<<<Union behind BA strike receives £18m from taxpayers in 'money-
laundering' deal with Labour
The union behind the British Airways strike has received £18million
from taxpayers under Labour, The Daily Telegraph can disclose.
Charlie Whelan arrives at Downing Street. Photo: Alan Davidson/The
Picture Library Ltd
By Martin Beckford
10:00PM GMT 18 Mar 2010
Unite, and the two unions that formed it, received the public money
under two little-known funds to improve management and training for
its members.
It has been the biggest beneficiary of one of the schemes, the Union
Modernisation Fund, and received a sixth of all the money given out
under the Union Learning Fund.
The figures have led to fresh claims that Britain's biggest union has
taken over the Labour Party after donating almost £30million over the
past decade and employing a key adviser to Gordon Brown as its
political director.
It comes ahead of a planned three-day walkout by Unite members of BA's
cabin crew this weekend, which is set to cause travel chaos for
thousands of passengers.
Francis Maude, the Shadow Cabinet Office Minister, said: "This really
looks like money laundering - taxpayers' money is being funnelled into
Unite then put straight back into Labour's coffers.
"It's a real racket, with taxpayers' money being round-tripped into
Gordon Brown's re-election fund. We must have much greater
transparency on what unions are receiving from the Labour Government
in return for their backhanders."
Unite, which claims to have 2million members, was formed through a
merger of Amicus and the Transport & General Workers Union in 2007.
Electoral Commission figures show it has long been Labour's most
important donor, giving £29,541,155 since January 2001.
The union is accused by the Tories of assuming power and influence
over the party it "bankrolls", getting left-wing policies implemented
in law and winning support from ministers for its campaigns and
industrial disputes.
Unite's political director, Charlie Whelan, has returned to the heart
of Mr Brown's spin operation as an unofficial aide, having previously
served as his special adviser. He is regularly seen in Downing Street
and has a Westminster pass.
Several Unite officials have been selected as Labour candidates for
the forthcoming general election, including Jack Dromey, who is
married to the party's deputy leader, Harriet Harman.
But this newspaper has established that the union has also received
large amounts of taxpayers' money, amounting to more than half of its
donations to Labour.
Since 1998, Unite, Amicus and the TGWU have received £17,396,498 under
the Union Learning Fund, 17 per cent of the total money handed out by
the Government.
The Union Learning Fund was set up in 1998 in order to encourage union
reps and members to improve their education and training.
Now administered by a body called Unionlearn with the help of the
Trades Union Congress, it hands out more than £15m a year to unions
who bid for local projects. Its aim is to help unions improve the
skills and education of their members, particularly by training Union
Learning Reps who encourage colleagues in the workplace to take up new
courses and gain qualifications.
Mr Brown announced increased funding for the scheme at the TUC
conference in September 2007, just months after he became Prime
Minister, calling it "the biggest transformation of trades unions
since the growth of the shop steward movement".
But details of where the money goes are not published while annual
evaluation reports ceased several years ago.
An analysis commissioned by the Government but carried out by York
Consulting in 2006 found there was no framework "against which the
employment/economic impact can be measured" and that "unions do not
collate monitoring data in a form which is consistent and which is
accurate and reliable".
It stated: "Although the evaluation has tried to generate 'evidence'
from unions of the impact of the ULF particularly on their strategic
development, it is difficult to substantiate the majority of claims
from unions against other sources.
"Unions, are to a large extent, dependent upon external funding. ULF
has been a major part of that funding. Therefore, statement
demonstrating a positive impact, could typically be expected. In
addition, employers can only offer a first hand estimate of the value
and impact of ULF on their workforce. There has been no attempt
currently to develop quantifiable impact analysis indicators."
Unite has been given £382,469 under the Union Modernisation Fund since
2006. This is higher than the amount received by any other union
including Unison (£345,832), which represents public sector workers;
Usdaw (£291,075), the shop workers' body; and the GMB (£257,476).
The Union Modernisation Fund is administered by Lord Mandelson's
Department of Business, Innovation and Skills. In total, it has given
out more than £7m since it was set up in 2006.
It is intended to help the unions train reps, make their management
structures better and reach out to new and younger members through the
internet. Unions must put in bids for grants for specific projects,
and match the sum with their own cash.
Opposition parties have claimed it is a "bung" to groups that support
Labour both politically and financially.
The unions that formed Unite were also given public funds under the
Partnership at Work Fund in the early years of New Labour. Amicus
worked on a project to tackle bullying in the workplace, called
Dignity at Work, which was backed by BA and which received £1m from
ministers.
A spokesman for the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills
said: "Since the Union Learning Fund began in 1998 it has provided
£17,396,498 to Unite, Amicus and the TGWU.
