2025 PCS Home Office Merseyside Branch Annual General Meeting

The AGM will be held on Wednesday 5th March at 12pm using MS Teams.

1.               Chair’s Opening Remarks - Karen Bolger (Branch President)

2.               Adoption of the agenda

3.               Apologies

4.               Appointment of tellers

5.               AGM 2024 Record of decisions

6.               Branch Annual Report 

7.               Branch nominations (See below)

8.               Home Office Group nominations (See below)

9.               PCS National nominations (See below)

10.           Motions for debate (See below)

11.           Any other business

Branch Officers - All elected

President - Karen Bolger

Vice President - Kris Rowe

Secretary - Phil Mount

Assistant Secretary – Jacqueline Hughes

Organiser – Mark Spencer-Scragg

Assistant Organiser – Sophie Ford

Treasurer – Andrew Nixon

Branch Executive Committee members - All elected

Dean Barron

Chris Smith

Clare Kay

Phil Brightmore

Appi Kovoory

Simon Porter

Andrew Mabbs

Martin Snape

Emma Mooney

Chris Helm

Paul Jobson

Ben Ramsdale

Kieron Worsell

Lindsay Melia

John Lonergan

Ceri Scanlon

Neil Dodd

Auditors (2 posts)

(2 vacancies)

PCS Home Office Group Conference Delegates (5)

1.        Karen Bolger

2.        Ben Ramsdale

3.        Chris Helm

4.        Sophie Ford

5.        Vacant

PCS National Conference Delegates (5)

1.        Chris Helm

2.        Ben Ramsdale

3.        Vacant

4.        Vacant

5.        Vacant

PCS Home Office Group Executive Committee nominations

President – James Cox

Vice President – Karen Alderson

Assistant Group Secretary - Phil Mount

Assistant Group Secretary – Zac Vallely

Assistant Group Secretary – Jordan David

Assistant Group Secretary – Rebecca Hunter

Group Executive Committee member – Andrew Mabbs

Group Executive Committee member – Simon Porter

Group Executive Committee member – Jacqueline Halsall-Hughes

Motions

Motions relating to the Home Office Merseyside Branch

Motion 1 (rule change)

That this Annual General Meeting instructs the Branch Executive Committee to amend Rule 20 of the branch Rules to read:

“The Branch Executive Committee shall consist of the Officers of the Branch and eighteen other members, elected by secret individual ballot of the members of the Branch.”

Motions relating to issues in the Home Office

Motion 2 (Attendance Management)

Conference notes:

•    On 28th November 2024, the new Home Office Attendance Management Policy came into effect. It introduced separate informal and formal procedures and increased base review points. Use of the formal procedure required managers to identify a cause for concern in the employee's absence to proceed. Transitional arrangements were simultaneously released to direct handling of cases that began before the new policy came into effect.

•    Unfortunately, but not surprisingly, the department refused to roll out a training package or support resources for management to assist them in transitioning to the new policy. The department expected managers of all grades to read, digest and implement the new procedure and transitional process immediately upon publication. Instead of providing a consistent and uniform training and guidance package to support to their managers, the department pushed responsibility over to the overburdened HRBPs in each area. HRBPs were given a choice whether they wished to provide managers with training in their respective areas. It is no shock then that managers in most areas have not and will not receive any training due to the departments failure to mandate this support.

•    Notably some managers are not even aware that the attendance management policy has even changed and are following the old process. Those managers that are aware of the changes, are ignoring it. In some cases, despite having the requirements of the new policy explained to them by branch representatives, managers have stubbornly proceeded with formal action in breach of policy, creating the potential need for appeals or formal grievances in the future.

•    Home Office Merseyside Branch representatives have noted multiple incidents of line managers failing to properly observe the new policy and the transitional arrangements; often proceeding to formal action without identifying any cause for concern, leading to unnecessary formal warnings as well as stress and anxiety for our members. Some managers have cited an employee hitting an absence trigger point as a cause for concern, despite this being clearly counter to the policy.

•    In the absence of clear training and guidance, line managers are continuing to use the outdated attendance management process, causing members additional stress and reps more work.

Conference instructs the GEC to:

•    In preparation and ahead of the review of the policy, in October this year, gather evidence from branches across the country to build an evidence base demonstrating the failure by managers to correctly implement the new policy and transitional arrangements.

