Latest news with #ScottishMinisters
The Independent
02-06-2025
- Business
- The Independent
Union urges for ministers to help with Scottish Water pay dispute
Scottish Water workers have begun one week of strike action in a row over a pay deal. Members of GMB Scotland and other unions are striking from Monday for seven consecutive days at the publicly-owned organisation, with a mass rally planned in Glasgow on Wednesday. Scottish ministers have been urged to get involved in the dispute, which began in June 2024. Workers at GMB Scotland backed industrial action after the water company reduced the terms of a pay offer that had already been rejected, according to the union, which claimed that executives received record bonuses last year. Unionised staff voted against an offer of 3.4% or £1,400 covering the last nine months as the company changed the date for annual rises from July to April. The company branded industrial action 'unnecessary' and said seven offers have been made since June 2024. Scottish Water's latest offer would see an average pay increase of around 7% over two years (2024/25 and 2025/26), in addition to a 3.5% yearly salary increase. It called for 'sensible' negotiations from the unions, rejecting suggestions that emergency works would be impacted. In a marginal majority, 51% of Unison workers employed by the water supplier voted to reject the pay offer, and 49% voted to accept. The turnout was 86%. GMB said 60% of its members voted against the offer, and 40% chose to accept, on a turnout of 78%, while statistics were not provided by Unison. The strikes will conclude on June 8, and follow two days of industrial action in April. GMB Scotland organiser Claire Greer wrote to secretary for net zero Gillian Martin, raising concerns about the failure to resolve the dispute. Ms Greer said: 'It is impossible to know whether Scottish Water is playing games or simply inept, but the relentless progress of this dispute towards industrial action could have been halted at any time with open and straightforward negotiations. 'Instead, we have been given a series of needlessly complicated offers, one worse than the last, as managers spend more time attempting to undermine staff unions than delivering a fair offer. 'It needs to stop and if Scottish Water do not know how, ministers must explain public money is being risked by a dispute that should have been settled months ago. 'The public deserves better and workers deserve a fair pay offer.' Peter Farrer, chief operating officer at Scottish Water, said: 'This week's industrial action is unnecessary. It will mean union members losing valuable wages and add extra costs to the business which are ultimately paid for by customers. 'We invited the joint trade unions to talk over the weekend but unfortunately they refused to meet without preconditions. 'Given how close the vote against our latest pay offer was, we felt a resolution was possible and would be welcomed by all our colleagues. 'It is now time for the joint trade union leadership to return to the table with a sensible solution that ends this dispute. 'In the meantime, we have robust plans in place to maintain essential services should the trade unions press ahead with their strike action.'
Spectator
29-04-2025
- Politics
- Spectator
The Maggie Chapman saga is a new low for the Scottish Parliament
The Scottish Parliament's equalities committee has voted against removing Green MSP Maggie Chapman as deputy convenor following her attack on the Supreme Court. At a rally in Aberdeen in the wake of the judgment in For Women Scotland Ltd v. The Scottish Ministers, in which Lord Hodge found for a unanimous panel that the term 'sex' in the Equality Act 2010 referred to biological sex, Chapman, an outspoken advocate of gender ideology, decried 'bigotry, prejudice and hatred that we see coming from the Supreme Court'. This prompted the Faculty of Advocates to call for Chapman's resignation as deputy convenor of the Holyrood committee responsible for equalities legislation, human rights and civil justice. The legal body accused the Green MSP of an 'egregious breach' of the Judiciary and Courts (Scotland) Act 2008, which states that MSPs 'must uphold the continued independence of the judiciary.' Chapman has been defiant, saying that she appeared at the rally not in her capacity as deputy convenor but as an MSP representing her trans and non-binary constituents.
