logo
Unions are in grave place and need help from Labour

Unions are in grave place and need help from Labour

The National5 days ago
June 6 was the 25th anniversary of the introduction of the statutory union recognition mechanism.
This procedure provides the means by which unions can compel employers by law to recognise them for collective bargaining on behalf of their members' terms and conditions if certain support thresholds are met.
The introduction of the statutory union recognition mechanism was the key part of Tony Blair's 'New' Labour 'fairness at work' policy. It was put on the statute book in the form of the Employment Relations Act 1999.
READ MORE: 'Beyond shameful': Harvie urges SNP to explain secret talks with Israeli diplomat
In both the manifesto, from which Labour won a massive landslide majority of 179 seats, and then in the Fairness at Work White Paper 1998 which preceded the Act, the party pledged to introducing a statutory right to union recognition 'where a majority of the relevant workforce wishes it'.
'Simples', as the catchphrase of the meerkat, Aleksandr Orlov, of the Compare the Meerkat advert has it. Except that nothing is ever that 'simples' with New Labour. The pledge was watered down and qualified in a whole host of ways at the behest of big business.
For example, all the votes for union recognition in a ballot of the workforce bargaining group had to also equate to 40% of all those entitled to vote. In other words, non-voters were counted as No voters. Meanwhile, the bargaining unit chosen by the union had to be deemed to be 'compatible with effective management'.
In the 25 years since June 6, 2000, just 1473 applications had been made for union recognition, an average of only 60 a year.
Many of these were re-applications because some 20% of the applications were withdrawn before being subject to the first part of the adjudication.
The reasons were because the unions had made mistakes in their applications or because employers had deliberately recruited more workers in order to reduce the relative level of support for union recognition.
And, to boot, only a third of total applications were actually successful in gaining union recognition in the end. It's not rocket science to think that a more complex and challenging procedure with more thresholds to be passed has something to do with these poor outcomes.
READ MORE: How long before the 'rebel' Labour MPs jump ship to Corbyn's party?
It's also not rocket science to think that the statutory union recognition mechanism is an inversion of the 'fairness not favours' promise Blair made.
Under pressure from the right-wing media like the Daily Mail not to cave in to the unions – as if that was ever likely – Blair promised 'fairness not favours', hence, the nomenclature of 'fairness at work'.
But the favours were given to big business, and fairness was not given to the unions and their members.
Not doing the Labour thing is what Labour do, as Gerry Hassan put it in the Sunday National at the end of March this year.
Karl Marx's remark that 'history repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce' is extremely apposite when it comes to Keir Starmer's Employment Rights Bill. It is the flagship piece of legislation emanating from Labour's New Deal for Working People. The bill is expected to go on the statute book in the autumn after gaining Royal Assent but many of its measures will no be implemented until the autumn of 2026. Again very 'New' Labour.
Where the tragedy of the Employment Relations Act 1999 becomes the farce of the soon-to-be Employment Rights Act 2025 is precisely on the issue of union recognition.
Significant reforms to union recognition and collective bargaining are set out in the legislation but the crucial weakness is that Labour is not also providing a robust right for unions to have access to workers for recruiting and organising.
It simply gives them the right to ask a government body, the Central Arbitration Committee, for this access, but this government body has no powers of enforcement of access rights over employers. The most it can do is fine employers.
READ MORE: Westminster will never feel any heat from the FM's hot air and bluff
This then undermines the significant improvements being made to the right to union recognition through lowering the levels of worker support needed to gain it from an employer.
In other words, the legislation gives with one hand but takes away with the other.
Unions are in a grave position at the moment. The latest data, for 2024, shows that union density – the proportion of all workers in a union – has now fallen to an all-time low of 22%. In the private sector, which is much bigger than the public sector, density is just 12%.
Unions need to be shown favours in order to allow them to perform their historic role of creating fairness in the economy.
Labour has shown itself again not to be the party capable of doing that.
Gregor Gall is a visiting professor of industrial relations at the University of Leeds and author of the 'Mick Lynch: The making of a working-class hero' (Manchester University Press, 2024).
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Why Afghan refugees are being deported from Iran to face Taliban rule
Why Afghan refugees are being deported from Iran to face Taliban rule

