Make no mistake: the new trade union bill is a deeply intolerant tirade against working people and the labour movement. Ignore the bland ministerial statements and read the damn thing – it is deliberately designed to outlaw most strikes and other forms of legitimate industrial protest while severing the financial link between union members and their historic political voice, the Labour party.
Despite extensive experience of industrial action in most sectors of the economy I cannot in all honesty think of any justifiable explanation for the Tory prejudice against strikes and other forms of legitimate industrial protest. With very rare exceptions, industrial protest arises from genuine frustration with the normal processes for resolving disputes that is the joint responsibility of unions and management. In general it works very well although this fact is totally unreported. Yet occasional breakdowns that lead to strikes make headlines. Indeed the number of days lost through strike action is at historic lows, so one has to ask – what is the problem? The answer is not about strikes, it is about about unions, working people and the labour movement.
If the objective is to have better turnouts in ballots then why not make voting compulsory or let unions hold controlled workplace ballots? I would like better turnouts too but I cannot force members to vote, I have to send them a legal document through the post and hope they return it.
If the objective is to reduce strikes in essential public services then why not introduce arbitration instead? In fact most public sector strikes in recent years could have been avoided but employers, not unions, refused arbitration and chose strikes instead.
It is perhaps conveniently overlooked that union members have no obligation to strike even if the majority of their colleagues vote for it. It is also usually forgotten that unions are required to ensure that sufficient workers are still working to avoid any public danger. But strikes do cause disruption and inconvenience and why shouldn’t they? Why should the only choice workers have when faced with a bad employer be to resign their job?
In case anyone believes the government is not trying to ban strikes, their impact assessment published with the draft bill says they expect two-thirds of public service industrial action ballots will fail the proposed new tests. I think it will be even higher, but on the government’s own assessment that is conclusive proof of the real intention. Even for those ballots that do pass the thresholds, employers will be at liberty to break the strikes by using agency workers. Anyone with industrial experience would realise the explosive nature of such a provision. Remember Wapping?
I fear that further political alienation, anarchic industrial relations and widespread civil disobedience with unlawful strikes and violent clashes will be the consequences if the anti-trade union bill as it stands becomes law. As the bill and related consultations are examined we will find out if the government is genuinely trying to be fair, as ministers claim, or whether behind the soft words they are really hellbent on destroying the working and political labour movement. A common cause for unions, the Labour party and all democrats.
———————————
Brian Strutton is national secretary of the GMB. He tweets @BrianStrutton
———————————