The government has put forward its most sinister plan yet for workers rights

Anyone interested in surveillance issues should be deeply worried by the latest proposal

 

The right to strike is a fundamental human right, recognised across the democratic world. It has played a crucial role in helping workers – whether they are union members or not – to secure better conditions and livelihoods, both for themselves and their families.

While many countries rightly celebrate human rights and access to justice, our government is busy working on reforms aimed at shutting down dissent and weakening people’s rights at work. We already have some of the strictest laws on strikes in the industrialised world.

The new proposals in the Trade Union Bill are designed to make it more difficult for unions to function effectively and do what they do best – helping people at work. They intend to make it much harder for ordinary women and men to take strike action.

The proposals intend to turn every abstention in an industrial action ballot into a vote against strike action – skewing the legitimate results. They allow employers to install agency staff during a strike to provide cover in an attempt to make any action ineffective, introduce new excessive scrutiny and sanctions on picketing, and add new disclosure and surveillance powers for all industrial dispute-related activity. All of this is designed to frustrate a workplace voice being heard.

One example of the disproportionate new measures proposed is the excessive new reporting requirements on campaign activity. The proposals require unions to publish picket and protest plans 14 days prior to any action. This must include when and where the union is holding a picket or protest, how many people will be involved, whether there is a plan to use loudspeakers or banners, and alarmingly, what the likely content of any websites or blogs might be.

The plan may also have to include details of when and how unions plan to use wider social media during this time. No other organisation is asked to provide details of social media campaign activity in advance. Such invasive additional scrutiny has no justification.

This is clearly excessive monitoring of legitimate campaigning activity, especially when what might count as official union communication is considered. It’s not clear, for example, whether someone whose Twitter profile recognises their voluntary union role would be seen as running a personal or an organisational account.

It would be entirely disproportionate for unions to face an injunction preventing a picket, or claiming damages simply because they failed to list a Twitter account used by a union member. These measures are simply designed to hinder legitimate union activity including campaigning.

Proposed new requirements on pickets are perhaps the most sinister plans, with picket supervisors (and potentially all members of a picket) having to identify themselves by name, wear an arm-band, and obtain a letter of authorisation that they must have on them at all times during the picket, ready to show on demand to ‘anyone who reasonably asks to see it’.

In light of recent blacklisting and illegal surveillance of trade union activities this should be hugely concerning to anyone interested in civil liberties issues.

It is already absurd that, under these proposals, a union, if challenged on any of the above, could be fined £20,000 or even lose its statutory immunity from liability simply because someone forgets to wear an armband. Especially worrying is the fact that a picket supervisor has to show paperwork that identifies them to any passerby who asks. This could encourage security firms working for the employer or anti-union group to intimidate the supervisor.

These proposals have no rational justification, and have already attracted censure from the Regulatory Policy Committee – an independent body appointed by the government which verifies the costs and savings of proposed laws to businesses and civil society.

The Bill is all about making life tough for unions and the working people they represent just for the hell of it and because ministers think they can get away with it. It is an attack on the civil liberties and human rights of all union members. No other civil society organisation in the UK will be obliged to comply with such requirements.

Just the ability to picket and protest, taken on its own, is a fundamental human right that is safeguarded by ILO Convention 87 (Article 3), the European Social Charter (Article 6 (4)) and the European Convention on Human Rights (Articles 10, 11 and 14).

It will not have passed the government by that similar proposals in Turkey were successfully challenged in the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), which declared the law incompatible with the country’s human rights obligations.

The ECtHR may have a mandate to intervene against these proposals if a case comes before it. It is no coincidence that this government has developed what looks like a deliberate and calculated plan to assault workers’ rights, and undermine the court at the same time.

Dave Prentis is general secretary of UNISON

Want to read more posts like this? Then *sign-up to Look Left* and make sure you have the facts to rebut right-wing spin 

As you’re here, we have something to ask you. What we do here to deliver real news is more important than ever. But there’s a problem: we need readers like you to chip in to help us survive. We deliver progressive, independent media, that challenges the right’s hateful rhetoric. Together we can find the stories that get lost.

We’re not bankrolled by billionaire donors, but rely on readers chipping in whatever they can afford to protect our independence. What we do isn’t free, and we run on a shoestring. Can you help by chipping in as little as £1 a week to help us survive? Whatever you can donate, we’re so grateful - and we will ensure your money goes as far as possible to deliver hard-hitting news.

12 Responses to “The government has put forward its most sinister plan yet for workers rights”

  1. stevep

    I wonder if this proposed legislation will apply to rich, landed groups like Farmers for action when they protest outside and blockade food producers and supermarkets? Thought not. The wealthy look after themselves, forming their own cartels and collectives outside of the rules and laws that apply to the rest of us.

    Incidentally, Thatcher had MI5 monitor and spy on trades union officials and activity back in the 1980`s as part of the mad bat`s “defeating the enemy within” campaign.
    Even they were aware of having gone too far.

    Britain and Europe are changing as we speak.

    The filthy far-right propaganda rags are losing their state-sponsored grip fast, The first Labour leader in decades who will speak for the people of Britain is about to be elected, The real human cost of the refugees fleeing their homelands is being understood and acted upon, the UK is getting restless for change even four months since the election.

    The Tories and their puppet masters aren’t going to have it as easy as they think, The EU in/out referendum is going to hit them badly, whichever way the vote goes. Their slender majority will naturally decline to the point where they will seek to cut deals with other parties. Best of luck.

    Despite the best efforts of the state propaganda machinery, Britain still wants it`s welfare state and NHS and secure jobs for those who work, still wants a sense of community and togetherness and above all, still values fairness.

    Collectivity is the only way people as a whole and especially workers, can have a genuine say in their lives.
    A collective voice to talk to and bargain with powerful wealthy interests and Corporations and indeed, governments who represent them.
    That`s why they seek to undermine collectivity, they want fascism, not democracy.

    Collectivity and the right to withdraw your labour is indeed a fundamental human right and any attempt by this government to tamper with that right should be seen as another step on the road to fascism and stoutly resisted.

    They push the good citizens of Britain too far at their political peril.

  2. Selohesra

    If unions had used their strike weapon a bit more sparingly – (how often do the railways, underground & teachers strike each year?) there might be more public sympathy for the unions. As it is strikes no longer seem a last resort and much of the public would like to see their wings clipped.

  3. Johnny

    How a bit more sympathy for under paid workers then? The fact is that if you not defend yourself you get walked all over. By losing wages do you think that people strike for fun or just to be awkward ? Look at what as happened to the people who are not in unions or stick up for themselves. They are working zero hours for a pittance

  4. Dave Stewart

    The number of work days lost to industrial action is at an all time low right now so your argument is simply wrong.

    See the ONS data series on page 6 of the document below.

    http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171776_411531.pdf

  5. stevep

    Employers don`t use the weapons they have at their disposal sparingly – redundancy, dismissal, zero hours contracts, employing agency staff, reducing pensions, cutting sick pay etc. I could go on, but I fear it is the old maxim that is appropriate here: “There are none so blind than those who will not see”.

Comments are closed.