"This figure is 17% of the total fund, although Unite and Amicus
actually represent 25% of the TUC.
"In the last 12 years the Government has supported over 800,000
ordinary workers through the ULF, helping them access training that
meets their needs and those of their employers."
Tom Wilson, director of unionlearn, said: "Almost three quarters of a
million people have benefited directly from the Union Learning Fund,
which has made learning and training possible for them in the past 12
years. A major part of the ULF's work is improving basic literacy,
numeracy and computer skills in the workforce. We work with thousands
of businesses to invest in their employees. Evidence shows that ULF
money encourages employers to additionally invest in training. ULF has
been held up to Ofsted inspection and all ULF projects are subject to
independent audit.">>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
<<<<<<<<<
Taxpayers' money spent on union salaries
Whitehall departments are spending millions of pounds of taxpayers'
money paying the salaries of trade union officials.
Several ministries said they effectively employ full-time union
representatives at public expense Photo: GETTY
By James Kirkup, Political Correspondent
8:00AM GMT 20 Mar 2010
Ministries and Government agencies spent more than £17 million paying
staff to carry out "trade union activities" last year.
Some departments are paying staff to work full-time on trade union
business.
And some full-time civil servants spend three days a work carrying out
union activities and still receive a full salary from the Government.
Public spending on union activities was disclosed in official figures
released to MPs.
The Ministry of Justice said it paid its staff to carry out 43,208
days of trade union activity in 2008/09. The estimated total salary
cost to the taxpayer was £6.5 million.
HM Revenue and Customs paid its staff for 48,902 days of union
activity during, at a cost of £5,918,065
In the current financial year, the Department for Work and Pensions
has budgeted to pay its staff to carry out 42,460 days of trade union
activity, at an estimated cost of more than £5 million.
Several ministries said they effectively employ full-time union
representatives at public expense.
The Department of Children, Schools and Families pays the salaries of
four members of staff engaged in "national full-time trade union
activity". Their annual wage bill is £118,000.
The Department of Communities and Local Government employs two full
time union workers at a cost of £95,000. It also spent £192,000 paying
part-time union workers for their union activities.
The Department for International Development said it has one full-time
staff member "allocated to undertake trade union activities" and paid
£30,000 to £35,000
At the Treasury, one senior official spends three days a week on trade
union activity.
Other Government bodies that confirmed they are paying for union
activity include the Crown Prosecution Service, which spent £535,915
last year, the Treasury Solicitor's Department, which spent £37,212,
and the Royal Parks, which spent £29,333.
The total annual bill for trade union activity in Whitehall is likely
to be significantly higher than £17 million, because several
ministries and agencies have refused to provide figures for their
spending.
The union representatives being paid by the Government are understood
to be from a number of unions.
Many are members of the Public and Commercial Services Union and
Prospect. Some based outside Whitehall are believed to be members of
Unite, the union behind the British Airways strike.
Union representatives have had a statutory right to "reasonable paid
time off" to carry out trade union duties since 1975.
Labour gave union representatives more rights to paid time off in
2002, passing a new law allowing union members paid time off for union
training courses.
The Daily Telegraph disclosed yesterday Unite and its component unions
have been given £18 million by the Government for training courses
from its Union Learning Fund.
Mark Wallace of the Taxpayers' Alliance said union representatives
should not get public money for their union work.
He said: "There is no reason why taxpayers should subsidise the trade
unions at all, and this multi-million pound bill must be stopped. The
unions are explicitly political organisations, and they should make do
with what money they can raise from their members.
"Many taxpayers will be horrified to learn that their money is being
used to fund the unions and their big-state, high tax message. It is
bad enough that they are issuing threats of strike action, but having
to pay for the people organising the strikes adds insult to injury."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Why does our money go to trade unions?35
Darren Rutland Campaign
Another shocking story of public sector staff working for unions at
the taxpayers' expense has emerged today. Dominic Raab MP has found
out that £7 million of our cash has been wasted on 1,200 Home Office
employees, police officers and border guards to work for trade unions
and Police Federations.
This is a disgraceful misuse of public money, not least because £7
million is a huge sum. Mr Raab goes on to calculate that an extra 300
officers could be paid for with the money going to trade unions. With
necessary spending reductions being made, the policing budget savings
are among the most controversial. But there's money being wasted on
funding union work. This shows that there are easy savings to make
that won't damage frontline policing.
Many UK Border Agency staff are represented by the Public and
Commercial Services Union, who recently assisted in organising a
national 24-hour strike against the cuts. Taxpayers should not be
paying for staff to do union work, particularly when unions play such
a blatant political role.
