BECTU
BECTU have been cited on twitter and in statements from the Young Vic, suggesting their involvement in the recent troubles means that the situation is being dealt with professionally and fairly. This is not necessarily the case.
The Young Vic had been planning the changes (unbeknown to the staff) for some time and contacted BECTU to ask how they could implement the changes. BECTU agreed to work with the Young Vic and held meetings in private, without the Young Vic’s BECTU representative being present. Why they acted in this way we do not know. BECTU have offered no explanation. For the avoidance of doubt the Young Vic’s BECTU representative should be present at any meeting between the theatre and the union.
Consequently the only voice being heard was that of the Young Vic Management, whose agenda was pretty clear. If the Young Vic wanted to proceed with their plans BECTU gave them two options: 1) A 60 day consultation period in which to work out, alongside the affected staff, the best way to proceed and make changes 2) Pay the staff a paltry sum and get rid of them asap. Obviously the Young Vic opted for the latter. Obviously the staff would have opted for the former. The choice the Young Vic made was sanctioned by BECTU. They agreed to it. They wilfully excluded all affected staff AND the BECTU representative from negotiations. Consequently I do not believe the claim that BECTU’s involvement has made the situation any better.
Secondly in his email, the Chairman of the Young Vic board stated that BECTU were issuing a statement saying why it was a “good thing”. This claim needs to be challenged on BECTU’s own terms. After the announcement was made staff were given the opportunity to meet with BECTU. In this meeting the man from BECTU said, and I quote “this has not been my finest hour” and agreed that it had been handled badly. He could not however answer the question why a consultation wasn’t offered, nor why he had allowed private meetings to take place. So there would appear to be big disconnect between what BECTU is telling its members in meetings and what it wants to say to the outside world.
He also said he was “appalled” at the Young Vic’s decision to advertise the new jobs less than 24 hours after staff had been informed their jobs would cease to exist. On this point I should mention that staff who had only just lost their jobs were having to take telephone enquiries and answer questions from applicants for the new positions.
There has also been an assumption, that because there are jobs to apply for there is no problem to solve. This is wrong on a number of counts, but primarily 11 members of staff have been affected and only four jobs are on offer. Secondly the new roles exclude the majority of current staff who cannot work full time and every weekend, as they have freelance careers, child care issues, or are combining this job with other work. As with front of house jobs in the majority of theatres, part of the attraction is the flexibility involved. Furthermore, part of the reason the Young Vic front of house team is so strong is because of the variety of experience and personality the current staff bring.
So when the Young Vic says “Their concerns are being addressed and we have agreed a proposal for affected staff with BECTU.” please take it with a pinch of salt. And to be very, very, very clear their concerns are NOT being addressed, and they haven’t been for a very long time. That is why this blog exists, that is why there is a social media furore and that is why the Young Vic are having to make a statement at all.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete