The Conservative and Unionist government in Westminster appear hell bent on confrontation with workers in key industries, some of whom have never in their history had a strike. The Royal College of Nursing in its entire 106 year history has never been involved in a strike, until now. Time and again the government have refused to meet with the unions to discuss their issues, including pay, claiming “it is not governments role to intervene.”
Given the fact that National Health (NHS) workers, ambulance staff and nurses, are employees employed in a service funded in part by the tax payer and is a nationalised employer - meaning that the government either directly or, cunningly through the use of “NHS Trusts” indirectly, is the employer - I would be interested what exactly the role of government is? Time and again the government through the Secretary of State for Health, Steve Barclay, have refused to meet with the unions representing nurses and ambulance staff to discuss their grievances. If this is the case, that it has nothing to do with Barclay why do the country need a well-paid Secretary of State for Health?
Nurses and ambulance staff in England, Wales and the six-counties are striking over pay which has not kept up with inflation. Nurses in Scotland are due to join the strike in the new year as the Royal College of Nursing (RCN) rejected a pay offer of 7.5% which is, in real terms below the rate of inflation and, therefore, a pay cut. As responsibility for health care in Scotland is a devolved matter the Secretary for Health there, Humza Yousaf, has spoken to the unions on several occasions but the Secretary of State for Health for the UK as a whole, Steve Barclay, refuses to do so. The Scottish Government may have wished to offer more money to their nurses but as they rely on cash from Westminster. Perhaps they had no more. This is supposition but may be another case for Scottish independence.
Nurses and ambulance staff in England, Wales and the six-counties are striking over pay which has not kept up with inflation. Nurses in Scotland are due to join the strike in the new year as the Royal College of Nursing (RCN) rejected a pay offer of 7.5% which is, in real terms below the rate of inflation and, therefore, a pay cut. As responsibility for health care in Scotland is a devolved matter the Secretary for Health there, Humza Yousaf, has spoken to the unions on several occasions but the Secretary of State for Health for the UK as a whole, Steve Barclay, refuses to do so. The Scottish Government may have wished to offer more money to their nurses but as they rely on cash from Westminster. Perhaps they had no more. This is supposition but may be another case for Scottish independence.
Barclay has refused several times to talk to RCN General Secretary, Patricia Cullen, herself a nurse, and on one occasion having left the union leader out in the corridor for half an hour then reportedly walked out of the office leaving her with a junior member of staff. He maintains that pay has “nothing to do with him” and if that is the case can I ask, what is the point having a Secretary of State for Health in the first place? If solving problems in the health service are not his concern, what exactly are? The RCN have offered to attend mediation if the government are willing and Patricia Cullen has been on television on more than one occasion with offers of compromise, all falling on deaf government ears. Government policies regarding health workers is undermining the NHS. Morale among nurses is at an all time low as many cannot afford to live, let alone look after and care for the sick. British nurses are amongst the lowest paid in Europe and unless something is done to rectify this there will be a mass haemorrhaging of nurses.
Is this an attempt by the Conservative and Unionist government in Westminster to de-unionise the NHS? Is it another plan to not very covertly move another step towards the privatisation of the NHS? The RCN have never been involved in a strike in their 106 years of existence, the kind of trade unions Barclay and his cronies like. Now the RCN have, reluctantly, taken the more traditional form of trade union action, strike action. The government does not like it yet still takes a belligerent attitude. Ambulance staff are also traditionally moderate but have been forced, again through government intransigence, to take to the picket line and, like their colleagues the nurses have agreed emergency cover. The government have been using troops to staff ambulances. Army paramedics are doing some of the work usually carried out by ambulance staff but hardly to the same standard. Civilians are not soldiers on a battle field! This action of using the army has echoes of the 1926 General Strike in Britain when the government of Stanley Baldwin had the Organisation for Maintenance of supplies (OMS). This was made up of the bourgeoisie, strike breakers and troops and had been in place for some time and was designed to break the strike. Are we witnessing a repeat of these tactics?