ITV News

timean hour ago

  • ITV News

Why Afghan refugees are being deported from Iran to face Taliban rule

More than a million Afghan refugees have been thrown out of Iran and sent back to their own country, where many face an uncertain fate. ITV News International Affairs Analyst Rageh Omaar reports on the world's unseen refugee crisis. Iran has hosted millions of Afghan refugees for decades. Many of them have known nothing else, other than their lives in Iran. In the past few weeks, this all came to an end. First came the formalities of the paperwork - sending them back to the country they or their parents fled. Then came the shock of confronting the emotional reality of being forcibly deported. Deportations of illegal migrants are a global topic - especially in the West. However, the stark number of Afghans being deported from Iran is startling: 1.5 million sent back so far this year. So why is Iran doing this now? In June this year, Israel conducted a devastating strike on Iran's critical military and nuclear facilities and assassinated senior Iranian military officials. Iran's suspicion is that Israeli intelligence recruited desperate and poor Afghan refugees to be agents, and guide Israeli strikes to their targets. A video produced by the Iranian military shows what they say is a bunker near a military site - with Afghans hiding inside it. So now many, like Maryam, are being forced to return to a country ruled by the Taliban. Mayram told ITV News that Iranian security forces were not allowing Afghans to live or work there. She has returned to Afghanistan and is searching for a home for her family. Her story is the same for millions of Afghans, especially women, returning to a country where there are virtually no humanitarian agencies. And many female returnees are not allowed to be educated or go outside unaccompanied by a male relative. This came after years of Western intervention in Afghanistan to be rid of the Taliban so that refugees could return safely, and not under duress.

Government warns asylum seekers they may be made homeless if they refuse to move out of migrant hotels into alternative accommodation - as current bill costs taxpayers £5.7million per day
Government warns asylum seekers they may be made homeless if they refuse to move out of migrant hotels into alternative accommodation - as current bill costs taxpayers £5.7million per day

Daily Mail​

timean hour ago

  • Daily Mail​

Government warns asylum seekers they may be made homeless if they refuse to move out of migrant hotels into alternative accommodation - as current bill costs taxpayers £5.7million per day

Asylum seekers could be made homeless if they refuse Home Office demands to move accommodation, the Government has warned. In a bid to stop migrants rejecting alternative housing without a valid reason, ministers will bring in new rules to tackle non-compliance. A 'Failure to Travel' policy will ensure illegal migrants who are moved from hotels to other 'suitable' accommodation must take it. If they refuse they could lose their housing and support, the Home Office said. Around 100 asylum seekers refuse to move accommodation each week, the Mail understands, and ministers currently have no powers to force them. Under the Conservatives, the Government threatened to remove housing and support from those who refused to move to the Bibby Stockholm barge, which is no longer in use. Labour's new plan will mirror the Tory rules, but will be applied more widely to other forms of accommodation. The 'firm but fair' policy is part of the Government's drive to end the use of expensive hotels to house asylum seekers. Chancellor Rachel Reeves has vowed to put a stop to the practice by 2029 - in a move she says will save £1billion a year. Currently, taxpayers are forking out £5.7million per day to house asylum seekers in hotels - at an average cost of £118.87 per person per night. Other accommodation, such as shared houses, is estimated to cost just £15 per night. Ministers are looking to buy tower blocks and former student accommodation to house migrants in a bid to reduce the hotel bill. More than 106,000 asylum seekers were in receipt of taxpayer-funded support as of March this year, including 32,000 in hotels. Asylum seekers are given free accommodation and a weekly allowance if the Home Office believes they would otherwise be destitute. The majority of those arriving on small boats qualify. Minister for Border Security and Asylum, Dame Angela Eagle, said: 'We inherited an asylum system on the brink of collapse - mismanaged, under strain, and costing the public a fortune. We are getting a grip. 'We are working to close hotels, restore order, and put fairness and value for money at the heart of our asylum system. This government is making those necessary decisions to protect the taxpayer and uphold the integrity of our borders. 'These reforms to the Failure to Travel policy are another example of this government's action to transform the asylum accommodation system and crack down on those who abuse our system, so it operates fairly and saves the taxpayer money.' The Mail this week reported how asylum seekers are using taxpayer handouts to fund their gambling habits. Home Office data, released to the PoliticsHome website, showed pre-paid cards given out to pay for basics including food and clothing are being used in gambling venues such as bookmakers, amusement arcades and even casinos.

