Memorandum submitted by the Public and
Commercial Services Union (PCS)
INTRODUCTION AND
SUMMARY
1. The Public and Commercial Services Union
(PCS) is the fifth largest trade union in the country representing
over 325,000 members working in government departments, non-departmental
public bodies and privatised areas.
2. PCS represents over 4,500 members working
across the culture sector throughout the UK in the Department
for Culture Media and Sport (DCMS), English Heritage (EH), the
British Library, national museums and galleries, working at all
levels and grades. We therefore are in a unique position to comment
on caring for our collections as this is core business for our
members working across the sector and we have a behind the scenes
knowledge of the workings of these institutions as our members
fulfil a variety of roles ranging across the museums and galleries.
3. PCS are eager to be a positive partner
in the sector and welcome the committee's inquiry as an opportunity
to review investment levels across the sector. We would also be
happy to supplement this written submission with oral evidence
or further written evidence.
4. We believe that this inquiry is an appropriate
and timely sequel to the previous inquiry as it affords us the
opportunity to expand on points made in our earlier submission.
5. This supplementary memorandum offers
commentary on:
— Funding to the sector, its adequacy
and the impact this has had on PCS members working in the sector.
— Care of the collections.
— The remit and effectiveness
of DCMS, Museums Libraries and Archives (MLA) and other relevant
organisations representing cultural interests inside and outside
government.
FUNDING
(a) Impact on Staff
6. PCS members are affected by the level
of Grant in Aid funding, (as well as the caps set by Treasury),
due to its impact on members' pay, changes to terms and conditions,
levels of staffing and the ways in which staff are employed. As
the pay bill is the largest spend of the revenue budget, pay negotiations
and the way in which staff are employed are influenced by the
restrictions imposed by the funding.
7. The sector is notorious for its low pay,
in particular in the grades 5, 6 & 7 in which PCS has the
majority of its members. These members fill a variety of job roles
such as security, warders, retail assistants, ticket sales, library
and administrative assistants, maintenance and cleaning.
8. Since the delegation of pay in the mid
nineties pay levels have lagged behind comparative grades within
the civil service departments. Across the sector there is a marked
disparity in pay, but the staff working in the museums and galleries
are doing similar work. For example, in the front of house and
security functions in the National Museums of Liverpool and National
Maritime Museum. Staff still have to cope with rising costs on
remuneration that fails to reflect living increases. The majority
of the national institutions are situated in cities and most members
of staff live a considerable distance from their workplaces resulting
in prohibitive travel expense.
9. As the demands placed on the national
museums and galleries increase and diversify, so do they on staff
working on the front line in these institutions. Over the past
months our members have faced:
— a huge increase in visitor numbers
and the added pressure of dealing with the public in great number;
— a growth in the number of events
held;
— an increasing emphasis on the
visitor experience;
— later working hours caused by
events whilst also being required to work normal hours the following
day; and
— the duty to safeguard the visitors
as well as the collections, despite insufficient staff cover or
working with inexperienced and often transitory staff.
The above has caused low morale and the perception
that the commitment staff give is not valued and their contribution
not recognised. All of these we believe are demonstrated by the
low level of pay and the attempts to remove the supplements that
enhance their basic wage.
10. Across the sector there appears to be
a concerted move to employ new staff as cheaply as possible. New
contracts which have poorer terms and conditions and more demanding
remits for less reward, have been introduced. This is the case
at the Natural History Museum, The National Gallery and the RAF
Museum. The result is tiers of staff are treated differently,
with the resulting resentment and embarrassment amongst the workforce.
In any one establishment there can be up to five different tiers:
those on "old" contracts, those on "new" contracts,
retail and trading company staff, agency staff and staff working
for either outsourced services (security and cleaning) or outside
contractors (catering). Such a structure can only undermine the
corporate unity and purpose when the workforce itself is divided
and many feel less valued than other colleagues doing the same
job.
11. The increased use of agency staff is
also marked. One national museum has an unwritten policy of deploying
agency staff to their front of house and retail functions, rather
than recruiting permanent staff to fill vacancies. Without wishing
to criticise any agency staff, particularly as our membership
in this area is on the increase, the use of agency staff has caused
problems that has a direct impact on the visitor experience: there
is a constant turnover of new staff as many temps are transitory,
training may be inadequate or left to permanent staff, which overloads
them and temporarily employed staff generally do not have the
knowledge of or commitment to the museum or gallery that more
experienced permanent staff have. There is a question of morality
in employing staff to contribute to and deliver the diverse and
demanding aspirations of the sector on even lower pay and worse
terms and conditions than others working alongside them doing
similar jobs.
12. Partly due to the need for staff to
work more flexibly to encompass the broader remit of national
museums and galleries there has been a corresponding increase
to workloads, but the demand on the workforce is exacerbated by
vacancy management to drive down staffing costs. The result is
that staff are asked to cover on rest days, events and colleagues'
absences resulting in long hours and inadequate time off. This
is apparent as well amongst those employed in the outsourced security
provision, for example OCS [a private security company] at the
Victoria and Albert Museum (V&A).
