Unions could be sued if workers go on strike
The Government has announced that unions could be sued if they do not provide minimum levels of fire, ambulance and rail services, under planned anti-strike laws. Voluntary agreements would cover other sectors including health, education, other transport services, border security and nuclear decommissioning.
Under the plans, first proposed by Liz Truss’s government, minimum service levels will be set for fire, ambulance and rail services, with the government consulting on the adequate level of coverage for these sectors, to address concerns that disruption to blue-light services puts lives at risk. However, it will also reserve the power to impose minimum service levels in the other three public services – health, education and nuclear – although ministers expect to reach voluntary agreements in these areas and say they would only impose the anti-strike law if this were not possible.
Government sources confirmed that union members who were told by their employers to work under the minimum service requirement but refused to do so could lose their jobs. The new law will also back employers bringing an injunction to prevent strikes or seeking damages afterwards if they go ahead.
Unions have condemned the restrictions and threatened legal action, while the Labour party says it would repeal them. Business Secretary Grant Shapps said the measures were being introduced to "restore the balance between those seeking to strike and protecting the public from disproportionate disruption". He said the legislation would be introduced shortly, in the current Parliamentary session. It will apply in England, Scotland and Wales. The business department also called on the unions to cancel upcoming strikes in a bid to resolve the current disputes "constructively through dialogue".
In an impact assessment published last year, the transport department said the move could push unions into striking more frequently as a way to put pressure on employers. The same document also warned that it could lead to workers taking more non-strike industrial action, such as refusing to work overtime, which could still cripple certain industries.
Labour's deputy leader Angela Rayner described the minimum-service proposals as "unworkable and unserious from a dead-end government". She said:
"At every stage the government has sought to collapse talks and throw in last minute spanners. Now the prime minister is wasting time on shoddy hurdles that even his own transport secretary admits won't work.”
Ministers have said they will consult on and then set an "adequate level of coverage" for the fire and ambulance services and on the railways. For the other sectors, the government says it expects to be able to reach voluntary agreements.
Responding to the news, the TUC has said that the Prime Minister should concentrate on fixing public services, not attacking public sector staff and says that the proposed legislation would make it harder for disputes to be resolved.
TUC General Secretary Paul Nowak said:
"This is an attack on the right to strike. It’s an attack on working people. And it’s an attack on one of our longstanding British liberties. It means that when workers democratically vote to strike, they can be forced to work and sacked if they don’t. That’s wrong, unworkable, and almost certainly illegal. The announcement offers nothing more to help with this year’s pay and the cost of living crisis. The only offer of talks is for next year. But we need to resolve the current disputes and boost the pay of public sector workers now. The Prime Minister said yesterday his door is always open – if he’s serious, he should prove it. He should take up my offer to get around the table to improve this year’s pay and end the current disputes.
“There is a world of difference between promises of jam tomorrow with technical discussions about pay review bodies, and proper negotiations on pay in the here and now. Our public services are already deep in a staffing crisis. But this government has gone from clapping key workers to threatening them with the sack if they take lawful action for a pay rise. It will only push more people away from essential jobs in public services, harming the whole nation. Trade unions will fight this every step of the way. We’re inviting every worker – public and private sector, and everyone who wants to protect British liberties -to be a part of our campaign to defend the right to strike.”
UNISON assistant general secretary Jon Richards said:
“Ministers should focus their time and energy on rebuilding trust and relationships with workers, not silencing and suppressing them. Minimum staffing levels in the NHS would be welcome by the public and health staff every single day of the week. That could avoid people being left lying in agony on A&E floors or dying in the backs of ambulances. The NHS is on its knees because of record vacancies. The idea of limiting legal staffing levels to strike days and threatening to sack or fine health workers at such a time shows proper patient care isn’t ministers’ priority. The government is picking ill-advised fights with NHS employees and unions to mask years of dismal failure to tackle pay and staffing. There’s a much simpler way for Rishi Sunak to put a swift end to strikes in the NHS and other sectors. That’s to allow his ministers to begin direct pay negotiations immediately to boost wages, retain experienced staff and improve patient care. The Prime Minister’s spoken of dialogue with unions. But talks must be about pay itself, not how the pay review body process works. UNISON will be examining these proposals and considering how to respond, including any appropriate legal challenge.”
related content
