Trade union boss warns Reeves against trading workers rights for economic growth
A senior trade union boss has warned Rachel Reeves that the Labour government will face stiff opposition if she tries to water down workers rights or suppress pay rises.
Steve Wright, the recently elected general secretary of the Fire Brigades Union (FBU), told The Independent he was alarmed by Keir Starmer invoking the policies of Margaret Thatcher in describing his approach to economic growth.
The Labour-affiliated FBU played a key role in ensuring that the party leadership stuck to its promise to include a workers' rights package in its manifesto under previous general secretary and former TUC president Matt Wrack.
But following Ms Reeves speech this week on economic growth, in which she backed a third runway at Heathrow, and confirmation by her and the prime minister that all policies will need to deliver economic growth, alarm bells have rung over the potential impact on workers' rights.
Mr Wright said: "The FBU welcomes the chancellor's assurance that there will be no scaling back of the Labour government's employment rights legislation.
'However, it was concerning to see the prime minister use a media intervention about the government's growth plans to invoke the policies of the Thatcher government.
'The FBU was at the forefront of the fight back against Thatcher's attacks on workers' rights and jobs, all of which were continued by successive Tory governments up until and including that led by Rishi Sunak.'
Sir Keir yesterday came under pressure from Tory leader Kemi Badenoch over the union reform and workers' rights package in the employment bill as she claimed it would undermine economic growth.
But Mr Wright insisted: 'The full and swift delivery of the Labour government's employment rights Bill is critical to growing the economy.
'A properly paid workforce that is better protected against unfair dismissal and has more secure employment is critical to delivering greater growth.
'With the bill due to pass through parliament in a matter of weeks, the government must ensure the legislation on workers' rights is in place much faster than the planned timeframe of autumn 2026.'
Claims have been made that Ms Reeves had previously told business leaders she would consider allowing zero-hours contracts to continue.
But Mr Wright insisted that the 'exploitative' contracts and additional protection against unfair dismissal must come into force by this summer at the very latest.
He said: 'The full delivery of the Labour manifesto commitment on workers' rights must be reflected in substantial pay rises for firefighters and all other workers.'
With the possibility that Ms Reeves will need to find savings in public expenditure, he also sent a warning over the potential impact on pay.
He said: 'The statutory living wage must also be increased to well over £15 per hour by the time the employment rights bill becomes law.
'The Labour government will only achieve its ambitious growth plans if it acts swiftly to place more money in the pockets of workers in secure jobs.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South Wales Argus
27 minutes ago
- South Wales Argus
Urgent action needed to break down barriers for disabled
Jenny Rathbone led a debate on the Senedd equality committee's report on tackling the disability employment gap, which found too many people face unnecessary barriers. The gap, which is the difference of employment rates between disabled and non-disabled people, stands at 31 per cent in Wales and has consistently been higher than elsewhere in Britain. Ms Rathbone said: 'We are running out of time. We must get on with it now. This is not about pay slips and productivity – it is about independence, dignity, equality of opportunity and what matters so much to the wellbeing of the individual and of society as a whole.' The Labour politician, who chairs the equality and social justice committee, told the Senedd: 'We need action this day and we need a wrecking ball to the barriers.' Conservative Altaf Hussain warned that 26 per cent of employed disabled people have not received any reasonable adjustments despite the right being enshrined in the Equality Act 2010. He pointed to research showing the average cost of adjustments was £75, saying: 'We know conclusively it's not expensive to treat disabled people properly but barriers, sadly, still exist.' Plaid Cymru's Sioned Williams warned UK ministers' proposals to cut benefits, including personal independence payment, will have a 'cataclysmic' impact on disabled people. She said: 'The specific barriers that disabled people face in accessing employment, identified in our report, must be addressed before changes to eligibility and support for disabled people are implemented.' Responding to the debate on June 11, Jane Hutt said ensuring disabled people can participate fully in society is one of the key values of the Welsh Government. She said: 'We want an inclusive approach to employment that supports disabled people to have equitable access to fulfilling and fair work.' Wales' social justice secretary highlighted an ongoing consultation on a draft 10-year disability rights plan which has been criticised for lacking concrete targets. Pressed for a timeline on incorporating the UN convention, which was an unambiguous commitment in Labour's 2021 manifesto, Ms Hutt did not provide any such timeframe.
