ÐÇ¿Õ´«Ã½

he Joint Industry Board for the Electrical Contracting Industry (JIB) was founded jointly by the two organisations now called the ECA and Amicus (AEEU) in 1968. The aim of its founders, both employers and the trade union, was to bring stability to the industry after a long period of poor industrial relations, by acting together in partnership.

It has on the whole proved very successful in that regard. The difficult times of the 1950s and early 1960s now seem to belong to a different age. However, any organisation that was founded 35 years ago needs to ask its members and itself quite frequently if it is relevant and appropriate.

The JIB did exactly that last year. It undertook a perception survey of its members, asking them through a mailed questionnaire a number of very direct questions. A total of 4528 forms were sent out, with 925 responses received (20·5%) – a very high proportion for a public opinion survey.

All 2028 JIB member firms were surveyed and 26·6% (540) responded. 2500 operatives working for JIB firms were also mailed having been selected at random, with 15·5% (338) completing the survey. The details are now on the JIB web site (http://www.jib.org.uk) and I recommend that you visit it.

Our survey says
The survey findings include: 56·2% found the JIB secretariat responsive or very responsive, and a further 33·9% had no firm view; only 6·3% were negatives. 55·1% found the JIB efficient, and 62·3% found it helpful or very helpful, with only 6·4% and 6·2% negative in each case respectively. There was no significant difference between operatives and employers.

Regarding whether the JIB was genuinely neutral as it is required to be, 20% thought it favoured employers, 25·8% thought it favoured operatives and 51·6% thought it neutral. Among the operatives, 44·1% thought it favoured employers, 41·8% thought it neutral and 11·9% thought it favoured operatives. The equivalent figures for the employers were 2·8%, 58·7% and 35·7%. Neither party saw the JIB as favouring itself and most thought it neutral.

The survey then sought responses to a series of specific statements such as "the JIB has been successful in providing industrial relations stability": 74·8% agreed, with only 3·7% disagreeing. To the statement "changing circumstances since 1968 render the JIB irrelevant", only 13·2% agreed and 42·5% disagreed, with 40·3% having no firm view.

Any organisation that was founded 35 years ago needs to ask its members and itself quite frequently if it is relevant and appropriate. The JIB did that last year

There was also significant support for extending the JIB concept to other areas such as mechanical (38·2%), fire and security (47%) and data installation (46%). As with any long established institution there was a firm belief that "the JIB needs to make improvements" (60·4%), though rather more so among operatives (68·5%) than employers (54·6%).

Regarding the JIB's rules, these are formulated by the Board, which is comprised equally of ECA and Amicus members plus one independent member and the independent Chair, and are only introduced with at least 75% agreement. The framework of terms and conditions received strong approval (68·8%).

The rules were also seen as clear (56·6%). Compliance with the rules was not as highly rated, with only 35% saying it was good or very good, 17·9% saying it was poor or very poor and 43·6% saying "average". Operatives rated compliance at 31·8% in the good range, and employers 37·3%. "Fairness" was highly rated, with 54% thinking the rules fair to operatives (10·6% disagreeing) and 53·5% thinking them fair to employers (9% disagreeing).

Questions were also asked to rank JIB functions. The dismissals and disputes procedure received overwhelming support, with 76·5% thinking them important or very important, and a tiny 2·9% disagreeing. There was even higher support for wage determinations and related terms and conditions (90% importance, only 2·1% against). Also strongly endorsed were welfare benefits (88·9%); health and safety (87·7%); industrial relations advice (73·3%); administration of apprentice training (80·5%); adult training (67·5%); and monitoring the National Working Rules (76·8%). More doubtful, but still majority support for a controversial area, was "guidance on the use of agency labour" (59·5%).

Regarding the dismissals procedure, there were some signs of confusion, probably caused by the continuing revocation of the previous exemption from the employment tribunal arrangements. 50·9% thought that the JIB should have its own dismissals procedure, with 41·5% favouring the same arrangements as other industries. The employers were more favourable (55% to 38·9%), whereas the operatives were exactly divided (45·1% either way). However, only 42·9% were familiar with the procedure (employers 51·9%, operatives 30·4%) but, for those who had actually been involved in it (only 11·3%), there was general support for how it works.