13. There has been a real fear as expressed
in Tony Travers's and Stephen Glaister's study[39]
and by the NDMC that if central funding is constrained or falls
these national institutions will be in the invidious position
in future of managing decline, closing galleries or limiting access
were cited as examples. The reality is that this has already happened
and is happening; we highlighted some examples in our previous
submission in the British Museum and at the V&A, where the
musical instruments, tapestries and textiles galleries were closed
to public access due to the lack of staff.
14. Another feature of the impact of inadequate
funding is that in developing an income stream, space has been
taken from exhibiting to give yet more space for retail or catering
functions, such as at the Science Museum.
15. National museums and galleries, as well
as the Directors of National Museums Conference (DNMC), will undoubtedly
present evidence to highlight the extent to which Grant in Aid
has eroded in real terms whilst public sector inflation has risen
and the demands made on the institutions become more exacting.
These national institutions have successfully fulfilled the government
objectives of social inclusion, learning and education, engagement
in communities and regenerating local economies.
16. National museums and galleries have
achieved the diverse and increased activity as well as the traditional
core activity. However, they have done so against the obstacles
of zero funding growth and limited funding from other sources—corporate
sponsorship, benefactors, special exhibition charging—which
are restricted as these are pursued by all the institutions. Additional
funding, such as Heritage Lottery Fund monies, tends to be ring-fenced
and project based.
17. Corporate funding is a cause for concern,
where in order to secure monies additional conditions are agreed.
For instance, at the National Gallery to attract the funding necessary
to digitalise its library, money was donated by Bill Gates on
the condition that his company received the copyright to all future
sales of the Gallery's pictures. This brings into question the
ethics of such agreements when the collections are for the public
benefit and public property, held in trust by government.
(b) Care of Collections
18. PCS feels it appropriate to voice the
concerns felt by the committed staff who work with the collections,
who have consistently raised the issue of declining standards
in cleanliness, maintenance, repair and security.
19. Housekeeping cutbacks have resulted
in fewer staff covering larger areas, leading to less thorough
cleaning. Outsourced cleaning services are apparently instructed
to provide only a "maid service", ie. superficial cleaning.
20. The wear and tear on buildings due to
the rise in visitor numbers is increasingly problematic, especially
where maintenance staff have been reduced. Similarly with repairs
or refurbishing, as the expertise and skills are depleted through
restructuring exercises and the non-replacement of staff these
essential works are being left incomplete.
21. There are real concerns regarding the
protection of the collections. One national museum has realised
that the emphasis on welcoming the visitor, of promoting access
and social inclusion has seriously impinged on its duty to protect
its exhibits but is now addressing this. Elsewhere there are accounts
of inadequate security, particularly where the private sector
is involved in providing this service, to inadequate knowledge
of the collections and the buildings and a lack of training.
(c) The remit and effectiveness of DCMS, the
Museums, Libraries and Archives Council and other relevant organisations
in representing cultural interests inside and outside Government
22. There is the perception, shared by PCS
members and their employers, that national museums come low in
the pecking order with DCMS. If this was seen in terms of funding
agreements the museums trail after the substantial investment
in sport and the arts and the current focus on the Olympics 2012
does not instil much confidence this will change. In listing DCMS's
priorities for 2006 and beyond[40]
"heritage" receives scant reference. PCS believes in
order to "maximise culture's impact" at home and abroad
there has to be improved investment across the sector.
23. There appears to be no co-ordinated
and inconsistent information collated on the contribution museums
and galleries make to the economy or communities. The NMDC gives
estimates, but we believe this should be work undertaken by the
DCMS and MLA to inform policy and decisions. There also appears
to be no mechanism for collecting and updating the data and statistics
necessary to assess performance and achievement in the sector
and the impact it has on the economy: there are no over-arching
gauges that assesses value or recognition of the sector's contribution
and achievements. Perhaps if there were recognition, based on
comparative data of how museums and galleries have successfully
increased the scope of their activity and of their economic impact,
there would be greater recognition of the workers who enable them
to do this.
CONCLUSION
24. Over the last few years the sector has
evolved. Its core priorities have expanded to cope with and develop
additional objectives. However, the less attractive side is that
in doing so it has also become more fragmented, disparate and
wasteful: restructuring to achieve efficiencies to find funds
or reduce outgoings have resulted in increased costs, for example
redundancies.
25. Numerous separate pay bargaining units,
payroll departments and human resource management result in the
duplication of work across the sector and do not make economic
sense. There is no cohesion or coherence in this approach, nor
in the funding of the sector. Ultimately the burden falls on those
who work within these organisations, essential to delivering access
to the collections.
September 2006
39 Valuing Museums Tony Travers, Stephen Glaister
ISBN 0-9536047-4-8. Back
40
Letter to Prime Minister from Tessa Jowell, DCMS Priorities 26
July 2006. Back
| 
