The lobbying bill is a gift to union bashers

Spread the love

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/11/lobbying-bill-gift-to-union-bashers-blacklisting

Given what we know about blacklisting, the lobbying bill’s demands on union membership lists pose a sinister threat

The government’s lobbying bill may be in trouble, but its attack on the confidentiality of union membership records continues in the Lords on Monday. To avoid what would have been a stonking defeat, ministers last week announced a “pause” on part two of this troubled bill, which would restrict free speech for groups other than political parties during an election campaign. The huge opposition it has provoked from across the political spectrum forced the government into this tactical retreat.

But this is no time to celebrate. The government has merely delayed debate in the House of Lords until December on part two – and it has brought forward to later on Monday the attacks on trade union membership contained in part three of the bill. They still aim to finish the bill by Christmas. Debating it in a different order is no victory for campaigners.

No one other than unions might be thought to be interested in plans for tying up union membership systems in blue tape. But there are wider questions at stake about how much personal data should be open to the state and its organs. The bill requires unions to appoint independent membership “assurers” from a list provided by government. These assurers, plus the government-appointed union regulator (the certification officer), and any other investigators appointed, will all have access to union membership records.

Any employer or political opponent of trade unionism will be able to make complaints about membership, which have to be investigated. As the extent of blacklisting in the construction industry has been revealed, members are naturally concerned at union lists being made open.

The government is unable to say why this section of the bill is needed. There is already a strong legal requirement on unions to have robust membership lists. Unions need efficient systems to collect subscriptions and they know that if there is anything dodgy about the membership in a strike ballot, the employer will win an injunction.

Freedom of information requests have established that no one has called on the government to introduce such a measure. And, according to its website, the Certification Office has received no complaints from trade union members relating to registers since 2004. On top of that, between 2000 and 2004 only six complaints were received – five of which were dismissed and no declaration was issued for the sixth.

Continue ReadingThe lobbying bill is a gift to union bashers

Privatisation, a very British disease

Spread the love

http://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/joe-guinan-thomas-m-hanna/privatisation-very-british-disease

JOE GUINAN and THOMAS M. HANNA

Britain is an extreme oddity regarding privatisation: nowhere else in the advanced world is there such a willingness to sell everything that isn’t nailed down. Time and again the British public is ripped off and sold out by its leaders.

Image reads Cameron's Cultural DevolutionA few weeks ago, London was the scene of a heist of spectacular proportions. We may never know the full extent of what was stolen, but the indications are that it was anywhere between £1 billion and an eye-watering £6 billion. Although the robbery was carried out in broad daylight, it is unlikely the money will ever be recovered or the perpetrators brought to justice. This is because they were sitting in some of the world’s largest financial institutions – Goldman Sachs, Barclays, Bank of America and UBS – and acting on behalf of the British government.

Their instrument was the undervaluation of shares in Royal Mail, which with the initial public offering immediately soared from 330p to above 500p. The company was sold at £3.3 billion but in J.P. Morgan’s estimation the real value may have been as high as £10 billion. No wonder the IPO was oversubscribed. It was, as TUC General Secretary Frances O’Grady pointed out, akin to “selling five pound notes for four quid.” The biggest private shareholder is now the hedge fund TCI, which snagged 5.8 per cent of the company. The principal victim of this daylight robbery is, of course, the British public.

There has been plenty of public and media commentary – and even a little outrage – at this latest instance of the looting of Britain’s dwindling public sector. After all, even Margaret Thatcher was “not prepared to have the Queen’s head privatised.” The sell-off was conducted in the teeth of sceptical public opinion as well as fierce opposition from postal workers, with 96 per cent opposed in a recent ballot. Billy Hayes, General Secretary of the Communication Workers Union, denounced the manner in which a centuries-old public company, returning regular profits to the Treasury, was “flogged on the cheap for no good reason.” Postal workers have voted for industrial action, seeking guarantees on pay and working conditions.

Missing from most of the discussion, however, is any recognition of just how extraordinary all of this is. Business Secretary Vince Cable may have faced some tough questions about the handling of the flotation but it will blow over. No heads will roll. Asset-stripping of the public sector has become a fact of life. Even among the British left, battered by the serial privatisations of the 1980s and 1990s, there is a certain wearied resignation, a sense of going through the motions in the face of the seemingly unalterable order of things.

We should resist this normalisation. Viewed from an international perspective, Britain is an extreme outlier regarding privatisation. In no other advanced industrial country would quite so flagrant a rip-off have been engineered and tolerated. Nowhere else – not even in the corporate-dominated United States – is there such a degree of nonchalance about ownership and control over vital infrastructure and public services. In the UK, the attitude seems to be that if it isn’t nailed down then it is for sale. Privatisation is increasingly the British disease.

