Anti-strike law: Shapps has the power to set minimum levels of service | strike

[ad_1]

Business Secretary Grant Shapps will be able to set statutory minimum service levels for a range of public services, in terms of a new anti-strike bill that Labor has condemned as likely to increase stoppages.

Revealing details of the proposed law, Shapps said that ministers will consult as the bill progresses on the minimum levels of services required for fire, ambulance and transport services, including railways.

The actions, which could lead to the dismissal of employees, will also affect health, education, border security and nuclear decommissioning. The hope for these areas, Shapps said, is to reach the minimum agreed-upon levels of service, “and that means we don’t have to use that much force on the bill.” Again, these are not specified.

The bill’s explanatory notes, which were published after Shapps spoke, gave no detail on the minimum level of services required. Under the law, the business minister will be given powers to “make regulations providing for levels of service where there are strikes in relevant services”.

Employers must consult with unions about what this means in practice before striking, the bill says. It also asserts that employees who violate minimum service levels will lose employment protection measures and can be fired.

Although the government insisted the planned law, which would apply to England, Scotland and Wales but not Northern Ireland, did not constitute an attack on the right to strike, unions called it draconian and more likely to exacerbate rather than constrain industrial disputes. their influence.

Mick Lynch, general secretary of the RMT rail union, described the bill as “an attack on human rights and civil liberties which we will oppose in the courts, parliament and in the workplace”.

Unite leader Sharon Graham called it “another dangerous tactic from a government that must negotiate to resolve the current crisis it has caused.”

Introducing the yet-to-be-published bill in the House of Commons, Shapps singled out the unions representing ambulance crews, who struck again on Wednesday, for not setting minimum levels for national service.

Shapps said, “While we fully believe in the right to strike, we have an obligation to protect the lives and livelihoods of the British people.” He said the new ambulance strike “will result in patchy emergency care for the British people – this cannot continue”.

Shapps added: “We do not want to use this legislation. But we must ensure the safety of the British public.”

The Unison union dismissed as a “lie” Shapps’ description of the ambulance strike arrangement as meaning there would be insufficient coverage.

Ambulance staff will stage their industrial strike throughout the day to fill the gaps, with none out for more than 12 hours and many doing so for as little as six hours.

Archie Bland and Nimo Omer take you through the top stories and what they mean, for free every morning of the week

Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online advertisements, and content funded by third parties. For more information, see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

In her response in the House of Commons for Labor, the party’s deputy leader, Angela Rayner, described the bill as a distraction from the broader problems of understaffing and low wages that had led to strikes in many public areas.

Reiner said one of her constituents had recently died while waiting for an ambulance: “It wasn’t on a strike day. It’s because of the catastrophic mess we’re seeing in the system under this Tory government. His government isn’t offering any solution because they created the problem.”

Reiner said Shapps “knows the NHS can’t find the nurses they need to work on the wards”. “He knows that trains don’t run even on strike days, and that’s the shortage of staff. So how can he seriously think that firing thousands of key workers will not only plunge our public services into more crisis?”

Reiner said the legislation showed that “a government lacks ideas, time, and is rapidly running out of sticky plasters; a government that politicizes the lives of nurses and teachers because they cannot afford the necessary cooperation and negotiation.”

We need negotiations, not legislation. So, when will the minister do his job? “

[ad_2]