The National
25-04-2025
- Politics
- The National
EHRC issues guidance on single-sex spaces after Supreme Court ruling
It comes after the UK Supreme Court sided with the campaign group For Women Scotland, saying that a gender recognition certificate does not entitle a trans person to be considered their acquired sex under the 2010 Equality Act. In the act, the court ruled, sex is biological. Earlier this week, the Scottish Government delivered its response to the ruling and called on the EHRC to issue updated guidance on the impact of the court's decision. On Friday evening, the commission did so, publishing an 'interim update on the practical implications of the UK Supreme Court judgment'. We have shared an interim update on the practical implications of the Supreme Court's judgment in For Women Scotland v Scottish Ministers: — EHRC (@EHRC) April 25, 2025 The EHRC said: 'We know that many people have questions about the judgment and what it means for them. Our updated guidance will provide further clarity. While this work is ongoing, this update is intended to highlight the main consequences of the judgment. 'Employers and other duty-bearers must follow the law and should take appropriate specialist legal advice where necessary.' The EHRC said that the ruling means that in UK law 'a trans woman is a biological man' and a 'trans man is a biological woman'. It went on: 'In workplaces, it is compulsory to provide sufficient single-sex toilets, as well as sufficient single-sex changing and washing facilities where these facilities are needed. 'It is not compulsory for services that are open to the public to be provided on a single-sex basis or to have single-sex facilities such as toilets. 'These can be single-sex if it is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim and they meet other conditions in the act. However, it could be indirect sex discrimination against women if the only provision is mixed-sex.' READ MORE: Scottish schools must have single-sex toilets, judge orders The EHRC went on: 'In workplaces and services that are open to the public: trans women (biological men) should not be permitted to use the women's facilities and trans men (biological women) should not be permitted to use the men's facilities, as this will mean that they are no longer single-sex facilities and must be open to all users of the opposite sex. 'In some circumstances the law also allows trans women (biological men) not to be permitted to use the men's facilities, and trans men (biological woman) not to be permitted to use the women's facilities. 'However where facilities are available to both men and women, trans people should not be put in a position where there are no facilities for them to use. 'Where possible, mixed-sex toilet, washing or changing facilities in addition to sufficient single-sex facilities should be provided. 'Where toilet, washing or changing facilities are in lockable rooms (not cubicles) which are intended for the use of one person at a time, they can be used by either women or men.' It said schools 'must provide separate single-sex toilets for boys and girls over the age of 8', adding: 'It is also compulsory for them to provide single-sex changing facilities for boys and girls over the age of 11.' The EHRC further said: 'Membership of an association of 25 or more people can be limited to men only or women only and can be limited to people who each have two protected characteristics. It can be, for example, for gay men only or lesbian women only. 'A women-only or lesbian-only association should not admit trans women (biological men), and a men-only or gay men-only association should not admit trans men (biological women).' It added: 'There are rules about when competitive sports can be single-sex, which we intend to address separately in due course.'
The National
22-04-2025
- Politics
- The National
Green MSP 'breached law with attack on Supreme Court gender ruling'
Maggie Chapman, an MSP for North East Scotland and deputy convener of Holyrood's Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee, sparked anger after addressing a trans rights protest held in Aberdeen over the weekend. She told activists opposing the ruling that sex in the 2010 Equality Act is biological: 'We say 'not in our name' to the bigotry, prejudice and hatred that we see coming from the Supreme Court and from so many other institutions in our society. Not in our name, never in our name.' READ MORE: Labour 'set to oversee highest child poverty levels ever,' Keir Starmer warned The Faculty of Advocates, a historic body which represents Scotland's lawyers, has now intervened with a damning letter to Chapman accusing her of breaching the Judiciary and Courts (Scotland) Act 2008 – under which MSPs must uphold the independence of the judiciary. The faculty's dean, Roddy Dunlop, also wrote to SNP MSP Karen Adam – the convenor of Holyrood's Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee – asking her to consider Chapman's position as her deputy. Dunlop said the Faculty of Advocates was fulfilling 'its duty to speak out in defence of the judiciary when it comes under attack: especially given the constitutional restrictions which prevent the judiciary from defending itself publicly'. Roddy Dunlop is the dean of the faculty of advocates (Image: Faculty of Advocates) He went on: In light of the above, it was with considerable concern and dismay that we read reports of Ms Chapman MSP addressing a public gathering in the wake of the recent ruling in For Women Scotland v Scottish Ministers. In video footage which is circulating widely online, she is seen to condemn what she claims is the 'bigotry, prejudice and hatred that we see coming from the Supreme Court'. 'These are appalling comments to come from any elected politician. They are all the worse when they come from someone who holds the post of deputy convenor of the Scottish Parliament's Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee. 'It really should not require to be said, but the Supreme Court – indeed, all judges – are in post to apply the law. They do not take sides. They decide without fear or favour, consistently with the judicial oath. 'For Ms Chapman to claim that they were swayed by 'bigotry, prejudice and hatred' is outrageous. We are talking about the apex court of these islands, in this instance made up of a bench which included two of Scotland's finest legal minds, as well as two women. No sensible person could read their dispassionate analysis and conclude that they were swayed by such matters.' Dunlop said that Chapman's comments 'not only' breached the 2008 act, but that they 'go further than that, and create a risk of danger to the Members of the Court themselves'. 'This behaviour is irresponsible and reprehensible,' he added. Dunlop cited previous moments when the faculty had issued statements on political events, such as when the Daily Mail ran its 'enemies of the people' headline about judges ruling on Brexit, or when the Tories attacked 'activist' lawyers. He went on: 'This is no different. Indeed, in attributing such emotive descriptions as 'bigotry, prejudice and hatred' to the judges of the Supreme Court, Ms Chapman's attack is far worse. READ MORE: 'A woman is an adult female': Keir Starmer breaks Supreme Court silence 'In these circumstances, we respectfully request Ms Chapman to reflect on her words, and whether they allow her to properly discharge her responsibilities as deputy convenor in line with the impartiality requirements of the guidance on committees issued by the Scottish Parliament. 'As to the former, we suggest that a fulsome and swift apology is warranted. As to the latter, and notwithstanding that the requirements apply only whilst acting in the capacity of convenor, we suggest that her comments are not compatible with her role as deputy convenor, or, arguably, her continued membership of the committee.' Dunlop concluded: 'Faculty very much regrets having to write this letter. However, Ms Chapman's words have left it with no choice. Her behaviour in this instance is utterly beyond the pale.' The Scottish Greens have been asked for comment.