Western Telegraph
35 minutes ago
- Western Telegraph
Wales 'shortchanged' by UK Government, says Plaid Cymru
Heledd Fychan led a debate on June 11 following chancellor Rachel Reeves' announcement on the UK Government's spending review, which sets department budgets. Calling for fairer funding, Plaid Cymru's shadow finance secretary warned that future governments in Wales will always be constrained by the whims of Westminster. Ms Fychan said: 'Wales continues to be shortchanged by Westminster and disproportionately affected by many of the decisions taken. How we are funded is fundamentally flawed and does not meet the needs of our population.' She added: 'I find it frankly insulting that we're supposed to celebrate and be grateful for whatever funding is offered, even when it falls considerably short of what is owed.' 'It's like being owed money and being happy and grateful when you receive only 10% of that money due. You'd say 'Thanks', but you'd also question 'Where's the rest?'' The Plaid Cymru politician called for an economic fairness bill to replace the 'outdated' Barnett formula, the mechanism used to allocate additional funding to Wales. She called for a wealth tax, greater powers to create new income tax bands – as in Scotland – and an increase to the Welsh Government's borrowing powers. Ms Fychan also urged the UK Government to end the 'cruel' two-child benefit cap and plug a £72m gap in the Welsh budget from costs associated with national insurance. She described an announcement of £445m over 10 years for rail as 'nowhere near enough', with Wales still £4.15bn 'short' of the consequential funding due from the HS2 project. Labour's Joyce Watson said the spending review provides nearly £5bn extra for Wales, with an average of £22.4bn a year allocated to the Welsh Government between 2026/27 and 2028/29. She warned public services took an 'absolute battering' when the Conservatives were in power, saying she had had enough of moaning from opposition benches. Turning her ire towards the Plaid Cymru benches, she told the Senedd: 'If I offered my children a few sweets and they didn't feel it was enough, they might have a tantrum. It sounds a bit like that to me…. And that's your attitude all the time: moan, moan, moan.'
The National
an hour ago
- The National
The Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse constituency, explained
The late Christina McKelvie's winning margin over the Labour candidate in the seat was 12.6% at the 2021 election, which sounds healthy enough – but that was achieved in the context of a record-breaking national landslide for the SNP, when Scottish Labour were trailing by more than 26 points across the country. To win Thursday's by-election, Labour wouldn't need to be anywhere close to a Scotland-wide lead over the SNP. Trimming the SNP's national lead to 13 points would, on a uniform swing, be enough to push Labour ahead in the constituency. Consequently, this is a by-election that would have been unwinnable for the SNP during most of 2024. And as a reminder, the constituency overlaps with the Westminster seat of Hamilton and Clyde Valley, which was easily captured by Labour at last July's General Election by a 22-point margin. READ MORE: Scottish Labour by-election candidate flounders after dodging question 11 times By March of this year, when it became clear the by-election would be taking place, the SNP had re-established themselves and held an 11-point Scotland-wide lead on the Holyrood constituency ballot in a poll conducted by Survation – but even that was a small enough gap to leave Labour as slight favourites to gain Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse. Since then, there has been a poll showing the SNP with a huge 21-point national lead, which raised hopes that the by-election was taking place at a favourable time, and that the SNP might come away with a comfortable victory. But the most recent poll at the weekend from Norstat had the national lead at 14 points, which is consistent with only a razor-thin SNP advantage over Labour in Hamilton. History and symbolism are the other reasons why the SNP might have preferred this contest to be taking place somewhere else. Hamilton was the scene of their greatest-ever by-election success in 1967, when Winnie Ewing stunned Labour by winning on a mammoth 38% swing. The historical importance of that triumph can be explained very simply: prior to 1967, the SNP had never had any parliamentary representation (apart from for a few short weeks in 1945), but since then they have never been without parliamentary representation. And yet they've learned the hard way that returning to the scene of their most famous win has its dangers. In 1978, another Hamilton by-election came up, and the SNP put forward Margo MacDonald as a big-name candidate, in the hope and expectation that she would repeat Ewing's feat. Instead, there was a swing against the SNP, allowing Labour's George Robertson to romp home decisively. The symbolic turning of the tide in the very place where it had all started for the SNP helped to generate considerable momentum for Labour, and contributed to the SNP's massive setback in the 1979 General Election. If a third dramatic upset in a Hamilton by-election is reported by the media on Friday, that will be bad news for the SNP because by definition it will mean they have lost. And despite the arithmetic firmly suggesting Labour should be in the hunt on Thursday, most of the chatter from the ground suggests that if the SNP face any real threat, it comes from Reform UK. A win for Farage's Unionist ultras would undoubtedly qualify as a by-election spectacular on a par with Hamilton 1967, and would invite comparisons that the independence movement might prefer to avoid. However, the latest polling suggests that Reform are still well behind the SNP nationally, which means that the Nationalists ought to be able to fend off the challenge – especially as there doesn't seem a reason to believe that Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse is unusually favourable terrain for Reform. READ MORE: Nigel Farage splashes 'unimaginable cash' on private jet jaunt to Scotland There was no real sign of that at the General Election last year, when Reform took 8% of the vote in Hamilton and Clyde Valley – only a smidgeon better than their Scotland-wide showing of 7%. Constituency-level estimates from the 2016 EU referendum also suggest that the local vote for Leave may actually have been a tad lower than the Scotland-wide figure of 38% – and it's known there is still a strong correlation between support for Brexit and support for Reform. So despite the jitters, most of the indicators suggest the SNP are the likely winners on Thursday. But parliamentary by-elections are strange bubble environments in which voters often behave in a way they normally wouldn't. The only safe assumption is that almost anything is possible.
