Up until now we haven't had a category dedicated to industrial relations but we've decided we are going to need it. Union militancy is back and in the public sector. Eric Pickles MP has just released a press statement noting the return of secondary picketing:
The UNISON’s official strike blog reports: “Tewkesbury - Successful picket again today GMB and non members refusing to cross picket line. Management accusing GMB of secondary picketing yesterday and threatening to bring police in today to clear highway! Depot closed again today.”
Eric Pickles MP, Shadow Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government, said: “Like a rerun of Life on Mars, under Gordon Brown the country seems to be returning to the bad old days of the 1970s. The prospect of a return of secondary picketing is an ominous development. With the rubbish piling up in the street and essential public services closed, this is deeply worrying for hard pressed council taxpayers."
As George Bridges has already argued, the unions may be the most effective unofficial opposition to the next Conservative government's ambitions.
I do not understand the concern. We need to somehow reduce the public workforce by 1 million so if they do not want to work then get rid of their jobs.
That said I would also advocate improving the rewards for productivity in the public sector and sharing the proceeds of efficiency between those willing to work and the tax payers.
Posted by: HF | July 17, 2008 at 17:46
HF, do not those in the Public Sector already get the rewards of longer holiday entitlement and better pensions that most people in the real economic world get already?
I have several friends who work in the civil service in three different departments as well as some in local government, and they certainly don't work as hard or as long as all the people are know in real world.
First thing a Conservative Government should do is increase the retirement age to 65 for everyone who is under 50 in the civil service to bring it in line with people outside of their little bubble. We should also freeze all recruitment.
Posted by: Andrew Hemsted | July 17, 2008 at 18:37
It may offend many of us that public sector workers gets better pensions, more secure jobs and tend to work fewer hours than folk in the public sector. It is certainly offensive that some councils have had to increase taxes just to fund pensions. But would a Conservative government be ready - in the furst flush of power - for a long-drawn out and bloody battle with Unison and Unite? A battle that would damage public services and which we are not guaranteed to win.
Posted by: SimonC | July 17, 2008 at 18:48
"I do not understand the concern. We need to somehow reduce the public workforce by 1 million so if they do not want to work then get rid of their jobs." ~HF
Many of the public sector strikers are the front-line staff, where any future "culling" is unlikely to be. The front-line is vital and any pay rises are presently being hoovered up by unnecessary personnel and quango's. We have to be more careful at saying who ever would be likely to go when the idea of the "Post Burecratic Age" is to keep the frontlines at full capacity while running a largely electronic frame work "In the back".
With secondary picketing being of serious concern we should be prepared to face up the the second Thatcherian Era we have to prepare for. The horrible thing is it won't be the pits we may have to horror of crushing again.
It'll be the state itself.
Posted by: James, Swadlincote | July 17, 2008 at 20:41
Let's start with getting rid of everone with "Diversity" and "Climate Change" in their job titles or descriptions. That will save about £1bn and clear out all the liberal paresites in on go.
Posted by: Saxred | July 17, 2008 at 21:15
Let's start with getting rid of everone with "Diversity" and "Climate Change" in their job titles or descriptions. That will save about £1bn and clear out all the liberal paresites in on go.
Yes, I think tower hamlets spend about £20million on Climate Change Diversifiers, although I think these things are not done by the liberals but to fool the liberals.
Any authoritarian measure they want to put through they simply say it in the name of a liberal cause and they lap it up!
Just like the unions take an issue that their members/collegues of members wouldn't really disagree with and then use them as bulk to promote their hate filled agenda and hold the country to ransom until everyone is suffering... it makes them feel big.
Posted by: Norm Brainer | July 17, 2008 at 21:52
Imagine if the big Public Sector unions went on strike: and nobody actually noticed.
Oh, isn't that what's actually happened these last couple of days?
Posted by: Tanuki | July 17, 2008 at 22:05
Well, if Britain returns to Life on Mars under a Labour Govt. We need to ensure that we restore sanity to collective bargaining organisations otherwise we will be stuck in this war of attrition.
