Transport Salaried Staffs' Association

Information paper - Item 61

The Scottish Divisional Council met on Saturday 14 November 2009 and agreed the following resolution:

“That this council condemns the recent article published in the Journal, written by the General Secretary. The content and tone of the article was deeply offensive, divisive, ageist and without foundation. Further, no attempt has been made by the GS to substantiate his accusations of an unelected cabal controlling branches, EC and other democratic functions of the union. Nor has any retraction of the accusations been made.

In the circumstances this Divisional Council has no confidence in the General Secretary.

We would ask that this resolution is discussed by the Executive committee at its next available meeting. 14 November 2009.”

Upon receipt of the resolution, which was addressed for the attention of the Executive Committee, the Business & Campaigns Manager asked the Secretary of the Divisional Council for further particulars to assist the Executive Committee in its deliberations. The letter of request is attached as Appendix 1 and the Divisional Council response is attached as Appendix 2.

Ms Anslow, who represented the Executive Committee at the November meeting of the Divisional Council, reported to the EC at its meeting on 3 - 4 December 2009 that she had requested a copy of both the Divisional Council motion and minutes of the meeting held on 14 November 2009 but that none had been received.

Mr Kennedy, the paid Senior Organiser for Scotland who attended the meeting as the General Secretary’s representative, reported to the General Secretary that the motion of no confidence had been raised at the meeting of the Divisional Council, without prior notice, and that he had been asked to leave the meeting whilst it was discussed.

Given the potentially serious nature of the matter at hand it is not considered by the Executive Committee to be unreasonable for the Divisional Council Secretary to have circulated the proposed motion with the preliminary agenda so that Branches within the Divisional Council would have been able to take a view on it before the debate. This did not happen.

Neither the General Secretary nor the paid Senior Organiser in Scotland were given advance notification of the motion. The General Secretary was therefore given no opportunity to defend his actions in regard to the matter. This was denied by the movers of the motion.

At the Executive Committee meeting on 3 – 4 December 2009 the President indicated his intention to meet with Ms Anslow, Mr Black as Secretary of the Divisional Council and Mr Kennedy to discuss the issue. Executive Committee minute 330/09 shows that the Executive Committee agreed that the President hold discussion as outlined.

This discussion took place in January 2010 after which the President emailed the General Secretary as follows:

“I discussed this with Willie and, after some exploration of a constructive way forward, he suggested that you and I are both invited to their February Divisional Council”

No such invite was ever received by the General Secretary.

On 25 August 2010 the Regional Organiser in Scotland contacted the General Secretary’s office to ask if the General Secretary would be available to attend a Scottish Divisional Council weekend school during any weekend in November 2010. The Business & Campaigns Manager asked that the Divisional Council be informed that the General Secretary would feel uncomfortable in attending a Divisional Council weekend school whilst the Divisional Council had a motion of no confidence in the General Secretary unresolved.

On 02 September 2010 the Regional Organiser in Scotland emailed the Business & Campaigns Manager as follows:

“There was a meeting yesterday re. the planned Scottish weekend school.

I passed on your message that Gerry felt uncomfortable doing a session at the school as long as the motion of ’no confidence’ against him was still ’lying on the table’.

Divisional Council officers present said that the motion was no longer ’lying on the table’ and had not been for some time.

They agreed that Margaret Anslow would contact Andy Bain to make sure relevant parties were aware of this.”

The following email was sent in response by the Business & Campaigns Manager on 03 September 2010:

“Interesting turn of events. When did the Council overturn the original vote of no confidence and given that they formally communicated the vote of no confidence to him immediately after it was taken do they not think that it might help to formally let him know that they have now overturned it? Or is it the case that it hasn’t been overturned, it’s just that they don’t want to press it?”

On 03 September the General Secretary contacted the President seeking an understanding of how the motion of no confidence had been dropped without a subsequent meeting of the Divisional Council to discuss the matter. The President responded as follows:

“Gerry
On Scottish Divisional Council

Back in October 09, after several months of ’differences’ between Steve Whitehead and the Div Council over their proposals for rationalising branches and then the ’no confidence motion’ issue was raised, I offered to visit Glasgow in November and hopefully address both issues. Due to sensitivities there was little put in writing.

I felt that the visit was very constructive and Margaret, Willie, Tom and myself felt that things had been smoothed over and we had an agreed way ahead. My email below states that you and I would be invited to the Div Council but I did not make clear that that was on the basis that the no confidence issue was dropped, I just wrote:

after some exploration of a constructive way forward, he suggested that you and I are both invited to their February Divisional Council.

However for some reason the Div Council meeting did not happen. I did not follow this up - I don’t have time to. But in my mind the problem had been resolved. I suppose we should have discussed the matter in detail. There may well be other events/correspondence that I am not aware of.

This lack of communication then led to Frank saying that you would not be going to the Div Council while the no confidence issue stood.

I have also received a critical response to this from Willie.

I’m not sure the way forward but can we also discuss this on Monday?
Andy"

There has been no further communication on the matter.

  Information paper - Item 61