However it is hard not to conclude that the trade union leadership, particularly of UNISON, has a rather different agenda.  When UNISON Health Conference - representing 460,000 health workers - discussed the Government offer of a "staged" 2.5% increase (worth 1.9% over the year) there was a clear rejection. Negotiators were told to seek to secure an improved offer, and Conference reaffirmed the joint Staff Side claim for a significant percentage pay increase above the rate of inflation (Retail Prices Index). 

Things looked to be moving to a strike ballot, when suddenly new Health Secretary Alan Johnson (supported by UNISON in the Labour Party Deputy Leadership Election) re-opened negotiations. The outcome was a 0.1% increase on the offer, mainly in the form of money towards paying for the professional registration staff - something now being required of many more health workers.  Extra money was included for those on the 2 lowest pay bands, but in England this still did not even amount to a 2.5% pay increase. (Workers in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland had already been offered the 2.5% without staging.) 

Within days the new offer was being put to members in a ballot, with no recommendation to either reject or accept.  National publicity however portrayed the offer in unduly positive terms. When individual branches and some Service Group Executive Members began to urge rejection a national circular was issued threatening disciplinary action against though who didn't conform to the decision to make "no recommendation". 

Meanwhile in Local Government the 1^st April deadline for a new pay settlement in England drifted by, with the employers refusing to make an improvement on their original 2% pay offer. After a couple of months, with conference approaching in June, it was decided that no new offer was going to appear, and a one week consultation exercise was held with branches.  Unsurprisingly this received a very limited response. At conference in mid-June members were told that a new consultation exercise would be undertaken, and that this would give us a chance to campaign amongst our members for support for industrial action.  Delegates were to make clear to members that in the autumn there would be co-ordinated action across the public sector - linking with health workers, civil servants, teachers, etc. Clearly someone forgot to tell the Health Service negotiators of this plan for co-ordinated action. 

A new branch consultation in July has shown that 81% of local government members are in favour of industrial action for an improved pay offer, and a ballot of the ¾ million members is now to be organised, along with other unions.  However, as we go to press we hear that the employers have agreed to new talks before the end of August. Indications from national officials seem to suggest that they think 2.5% would be a good offer, though this is clearly out of touch with member aspirations.  If a new offer is forth coming the question is how will this be portrayed, and will a ballot on a new offer be used as a way to call off the ballot on strike action. 

Increasingly it seems likely that UNISON and the other big unions do not want to rock the Gordon Brown boat. In return for a few minor concessions over extended privatisation in the health service the opportunity to defeat Brown's 3 year, 2% pay limit could well be thrown away. If this happens it will certainly lead to a good deal of anger amongst activists with some demoralisation amongst the membership. Clearly the whole issue of the union link to the Labour Party, and why it is not delivering any benefits, will be on the table again.