considerable amount of time. This and the other issues raised in this submission undoubtedly impact on delivery and we believe that this is an equally important line of enquiry.

3  You will no doubt be aware of the background to the change programme and the subsequent creation of RPA. The key objective being to significantly reduce the running costs of CAP Administration by investing in a new computer system. This meant the closure of a number of front line offices and the threat of well over a thousand redundancies¹.. At the very outset we registered serious concerns about proposals which would lead to so many job losses. And whilst we recognised the need for change there was a collective view that such a significant reduction in the workforce would have lasting implications on service delivery.

4  The past five years have been very unsettling for staff. Efforts were initially made to establish RPA's future organisational structure and in turn provide staff with some certainty. Unfortunately the announcement of CAP Reform shifted the direction of the programme meaning a complete rewrite of how RPA would look. The fallout of this was that uncertainty was prolonged and in some instances offices earmarked for closure were kept open longer. A finite structure is still not known although this has not stopped the staff from applying for jobs where they are available. This process however has been a long and painful one.

5  As time passed it became clearer that the original objectives would not be met and that the new IT would not deliver the expected savings further exacerbating the feelings of staff. Today RPA still has staff in receipt of redundancy notices (we understand RPA were the only Civil Service department to issue such notices despite the Cabinet Office Protocols on Redundancy and Redeployment) and staff are still threatened by redundancy.

6  The scale of the change generally and the shift to SPS has meant that RPA is heavily reliant on temporary and contingent workers. Presently RPA has some 900 staff temporarily promoted into higher grades, including entire management chains. This has meant that during times of crisis inexperienced managers found themselves in authority. This was evident in the Customer Service Centre emergency earlier this year. Whilst we do not doubt the volumes of calls the centre was receiving it was staffed by untrained managers and staff brought in off the streets.

7  It is also important to point out that we have seen the influx of well over 1500 casual, fixed term and agency workers in RPA. The bulk of these are agency workers who are paid the minimum wage to work unsociable hours. This area has been of grave concern to PCS and we have campaigned vigorously against their use and abuse. (PQs have been asked). RPA continues to exploit these workers today.

8  It is not unusual for a contractor or consultant also to occupy a civil service post. We do not have definitive figures but parts of the organisation are being flooded with consultants some costing as much as £2000 per day. Others have been constant in RPA for well over five years. The culture is one of outsource too. When Accenture were brought in to build the new IT system existing IT areas hived off to IBM at the same time. During the Customer Call Centre crisis BT were also brought in at the drop of a hat without the apparent need for a tender process.

9  It is also worth mentioning that for the second year running PCS has been in dispute with RPA over pay. For the last six weeks there has been continued industrial action over pay gaps that have further widened between RPA and its parent department DEFRA. The background to this is that when RPA was set up it mirrored the higher pay rates in DEFRA. In 2003 however RPA exercised its right as an Executive Agency to pay delegation. This subsequently saw a worsening of rates (the gulf is now as much as £3000 in some pay bands) in RPA, since they did not keep pace with DEFRA. Needless to say this has had a detrimental effect on staff in RPA who despite being told that SPS is DEFRA's number one priority do not earn DEFRA pay rates

10  We appreciate that the issues raised within this submission are not areas that you would be necessarily expecting to see however on behalf of PCS members in RPA we believe that they need to be brought to your attention. We think that they raise all kinds of questions about leadership and about accountability at the time of great change. We have seen time and again how it can be mismanaged in the Civil Service and from what we can see is happening in RPA is no different.

11  I understand that the rapporteurs are due to meet RPA trade union representatives next week. They will be able to provide you with more background to these issues.

Public & Commercial Services Union

December 2005

Notes

¹ Projected reduction in staff from 3500 to 1900.


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2006
Prepared 20 April 2006