We can cut out public funding of the unions introduced under Brown (union comms allowances)
End the closed shop system which is effectively operating - many new employees are confronted on their first day at work with a shop steward dishing out membership forms at 9:05am and breathing over new starts while they fill it in. This needs to stop. There should be a 'cooling off' period of a month before membership of a union can progress.
There should be a limit to the effects a strike can have, a maximum number of employes which can be on strike at any one time to reel back the trend of 'super unions' like Unision, who have millions of members and can therefore cause chaos.
Union membership should need to be renewed annually via a special website, ending the corralling of employees onto the union books and quietly direct debiting them for years and years. By making it on-line or via post to domestic address, this will avoid intimidation of people to join and stay joined.
Monthly membership fees should be clearly shown as deductions on the wage slip.
We should introduce law that forces arbitration for strikes which involve more than 10,000 workers... and finally...
We should introduce a law that makes it illegal for organisations to donate to political parties. Only individual donations from private individuals should be allowed. The unions will scream at this, but we can make it possible for employers to deduct party contributions from pay packets directly instead.
Posted by: oberon Houston | July 18, 2008 at 07:20
We need a major reduction in the number of public sector workers.
We can achieve that quicker through working with those groups that are co-operative than with those who are not.
We need to share the proceeds of efficiency gains to reward good behaviour.
Posted by: HF | July 18, 2008 at 08:13
Earlier this month I pointed out how the Labour Party were making more money out of the trades union movement than for a very long time. An accusation that is now backed up by official figures from the Electoral Commission which show that whilst Labour only got 53% of funding from the union movement under Tony Blair between April 2002 and April 2003 since January 2008 that figure in the first half of this year has risen to 82%.
Yet speaking on BBC Newsnight on July 16th 2008 Government Minister Pat McFadden (known to many as Postamn Pat) said that "there will be no sale of party policy to the unions."
Just who does Mr. McFadden think he is kidding?
Only last week it was confirmed in The Times that any company seeking to win government contracts to deliver public services is being told that they must demonstrate how they "would build good relations" with the unions as part of a contract bid.
Reading between the lines I believe that this in itself proves that the government is now abusing its position.
For example, these government contracts amount to a value of £115 billion which is 6% of government GDP and the employment of 1.2 million people.
When one considers that 490,000 of Unison's members contribute £3 a year to the Labour Party the evidence is clear for all to see.
You don't need to be a mathmetician to realise that at a time when unions are currently staving off the Labour Party from bankruptcy by underwriting their accounts 1.2 million new subscriptions would mean £3.6 million to Labour.
I believe that this in itself amounts to clear evidenec that the trades unions are receiving policy favours in return for them bankrolling the Labour Party.
At the same time these same very unions are causing the worst disruption to public services since the Winter of Discontent in 1978-1979.
As if we have not seen the worst yet driving instructors walked out on July 16th, local government workers walked out on July 16th and 17th, coastguards are walking out on July 18th and Passport staff are walking out on July 23rd.
Surely one has to ask why this whole charade can be allowed to go on?
Surely one has to question the links between the Labour Party and the trades unions both now and in the future?
Surely one has to ask what right these left wingers have to hold law-abiding and tax-paying citizens to account?
And surely one has to ask why these people have devloped so much power since 1997?
I believe that these greedy unions need putting back in their place.
Margaret Thatcher did it to a huge extent.
Despite the hype and spin Tony Blair failed to live up to her legacy.
Which is why David Cameron has to take the leadwhen he becomes Prime Minister by banning all links between unions and the Labour Party, by making every public sector employee sign no-strike agrrements before taking up office and by outlawing strikes completely in front line public services.
It may sound harsh but when it comes down to the wire there is a famous old saying that would sum all of its up: "If it hurts it will work!"
Posted by: Geoffrey G Brooking | July 18, 2008 at 09:38