Thatcher may be long dead but Thatcherism is alive and kicking. These belligerent tactics adopted by the British Government towards their own workers stink of those adopted by Thatcher and her henchman, Ian MacGregor, back in 1984. Again, is history about to repeat itself? The public appear, and rightly so, to be behind the nurses and ambulance staff and long may this understanding attitude last. They know that without the nurses and, equally important, ambulance crew’s daily life for the population would be even more perilous than it is in general.
On the railways and London Underground, members of the Rail and Maritime Transport (RMT) union have been in dispute for some time. A series of strikes have been held and, as with the health workers, the Secretary of State for Transport, Mark Harper, refuses to meet with RMT General Secretary, Mick Lynch despite countless offers. The rail network across Britain has come to a standstill as the staff at Network Rail which is responsible for the infrastructure, track etc, across Britain are on strike. This is despite the RMT in Scotland having reached a separate agreement with Scotrail over pay. The network still closes when Network Rail staff are out. The strike is about poor pay, working conditions and growing concerns over job insecurity. Once again, pay is not in line with the rate of inflation and any pay offer below that rate is in fact a pay cut. The strikes affect thirteen rail companies and London Underground and are likely to continue until the government come to their sense, if they have any. Mark Harper, like his counterpart in Health Steve Barclay, maintains that the union should talk to the rail companies as they are the employer.
Is this an attempt by the Conservative and Unionist government in Westminster to de-unionise the NHS? Is it another plan to not very covertly move another step towards the privatisation of the NHS? The RCN have never been involved in a strike in their 106 years of existence, the kind of trade unions Barclay and his cronies like. Now the RCN have, reluctantly, taken the more traditional form of trade union action, strike action. The government does not like it yet still takes a belligerent attitude. Ambulance staff are also traditionally moderate but have been forced, again through government intransigence, to take to the picket line and, like their colleagues the nurses have agreed emergency cover. The government have been using troops to staff ambulances. Army paramedics are doing some of the work usually carried out by ambulance staff but hardly to the same standard. Civilians are not soldiers on a battle field! This action of using the army has echoes of the 1926 General Strike in Britain when the government of Stanley Baldwin had the Organisation for Maintenance of supplies (OMS). This was made up of the bourgeoisie, strike breakers and troops and had been in place for some time and was designed to break the strike. Are we witnessing a repeat of these tactics?
Thatcher may be long dead but Thatcherism is alive and kicking. These belligerent tactics adopted by the British Government towards their own workers stink of those adopted by Thatcher and her henchman, Ian MacGregor, back in 1984. Again, is history about to repeat itself? The public appear, and rightly so, to be behind the nurses and ambulance staff and long may this understanding attitude last. They know that without the nurses and, equally important, ambulance crew’s daily life for the population would be even more perilous than it is in general.
On the railways and London Underground, members of the Rail and Maritime Transport (RMT) union have been in dispute for some time. A series of strikes have been held and, as with the health workers, the Secretary of State for Transport, Mark Harper, refuses to meet with RMT General Secretary, Mick Lynch despite countless offers. The rail network across Britain has come to a standstill as the staff at Network Rail which is responsible for the infrastructure, track etc, across Britain are on strike. This is despite the RMT in Scotland having reached a separate agreement with Scotrail over pay. The network still closes when Network Rail staff are out. The strike is about poor pay, working conditions and growing concerns over job insecurity. Once again, pay is not in line with the rate of inflation and any pay offer below that rate is in fact a pay cut. The strikes affect thirteen rail companies and London Underground and are likely to continue until the government come to their sense, if they have any. Mark Harper, like his counterpart in Health Steve Barclay, maintains that the union should talk to the rail companies as they are the employer.
