A special emergency meeting of the National Executive of Britain’s biggest trade union Unite has been called for October 9th in order to discuss the legal challenge to Derek Simpson launched by former Rolls Royce Convenor and Amicus Executive member Jerry Hicks.

The legal challenge to Unite Joint General Secretary Derek Simpson questioned his right to remain in office beyond 65 without an election, and is still under investigation by the government appointed Certification Officer.

The challenge was first said by Derek Simpson and others to have had no chance of success. But in a swift about face meetings have been organised for Unite Officers and supporters this weekend by Derek Simpson, in advance of the National Executive meeting next week, in anticipation of a ruling against him.

Jerry Hicks who filed the complaint has always held the view and argued strongly that his challenge was correct legally. He said today “This cobbled together scheme sold as a package with the devil hidden in the detail that was financially beneficial to some and very costly to our members has been exposed”. It was ill conceived, ill thought out, probably ill advised and most importantly illegal. He says this because why else would Derek Simpson break cover so dramatically as he appears to have done, in a way that continues to be the mirror image of the Sir Ken Jackson fiasco.

It is thought that Derek Simpson will seek authorisation from the Executive to suspend the rulebook that was voted in by 95.3% of all members of Unite in a ballot held two months ago, in the hope that this would allow him to stand for election in the Amicus section of Unite for a period of office until 2010. But such a move to suspend the rulebook, or deny all members a vote in an election, could spark additional legal challenges from members of Unite. The new rulebook is due to come into force on the 1st November and would abolish the separate sections of the union and with a successful challenge from Jerry Hicks force an election for a new General Secretary for the whole of Unite next year.

Mr Hicks has announced that if there is to be an election either as a result of his legal challenge or by way of the latest developments then he will stand as a candidate for a new General Secretary.

Mr Hicks a former union convenor, was sacked from his job in Rolls Royce in 2005 where he had worked for 30 years and won an Industrial Tribunal decision of ‘victimisation’ following the attack on trade union rights in the Bristol factory. Though there was several weeks of strike action at the time, Mr Simpson’s decision not to show a personal presence was considered deeply damaging to the campaign for Mr Hick’s re-instatement.

Unite is not only the country’s biggest Trade Union it’s also the biggest single donator to the Labour Party having given £millions of members’ money over the last few years. Last year Derek Simpson gave his backing to Gordon Brown and also helped to ensure he was unopposed in his challenge for the Labour leadership. Mr Simpson has also been criticised for abandoning his election pledges, including support for the principle of election of officers as well as over the role he played in the construction workers’ dispute at Wembley Stadium.

A website JerryHicks4gs.com has been set up for additional details.

4 responses to “EMERGENCY UNITE EXECUTIVE MEETING CALLED OVER LEGAL CHALLENGE TO DEREK SIMPSON”

  1. Arrogance, sectarianism and stupidity!

    Like

  2. Another Unite member Avatar
    Another Unite member

    Three words that describe Simpson with great accuracy. It is for all of those reasons that many unite members are very pleased that someone is at last standing up to Derek Simpson. He who shouts alot spends even more and delivers little. Oh and Simpson has also split the Gazzette.

    Like

  3. why didn’t Jer discuss with others on the left? seems strange to me.

    Like

  4. Statement from Amicus Unity Gazette:
    Statement on proposed Unite rule changes
    Just two months ago the result of the ballot on the new Unite rule book was announced. The rule book was approved by 281,357 to 13,948, a massive majority. The turnout was around 17%, higher than that for the Executive Council elections in March.
    No one believes that all the more than a quarter of a million members who voted for the rule book had read through all the detail. Members voted “YES” because they wanted to see the merger consolidated and Unite going forward as a single union. They had been excited by the promise of Unite and what it has already achieved.
    Unite has won real enthusiasm from its members and, more generally, from across the movement. The victory at Grangemouth, protecting a final salary pension plan, and of the Shell tanker drivers over pay, demonstrated just what the union was capable of winning. Disputes involving Unite members, including the current bus dispute in London, and the ballot for strike action over pay in the NHS, have demonstrated that Unite is a union that the bosses have to take notice of. The organising approach has been proved to be more effective than a servicing approach.
    We want to see this enthusiasm harnessed and taken forward. We support the full integration of the union, and the ending of the separate Amicus and TGWU sections that was due to take place with the implementation of the new rule book on November 1st.
    However, a proposal is to be put by the Joint General Secretaries to an emergency meeting of the Executive Council on October 9th to delay integration by six months. Two reasons are given.
    The first is to allow for an election for the General Secretary of the Amicus section. Apparently, the union has been provided with legal advice that Derek Simpson will have to retire when he reaches 65, in December 2009, rather than the year later that was expected from the Instrument of Amalgamation, unless he wins a election in a ballot of members.
    The second is that insufficient progress has been made on integration. It was reported to the last EC by Tony Woodley that some senior officials in the union were deliberately blocking progress.
    We do not believe that either reason is sufficient to delay the full integration of the union. The merger was not supported by members to keep a General Secretary in a job for a year after his normal retirement age; it was to ensure an effective union more capable of fighting for its members. If senior union officials are putting up roadblocks to full integration the answer is not to delay, but for the Executive Council to hold those officials to account.
    If we believe the full integration of our union is the key in fulfilling the promise of the merger, then now, of all times, is not the time to delay. Progress towards integration will only be helped by keeping to the timetable already agreed by members.
    Tens of thousands of our members in the financial services industry are facing redundancy because of the banking crisis. UK manufacturing is shrinking at the fastest rate for 17 years. The economic crisis threatens all our members. At the same time we are being hit with runaway prices and a Government seemingly more interested in propping up the City than helping the people who put it into office. We echo Tony Woodley’s speech at the Labour Party Conference: “There’s no doubt that this corporate greed must be stopped.” That can only be done by a united union.
    We need our industrial sectors to be fully integrated with elected lay leaderships if we are to meet the challenges of the economic crisis. We need the integration of our lay and officer structures in the regions if we are to be effective on the ground. We reject the instruction to Amicus officers to not accept regional reorganisation of responsibilities. We think every senior officer in the union should be pushing forward an integration agenda not looking for difficulties. We want integration of the membership systems and do not believe there is any justification for keeping them separate. We want the integration of union finances. It is nonsense that there are still two sets of accounts. We believe that an election for the General Secretary of half our union – a half that will disappear organisationally immediately after the election – would be a distraction from the real work we need to do. The job of one full time officer, no matter how senior, is not more important than the fight for the jobs of tens of thousands of our members.
    A rule change by the Executive Council is unlikely to end the legal disputes. Indications have already been given that the proposed rule changes will be challenged on at least two grounds. Any legal cases could stretch on much longer than the proposed six month delay. We do not wish to see the union focussed on internal legal issues with uncertain senior officer responsibilities while our members in the real world are faced with bearing the costs of the economic crisis. We did not lead the union into this legal quagmire. We opposed challenging the rules at the Certification Officer. We accepted that the members had voted twice by ballot for the timetable arrangements for the Joint General Secretaries retirements. But a year extra in office for a Joint General Secretary is too high a price to pay for slowing down the integration.
    The union should be fully integrated without delay if we are going to fulfil our promise to our members. We believe the adoption by the Executive Council of this rule amendment would prove to be a disservice to our union and our members. We must be in a position to act as a single union onwards from November 1st.
    Editorial Board
    Amicus Unity Gazette
    05/10/2008

    Like

Leave a comment

Trending