LAST-ditch talks aimed at ending a bitter dispute between the Scottish Borders Housing Association (SBHA) and its manual staff ended in failure on Monday.

As a result, official ballot papers will be sent out next week to members of the Unite trades union, which represents the majority of the 90-strong maintenance division at the region’s largest social landlord.

They will be asked if they wish to take industrial action over proposed changes to their terms and conditions which management claims will bring them into line with standard industry practice and provide a better service for the tenants of its 6,000 plus rented properties.

At present, tradesmen and women work 111 hours a week over a three-week cycle, beginning when they leave their homes at 8am each morning. Within that cycle, they have one Friday off.

At Monday’s meeting of senior management and union officers in Tweedbank, SBHA confirmed its alternative proposal which would see staff beginning work “on site” at 8am and finishing at 1pm every Friday.

This was rejected by the union who claimed it amounted to an extra day’s work over the three week cycle.

An alternative compromise proposal from Unite to retain the 111-hour arrangement, was, it is understood, dismissed by management. That involved staff being “on site” at 8am, finishing at 12noon on two of the three Fridays and having one Monday off.

The ballot paper will specify that, notwithstanding the union’s opposition to the change in the working week, SBHA has allegedly failed to accord its workforce “dignity and respect”.

“This relates to wider issues about the deplorable industrial relations which exist at SBHA,” claimed Tony Trench, Unite’s regional organiser.

Mr Trench alluded to a “stress in the workplace” survey commissioned by his union last year, in which 38% of the 44 staff who responded claimed that management “engages in such things, as aggressive, bullying and threatening behaviour…personal vendettas, blocking holidays, ageism and pressure to leave and retire”.

Mr Trench told the Border Telegraph: “The morale of our members is at rock bottom and it is the management culture, evidenced by a number of specific incidents, which underpins the current dispute.” He cited an email regarding a staff meeting, called by management to start at 8am at SBHA’s Selkirk HQ on July 10, in which operatives were told that if they arrived late they could be subject to “disciplinary action”.

“This is not the behaviour of an organisation which cares about its workforce,” said Mr Trench.

He said a meeting, involving his union, management and the conciliation service ACAS, to discuss the wider issues of industrial relations at SBHA was due to be held today (Wednesday).

But he said that meeting would not affect the ballot which, after a week’s delay due to an “administrative error” by his union, would take place next week, with voting papers due to be counted after noon on August 8.

Mr Trench said endorsement for the ballot on industrial action had already been given at two mass meetings and in a consultative ballot of union members.

He said that if there was a majority in favour of taking industrial action, members would then decide what form that should take, with options including an overtime ban, a work-to-rule or selective strikes.

Responding on behalf of management, Alan Vass, director of technical services at SBHA told the Border Telegraph yesterday (Tuesday): “It is absolutely imperative to stress, as we have done on countless occasions both in public and in private meetings with Unite, that SBHA is fully committed to working with Unite towards an improved service for our tenants, to secure a stable financial future for SBHA to assist further growth and, importantly, to provide job security for all our staff.  “It is also important to reiterate that it was SBHA that made the request to ACAS, not Unite, to come in to help the negotiations and we remain fully committed to working under their guidance to ensure a satisfactory conclusion.  “It is disappointing that the union continues to turn to the media rather than raise them in line with the terms of the ACAS agreement that both parties signed up to.

 “We have a wide range of effective procedures to deal with any concerns our staff may have and we look into any issues or accusations raised both willingly and fully.  We deal with all staff matters internally and will not discuss them publically and we think this is unfair for the union to do so too.

 “In terms of the alternative working week plan presented to SBHA by the union, we in turn reverted to them with a further proposal.  “We think it is entirely fair that our staff are briefed first on this matter before it comes out into the public domain and we remain hopeful that we will reaching a solution that both parties are happy with.  “SBHA has made great strides in recent years to modernise and improve the service it provides to its thousands of customers. We employ almost 200 staff throughout SBHA, many of whom are members of other unions that we have good working relationships with.  “There is in fact scope to create additional jobs within our maintenance division however with the current dispute [SBHA wish Staff to start work in Tenants’ homes at 8 am] continuing we cannot proceed with that plan. We remain hopeful that we can proceed with that planning.

“Yet again, we urge the union to work with us to ensure a prompt resolution to this situation instead of continually placing hurdles in front of our discussions which simply extend the dispute which is not good for our tenants or for our staff and their members.”