This is just another in a string of recent stories on this topic -
last week it was revealed that almost half a million pounds of
taxpayers' money is given to trade union officials representing
Edinburgh City Council staff. A member of that council has called for
an investigation by the council's leader following the release of
figures detailing the £473,965 cost. It is an especially alarming
figure seeing as it is more than double the amount spent on union work
by Glasgow City Council, even though it is a smaller city.
Previous work from the TaxPayers' Alliance has shown that during the
2009-10 financial year, almost 2,500 full time equivalent public
sector employees undertook trade union duties while being paid with
our cash. If union officials who work for public bodies wish to
undertake their union responsibilities, it must be in their own time,
and should not be at taxpayers' expense.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
<<Introduction
Britain"s trade unions have threatened to unleash waves of industrial
action and trade union barons are relishing their generation"s
opportunity to engage in an ideologically driven and dogmatic attack
on the Government and the wider British public.
But behind their rhetoric, trade unions have become less relevant to
the British workforce. Membership numbers are now at their lowest
levels since the Second World War and the proportion of public sector
and private sector workers who are trade union members is in decline.
Barely half of all public sector workers are trade union members and
most have not voted for strike action on 30 November 2011.
Reform is now needed to protect the country from these misguided
attempts by a minority to hold the country to ransom. However, reforms
to trade union laws must go further than examining strike ballot
thresholds.
Action needs to be taken to stop the systemic way that some trade
unions abuse taxpayer funded resources. Facility time which should be
provided to support trade union representatives fulfil essential
duties is being abused by trade unions who are using these paid leave
arrangements to bolster their campaigning activities. Unison has
issued instructions to its members to get "as many activities as
possible covered by your paid facility time."
Although officials are being caught red handed abusing facility time
arrangements, one SPVA official from the PCS union has been
disciplined for producing anti-cuts materials with public resources.
Local government and council taxpayers are also severely affected by
these unsavoury practices. Camden Council, for example, allows trade
unions, including Unison and the GMB, to use a disused Council
property, which should have been earmarked for disposal, rent free
with taxpayers footing the bill for the utilities they use. This is
despite the new Unison headquarters being located with a few minutes"
walk. But this generosity is repaid with these taxpayer funded
facilities being used by an anti-cuts campaign.
Facility time is now five times higher in the civil service than in
the private sector as trade unions pillage the pockets of hard-pressed
British taxpayers to the tune of tens of millions of pounds a year.
This must stop and stricter controls and more transparency are now
needed.
Trade unions using taxpayer funded resources inappropriately are a
contagion that has spread far and wide. In just one year unions have
been bankrolled with £21.5 million from the Department for Business,
Innovation and Skills to employ over 170 staff to promote learning and
a further £7 million from the Skills Funding Agency to pay for trade
union representatives to gain diplomas and other qualifications in
trade union campaigning and other similar courses. A further amount of
up to £11 million over the last three years has also been given to the
unions from the European Social Fund. Some of these funds have been
abused by the trade unions and used to fund
3
political and campaigning publications leading the TUC being forced to
repay over £20,000. When unemployment is rising, this money would be
far more effectively spent on providing thousands of new
apprenticeship places and on education and training for those in need.
Trade unions have also benefitted enormously from the Union
Modernisation Fund, where there is little to prevent taxpayer funded
resources from being used to support political campaigning. This is
unacceptable and taxpayers" money should be clawed back.
Another area for immediate reform is over trade union membership forms
and the political levy. Under consumer protection laws, a business
would not be allowed to sell products or services without giving
buyers certain information and they would not be able to charge for
services without informing their consumers and gaining their consent.
But this is exactly what some trade unions do to bolster their
political funds without the explicit consent of their unsuspecting
members.
Both the GMB and PCS unions, with a total combined membership of over
900,000 include political fund contributions in their membership
subscriptions but nowhere on their memberships forms are applicants
informed of this or given the chance to opt-in or opt-out. Their
political funds could be swollen by this inappropriate practice and
the law needs to be changed to close the legal loophole in trade union
law that allows them to get away with this. If consumer protection
laws do apply in these circumstances, then these unions should face
investigation
The Unison union, which does give members the chance to opt-in to a
political fund on its application, could be in breach of existing
trade unions by discriminating against those who chose not to make a
contribution to political funds. Almost half a million members do not
pay into the political fund but despite this their membership
subscription rate remains unaffected. Effectively the Unison union is
not fulfilling its legal obligation to reduce their subscription rates
by the amount of the political levy and as a result could be pocketing
an extra £3 million a year from those members. This practice is
thoroughly unacceptable, needs to be investigated and action taken to
stop>>>
http://www.taxpayersalliance.com/uniondossier.pdf