Saturday, August 20, 2022
How not to conduct industrial relations
If it has done just one service to humanity, the current contest to be the next prime minister has exposed the Tory leadership for a politically-bankrupt bunch of chancers, intent on adopting the most extreme views in an effort to appeal to the backwoodsmen and women who will determine their fate.
Any thoughts of human rights, international law, equality, concern for the poorest in our society, even the health service has been cast aside as the two candidates seek to carve out a distinct right wing position for themselves that would make Donald Trump blush.
When it takes Michael Gove to point out that Liz Truss’s refusal to offer more support over rising energy bills and to just focus on tax cuts marks a “holiday from reality”, then we know that things have gotten out of control.
When it takes Michael Gove to point out that Liz Truss’s refusal to offer more support over rising energy bills and to just focus on tax cuts marks a “holiday from reality”, then we know that things have gotten out of control.
Add onto that the revelation that Liz Truss personally supported cuts to the NHS, arguing the service “cannot be put on a pedestal” in an article in which she also criticised the “inexorable” rise in doctors’ pay, then we know that the front-runner is going to be a bigger disaster than even Boris Johnson.
Sunak has not fared much better, admitting in a leaked video that, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, he took money from deprived urban areas in order to give it to other parts of the country. His campaign gaffes are becoming notorious, but the reason he is trailing in this contest is because he raised taxes to pay for expenditure during the pandemic, something that is not tolerated in the backwoods, where self-interest rules.
And now it seems that the malaise is spreading to other cabinet members. Truss has already said that she will introduce new laws to 'prevent militant unions crippling the rail network within a month of taking office', a nod to Thatcher and the miners' strike if ever I saw one. She may find, however, that times have changed significantly, and she will be taking on more than she can chew. Meanwhile, the current Transport Minister is taking his cue from that promise.
The Guardian reports that Grant Shapps has said that railway changes at the heart of some strike action will be imposed by legislation if workers do not agree to new deals:
Shapps said he would have to enact legislation referred to as a “section 188” to force through some of the measures. He said: “What I do know and I can say for sure is if we can’t get this settled in the way that we are proposing, which is ‘please put the deal to your membership’, then we will have to move to what is called a section 188; it is a process of actually requiring these changes to go into place so it becomes mandated.
“That is the direction that this is moving in now.”
Shapps said work practices needed to be updated, adding: “If we can’t get those modernisations in place we will have to impose those modernisations but we would much rather do it through these offers actually being put to their members.”
He gave an example of an offer made to RMT members of an 8% pay rise over two years, which was reportedly blocked by senior members of the union, including the RMT’s general secretary, Mick Lynch, without putting it to members.
Shapps said: “It’s time for union bosses to get out the way.”
The latest strike comes as the Tory leadership frontrunner, Liz Truss, unveiled plans for a radical shake-up of labour laws. The plan, drawn up by Truss, includes introducing minimum service levels on critical national infrastructure to keep trains, buses and other services running.
New laws would be introduced in parliament within a month of taking office if her leadership campaign is successful. She will raise ballot thresholds to make it harder for strike action to take place across all sectors.
A cooling-off period would also be introduced so unions can no longer strike as many times as they like in the six-month period after a ballot.
In fact the current strike action has been mandated by a membership ballot and is lawful. Further more there is public sympathy for all the industrial action currently underway.
People have seen that Tory mismanagement of the economy, combined with the effects of Brexit and, of course, the Ukraine war, has led to inflation hitting double figures. Energy prices are rising out of sight of the average person's ability to pay them, and that, and other costs are driving businesses to the wall.
The case for decent pay rises is unanswerable, as is the need for ministers to do much more to help. This confrontational approach to industrial relations will make things worse, for the country and the government. Do they really want to take that path?
Sunak has not fared much better, admitting in a leaked video that, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, he took money from deprived urban areas in order to give it to other parts of the country. His campaign gaffes are becoming notorious, but the reason he is trailing in this contest is because he raised taxes to pay for expenditure during the pandemic, something that is not tolerated in the backwoods, where self-interest rules.
And now it seems that the malaise is spreading to other cabinet members. Truss has already said that she will introduce new laws to 'prevent militant unions crippling the rail network within a month of taking office', a nod to Thatcher and the miners' strike if ever I saw one. She may find, however, that times have changed significantly, and she will be taking on more than she can chew. Meanwhile, the current Transport Minister is taking his cue from that promise.
The Guardian reports that Grant Shapps has said that railway changes at the heart of some strike action will be imposed by legislation if workers do not agree to new deals:
Shapps said he would have to enact legislation referred to as a “section 188” to force through some of the measures. He said: “What I do know and I can say for sure is if we can’t get this settled in the way that we are proposing, which is ‘please put the deal to your membership’, then we will have to move to what is called a section 188; it is a process of actually requiring these changes to go into place so it becomes mandated.
“That is the direction that this is moving in now.”
Shapps said work practices needed to be updated, adding: “If we can’t get those modernisations in place we will have to impose those modernisations but we would much rather do it through these offers actually being put to their members.”
He gave an example of an offer made to RMT members of an 8% pay rise over two years, which was reportedly blocked by senior members of the union, including the RMT’s general secretary, Mick Lynch, without putting it to members.
Shapps said: “It’s time for union bosses to get out the way.”
The latest strike comes as the Tory leadership frontrunner, Liz Truss, unveiled plans for a radical shake-up of labour laws. The plan, drawn up by Truss, includes introducing minimum service levels on critical national infrastructure to keep trains, buses and other services running.
New laws would be introduced in parliament within a month of taking office if her leadership campaign is successful. She will raise ballot thresholds to make it harder for strike action to take place across all sectors.
A cooling-off period would also be introduced so unions can no longer strike as many times as they like in the six-month period after a ballot.
In fact the current strike action has been mandated by a membership ballot and is lawful. Further more there is public sympathy for all the industrial action currently underway.
People have seen that Tory mismanagement of the economy, combined with the effects of Brexit and, of course, the Ukraine war, has led to inflation hitting double figures. Energy prices are rising out of sight of the average person's ability to pay them, and that, and other costs are driving businesses to the wall.
The case for decent pay rises is unanswerable, as is the need for ministers to do much more to help. This confrontational approach to industrial relations will make things worse, for the country and the government. Do they really want to take that path?
Comments:
<< Home
The answer to your question is yes. The Tories actually believe that they will get more votes if the strikes continue than if they are settled. That is why Shapps and co are refusing to allow management to make anything like a decent offer to railway workers.
As an aside, I think the parliamentary party are plain wrong in what they are saying about strikes.
Post a Comment
As an aside, I think the parliamentary party are plain wrong in what they are saying about strikes.
<< Home