The problem here is that the parameters in which these companies can operate, like how much they can put on the table in terms of a pay offer, are dictated by Harper! Therefore, the logical move is, as has been offered time and again by the RMT, for Mick Lynch and Mark Harper to sit over the table and negotiate in traditional fashion. Unfortunately, Harper refuses to do this claiming it is not his concern how the rail companies and the unions conduct their business. Echoes of Barclay in the health Service dispute. Why do Britain have these lame duck secretaries whom make up something called a Cabinet?
More than 100,000 postal workers are in dispute with the now (since 2014) privatised Royal Mail. The Communication Workers Union (CWU) have carried out a series of strikes with more planned. The union are, rightly so, concerned over management plans to cut up to 10,000 jobs, make changes to the employee’s pension scheme, which was fought long and hard to get, and pay which, once again, is well below that of the rate of inflation. With inflation officially at 11.1% the offer by management of just 9% is in fact a 2.1 percent pay cut. This offer was also subject to the union agreeing to “restructuring” meaning, in reality, job cuts. Dave Ward the General Secretary of the CWU said; “the stubborn refusal by management to treat their employees with respect” has aggravated the situation.
More than 100,000 postal workers are in dispute with the now (since 2014) privatised Royal Mail. The Communication Workers Union (CWU) have carried out a series of strikes with more planned. The union are, rightly so, concerned over management plans to cut up to 10,000 jobs, make changes to the employee’s pension scheme, which was fought long and hard to get, and pay which, once again, is well below that of the rate of inflation. With inflation officially at 11.1% the offer by management of just 9% is in fact a 2.1 percent pay cut. This offer was also subject to the union agreeing to “restructuring” meaning, in reality, job cuts. Dave Ward the General Secretary of the CWU said; “the stubborn refusal by management to treat their employees with respect” has aggravated the situation.
The government again refuse to get involved here as the Royal Mail is a private concern but, and here’s the punch, it is still His Majesty’s Mail and they are still His Majesty’s Government! Is there any logic to this?? Ever since privatisation the management at Royal Mail have been provoking disputes with the union at local and national level. Postal delivery staff traditionally do not cross picket lines of other workers on strike. I can remember as a shop steward in London organising my own shop's picket line early one morning and the postman, much to our applause, refused to deliver the company mail. Management at Royal mail have tried, and failed, to force delivery staff to cross picket lines. The workers stood up to this intimidation and management at local level gave up. Is this another attempt to undermine and eventually derecognise the CWU this time at national level?
The three industries, health, rail, and postal workers are key unionised areas of employment where there is still a will to fight back. The government in Britain do not like any form of resistance, they thought they had beaten the trade unions out of sight a couple of decades ago. They were obviously wrong I am pleased to say. That said, the events of the last year and government policy towards trade disputes do have an uncanny feel of déjà vu. Back in 1984 Margaret Thatcher planned and executed the miner’s strike which lasted one year. The miners were let down by the TUC who, in time honoured tradition, have been silent again in these series of disputes.
The three industries, health, rail, and postal workers are key unionised areas of employment where there is still a will to fight back. The government in Britain do not like any form of resistance, they thought they had beaten the trade unions out of sight a couple of decades ago. They were obviously wrong I am pleased to say. That said, the events of the last year and government policy towards trade disputes do have an uncanny feel of déjà vu. Back in 1984 Margaret Thatcher planned and executed the miner’s strike which lasted one year. The miners were let down by the TUC who, in time honoured tradition, have been silent again in these series of disputes.
British Prime Minister today, Rishi Sunak, has hinted at outlawing strikes in certain industries which disrupt the country. By the country he does of course mean the top five percent of wealth owners and their profits, not the ninety five percent of wealth creators, the working-class. If Sunak does go ahead with this para fascist law, making strikes illegal the unions, all of them must be prepared to fight. This will mean breaking the law, a law which will be designed to crush once and for all organised labour. The chances are Sunak won’t do it or he will not get such a law through parliament but just in case learn the lessons of the past and have contingency plans in place as a last resort.
 |
Caoimhin O’Muraile is Independent Socialist Republican and Marxist |
No comments