Keir Starmer accused of failing in his mission to 'smash the gangs' as figures show only a tiny fraction of small boat migrants are prosecuted - as the Tories say the smugglers have 'never had it easier'
Keir Starmer accused of failing in his mission to 'smash the gangs' as figures show only a tiny fraction of small boat migrants are prosecuted - as the Tories say the smugglers have 'never had it easier'

Daily Mail​

time2 hours ago

  • Daily Mail​

Keir Starmer accused of failing in his mission to 'smash the gangs' as figures show only a tiny fraction of small boat migrants are prosecuted - as the Tories say the smugglers have 'never had it easier'

Keir Starmer was last night accused of failing in his mission to 'smash the gangs'. Figures show that just a tiny fraction of migrants crossing the Channel are being brought to justice. Since Labour 's leader became Prime Minister last July, only 446 people have been charged with any immigration offence, figures published by Parliament have revealed. Over the same period, a record 43,309 migrants have reached Britain after crossing the Channel in more than 700 dinghies. This comes despite Sir Keir vowing to tackle the illegal migration crisis by scrapping Rwanda deportations and focusing on tougher law enforcement instead. The number of those charged includes some offences not related to Channel crossings, so the number of small boat migrants prosecuted was even lower. There were 153 people charged between last July and this June with the key offence of 'assisting entry of illegal immigrant', which is intended to be used against those piloting each vessel, but Labour insisted the numbers have increased on their watch from 118 in the previous 12 months. Tory justice spokesman Robert Jenrick said: 'Keir Starmer boasted he would smash the gangs, but the gangs are laughing at him. They've never had it easier and crossings are up 50 per cent as a result. We're now heading towards being the illegal immigration capital of Europe. 'It's clear Starmer is incapable of stopping the boats and his backbenchers don't want him to. The country cannot go on like this. 'Those that arrive illegally from the safety of France must be swiftly deported so the message is clear: if you break into Britain, you will not get a life here.' He obtained the new figures in Parliamentary written questions after asking ministers how many gangs had been smashed since Labour came to power. In a Commons clash this month, he asked Shabana Mahmood: 'Can the Justice Secretary [Ms Mahmood] tell us how many individuals have been prosecuted for smuggling people in on small boats?' She replied: 'I do not have those figures directly to hand, but I am sure that if they are available, I can write to him with the details.' He accused her of not having 'a clue' about 'one of the biggest challenges facing our country right now' but she shot back 'had he paid any attention, he would know that prosecutions do not fall to the Ministry of Justice; they are dealt with independently through the Crown Prosecution Service'. Latest Home Office figures show another 1,387 people have reached Britain in small boats since last Thursday, taking the total for the calendar year so far to 23,891. A Labour spokesman said: 'Robert Jenrick can reinvent himself as many times as he likes, but he cannot rewrite history. 'With Labour in office, more people were charged with assisting unlawful immigration in our first year in government than in the entire time that Jenrick was in charge of the Immigration System. 'Indeed, we charged more people with that offence in our first three months than he managed in his last six. 'But much more important than Robert Jenrick's failures in the past are the ones he is making now, and we don't just mean screwing up this attempted attack story against Labour. 'If he was truly serious about prosecuting dangerous people smugglers, he would not have voted against our new law to criminalise people who endanger the lives of others in the Channel, and would instead be supporting us to take that action against those who cause women and children to suffocate and drown on overcrowded small boats.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store