Everybody Out! (ctd.)
August 18 2015
Picture: Via Twitter
It was a nice touch to see the new National Gallery director Dr Gabriele Finaldi talking to suspended and dismissed NG employee Candy Udwin today. Let's hope some meaningful dialogue can help end this strike. This week also sees a new chair of trustees take over, Hannah Rothschild. Today is the 64th day of strike action at the Gallery this year.
Udwin, who was suspended and later dismissed for allegedly passing on commercially sensitive documents to the PCS Union (though she has appealed against her dismissal), has become a cause celebre of this strike, with the Union claiming she has been 'victimised' by the Gallery.
Anyone interested in a quick Google of 'Comrade Udwin', as the 'Weekly Worker' calls her, will see that she has a long and proud history of being involved in strikes, has stood for election as a member of the London Socialist Alliance, and at one point was even expelled by her former union, Unison, which must take some doing.
My point is not that even the most committed communist shouldn't be entitled to a secure and well paid job at a place like the National Gallery. Instead, it seems clear from reading the comments of people like Udwin that the dispute at the Gallery has all along been about far more than the specific issues of over-time, pay, and conditions. The National Gallery has become a convenient stick with which unions and the hard left can beat the government.
Here, for example, are some remarks from Candy, as reported by the PCS:
Candy said she believed there should be more strikes. “Help us make this a victory, so we can help the movement wipe the smile of David Cameron’s face,” she said.
In other words, if the same policies were being introduced in a less high-profile museum (as happened at the Royal Armouries in Leeds in 2012 for example), we'd not have heard much from the PCS.
Udwin's remarks also show how the PCS Union has needlessly made the strike at the Gallery worse, and in turn strengthened the exasperation of management and trustees. Again, as reported by the PCS:
[Udwin] described how her members [at the NG] originally discussed two-hour strikes about the issue but have felt so supported by PCS that they have carried out many more hours of strike action than they planned.
I should note that at a preliminary hearing appealing against her dismissal, a judge ruled that it was 'likely' Udwin had been unfairly dismissed. A full hearing takes place in October. I do hope somes sort of resolution can be agreed before then.
Update - I hold no candle whatsoever for Securitas, but I thought I'd see how they've got on at other institutions, to see if they really are the private sector demons some would have us believe. I came across a report by the Collections Trust, which is a charity that acts as:
[...] the professional association for collections management. Established in 1977, it is a UK-based charity that works worldwide with museums, libraries, galleries and archives to improve the management and use of their collections. It does this by providing know-how, developing and promoting excellence, challenging existing practices, pioneering new ideas and bringing experts together.
The Trust did a 'case study' on how Securitas were getting on at the Royal Armouries in Leeds. Here are some quotes:
Securitas Officers work seamlessly alongside the museums’ in-house security team [...]
'The relationship works so well with Securitas as they are responsive to our needs, they are flexible, consistent and have a good understanding of the contract’ Adrian Payne (Facilities Officer) [...]
Securitas have recently been awarded an extension on this contract. The Royal Armouries in Leeds have been impressed with the difference the Securitas team have made.
'For us, as a customer facing business, it was important that Securitas provided the same excellent level of service as our in-house team. The Securitas guards have integrated very well and are always polite and approachable. This ensures the Security department continue to provide the standards expected of a National Museum.’ Margaret Eyre, Contracts Manager
Update II - the National Gallery apparently decided today not to reinstate Candy Udwin, as her supporters had hoped. Here is a statement from the 'No Privatisation at the National Gallery' Facebook page:
We heard today the result of Candy Udwin's appeal hearing, and unfortunately the Gallery has decided to uphold its original decision to sack Candy.
This shows a disgraceful disregard for justice, and we are now calling on the new Director Gabriele Finaldi to do the right thing: step in and Reinstate Candy.
Thank you for all the support you continue to show Candy. This makes your support for our strikes even more important so please keep the solidarity coming!
Join us on our Friday night picket 5-6.30pm to send a message to Dr Finaldi to do the right thing!
(followed by solidarity social afterwards in Silver Cross pub Whitehall)
This means that a full employment tribunal hearing will take place in October.
But it does seem from a preliminary hearing that Candy's claim to be reinstated might have some strength. I haven't been able to get a copy of the full report, but here from the PCS Union website is what appears to be a fairly strong initial judgement in her favour:
“it actually says no more than that the claimant did what any employee, but perhaps more particularly one in the trade union looking for relevant material, could have done. That is, she accessed the respondent’s internet legitimately and found a document that was marked private and confidential. Having found the document she used it to do a calculation. That cannot be wrong or improper.
"....the claimant could have shared this with any other employee entirely legitimately. Instead, she told Mr Bemrose, her trade union national negotiator. I consider it highly likely that it will be accepted, as the claimant urges, that an internal trade union representative (here, the claimant) is at liberty to consult a senior national (i.e. external) trade union negotiator freely and openly with relevant concerns......I do not consider it likely that the claimant informing Mr Bemrose will be found to be culpable of blameworthy conduct, let alone gross misconduct........
"I consider it is likely that it will be accepted at the employment tribunal that the claimant was engaged in trade union activities. I further consider it likely that to the extent that Dr Foister did believe that it was gross misconduct, as to which I express no conclusion, the tribunal will find that she was wrong and that she had categorised it manifestly excessively. I consider that the information available to Dr Foister will be thought not to found a reasonable belief that what the claimant actually did was gross misconduct. That is, it is likely to be found that the publication to Mr Bemrose was not misconduct which the claimant was attempting to cloak with trade union activities as a defence. It actually was permissible trade union activities is what I consider an employment tribunal is likely to find.”
Might an eventual, if rather political solution to the present crisis be to reinstate Candy - which seems to now be as much a demand from the strikers as stopping the outsourcing plans, and which would be a straightforward and positive thing for the National to do - but at the same time carry on with the Securitas deal? That way each side would have a victory of sorts.
Incidentally, I don't remember any protests when the National Gallery 'privatised' their cafés and restaurants (now run by Peyton Byrne).