•    Apply pressure to the department to roll-out comprehensive, mandatory training and support for all managers on the new policy; to include clear, detailed, unambiguous instructions with examples for avoidance of doubt.

•    Continue to campaign for a comprehensive overhaul of the attendance management policy, to move from a punitive to a supportive approach.

Motion 3 (Security Clearance Policy)

There is currently a ‘closed shop’ situation operating within the Home Office that adversely affects our members. For some time now some  Expressions Of Interest (EOIs) being advertised on the Civil Service Jobs portal, stipulate that staff wishing to apply must have SC Security Clearance. An example of this would be a volunteer role recently advertised to join the Central Crisis Command Team which was only made available to staff with SC clearance.

Many long-term Home Office staff have Counter Terrorist Check (CTC) status but staff who have joined the organisation recently have SC clearance, as required by more recent hiring practices.

Long-term staff who only possess the lower CTC clearance are therefore at a disadvantage when EOIs are advertised for Temporary Promotion and other development opportunities.

This is despite the fact that most colleagues who currently possess CTC clearance would easily attain SC clearance if the department allowed them to apply.

The fact that there is no mechanism for CTC staff to upgrade their security clearance means that long-term staff are effectively penalised for their length of service while newer staff are able to take advantage of development opportunities.

Conference therefore instructs the GEC to:

•    Consider the impacts of allowing staff with CTC clearance to voluntarily apply for SC clearance, with the administration and costs of such to be borne by the department.

If this is determined to be feasible and not pose a detriment to staff with CTC clearance, the GEC is further instructed to:

•    Approach the department with the aim of reaching agreement such that all staff who currently hold CTC clearance may, should they choose to, apply for SC clearance, with the administration and costs of such to be borne by the department.

Motions relating to the national union

Motion 4 (PCS MEMBERS LEVY)

Conference censures the NEC for its failure to consult members on the continuation of the levy during this year when it’s not been used to fund any action under the national campaign mandate. The voting record of individual NEC members on this can be found in the annual report.

Regrettably hundreds of members have voted with their feet and left the Union citing the levy or increased cost of membership as the reason.  This is also causing a serious impediment to recruitment of new members to the Union.

The membership levy was initially agreed by an all member consultation and used to good effect during the first round of action in 2022/23 but this NEC have denied members the opportunity to review this decision despite several opportunities to do so arising during the last year.

Conference now instructs the incoming NEC to pause the levy for the National Campaign immediately should it still be in place upon them taking office and launch a full all membership consultation on the future provision of financial support for members taking paid targeted industrial action.

This consultation to take place as soon as is practicable following ADC with a view to replacing the current flat rate 50p from members monthly subscriptions paid directly into the general Fighting Fund with an appropriate percentage figure that will generate a long term regular growth in income to the Fighting Fund.

The consultation to be concluded in enough time to seek membership endorsement for any necessary rule changes required to be ratified by ADC 2026.     

Any further additional levies should receive membership approval in advance, be only used for specific campaign purposes and subject to regular review and further membership endorsement where necessary. 

Emergency Motion 1 (LEVY)

“Conference censures the NEC for its failure to consult members on the continuation of the levy during this year when it’s not been used to fund any action under the national campaign mandate. The voting record of individual NEC members on this can be found in the annual report. Regrettably hundreds of members have voted with their feet and left the Union citing the levy or increased cost of membership as the reason. This is also causing a serious impediment to recruitment of new members to the Union. The membership levy was initially agreed by an all member consultation and used to good effect during the first round of action in 2022/23 but this NEC have denied members the opportunity to review this decision despite several opportunities to do so arising during the last year. Conference welcomes the decision of 14 February NEC to pause the levy although the delay in taking this decision has been at great personal cost to members and undermined membership confidence and trust in any future levy campaigns. The incoming NEC is instructed to launch a full all membership consultation on the future provision of financial support for members taking paid targeted industrial action. This consultation to take place as soon as is practicable following ADC with a view to replacing the current flat rate 50p from members monthly subscriptions paid directly into the general Fighting Fund with an appropriate percentage figure that will generate a long term regular growth in income to the Fighting Fund. The consultation to be concluded in enough time to seek membership endorsement for any necessary rule changes required to be ratified by ADC 2026. Any further additional levies should receive membership approval in advance, be only used for specific campaign purposes and subject to regular review and further membership endorsement where necessary.”