From Pinochet to perestroika

Privatisation has been a prominent feature of the British political landscape for decades, but on the basis of an assumed international policy consensus about how to improve efficiency and economic performance. It is true that, since the 1980s, privatisation has been a key instrument in the toolkit of neoliberal globalisation, enforced from Latin America to Asia to Africa wherever the writ of the IMF and World Bank could be made to run. By 2009, 132 of the world’s 500 most valuable corporations were privatised former state enterprises. But within this neoliberal framework, very few countries were actually prepared to go quite so far quite so fast as the UK.

In a 2002 encomium to privatisation, HM Treasury calculated that, all told, between 1980 and 1996 Britain had racked up fully 40 per cent of the total value of all assets privatised across the OECD. This is an astounding figure. Elsewhere, the only remotely comparable experiences occurred in countries – Pinochet’s Chile and the disintegrating Soviet Union – that were undergoing exceptional transitions and in which the rule of law was basically inoperative.

Chile was the original laboratory. Between 1975 and 1989, under the jackboot of the Pinochet regime and at the urging of carpetbagging Chicago school economists, the country implemented two waves of privatisation. Not merely companies nationalised by Allende but a host of older public concerns – including 16 banks and thousands of mines, real estate holdings and agricultural enterprises – were auctioned off to elites at bargain-basement prices.

Given the accolades afforded the “Chilean miracle” by Milton Friedman and others, it is worth noting that the first wave of Chilean privatisation was a major embarrassment. All but five of the banks and many of the other enterprises failed and had to be taken back into public hands. By 1983 the government-controlled portion of the economy again equalled that under Allende, and critics mockingly referred to a “Chicago road to socialism.” (The second wave of privatisation, beginning in 1985, eventually returned many of these firms to the private sector).

Road tested in Chile, privatisation was then exported out across Latin America and worldwide. Under Margaret Thatcher, Britain served as the most prominent conduit and cheerleader. With free market economists again hectoring from the sidelines (see Thatcher’s correspondence with Hayek), all memory of capitalist mismanagement of factories and mines in the interwar years was forgotten as the commanding heights of the economy – electricity, gas, water, steel, civil aviation, telecoms and railways – were delivered up for auction. It was a massive transfer of wealth from public to private interests, marketed to the people with soothing promises of a shareholder democracy.

As with Royal Mail, the brazenness of the theft was stunning. In his magnificent recent book on public ownership, Andrew Cumbers, Professor of Geographical Political Economy at the University of Glasgow, found “considerable evidence that state assets were sold off at remarkably cheap prices.” Shares in BT jumped from 130p at privatisation to £15 by 1999. Railtrack was sold for £1.9 billion, but within two years had soared in value to £8 billion. The rolling stock company Porterbrook Leasing, privatised for £528 million, was re-sold just eight months later for £826 million, while the other two rolling stock companies were subsequently sold for £900 million more than their privatisation price. The architects of privatisation could barely be bothered to disguise what they were up to. Former Chancellor Nigel Lawson went so far as to state in his memoirs that undervaluation was a deliberate government tactic.

Hugely important strategic considerations were at work, as was evident in the subsequent development of the UK economy. Privatisation not only allowed for attacks on the trade unions but also – together with big bang deregulation – contributed to the build-out of London-based capital markets. The £3.9 billion rollout of shares in BT in 1984, for example, was six times bigger than any previous IPO and four times the size of any other capital-raising exercise in the world at the time. In this way, the privatisations of the eighties and nineties helped secure the City’s continuing place as a world financial capital.

In addition, the sale of 2.5 million council houses at a total value of £86 billion – more than all other privatisations combined – helped generate the real estate boom and (as Stephen Wilks notes) ultimately contributed to the property credit bubble. Revenues from the sale of other public assets – totalling £69 billion between 1979 and 1997 – allowed successive Tory governments to maintain public spending while cutting taxes for short-term electoral gain. Leon Brittan insisted that “people always overestimated Mrs Thatcher’s grasp of economics while underestimating her grasp of politics.”

How the Orange Bookers took over the Lib Dems


What Britain now has is a blue-orange coalition, with the little-known Orange Book forming the core of current Lib Dem political thinking. To understand how this disreputable arrangement has come about, we need to examine the philosophy laid out in The Orange Book: Reclaiming Liberalism, edited by David Laws (now the Chief Secretary to the Treasury) and Paul Marshall. Particularly interesting are the contributions of the Lib Dems’ present leadership.

Published in 2004, the Orange Book marked the start of the slow decline of progressive values in the Lib Dems and the gradual abandonment of social market values. It also provided the ideological standpoint around which the party’s right wing was able to coalesce and begin their march to power in the Lib Dems. What is remarkable is the failure of former SDP and Labour elements to sound warning bells about the direction the party was taking. Former Labour ministers such as Shirley Williams and Tom McNally should be ashamed of their inaction.

Clegg and his Lib Dem supporters have much in common with David Cameron and his allies in their philosophical approach and with their social liberal solutions to society’s perceived ills. The Orange Book is predicated on an abiding belief in the free market’s ability to address issues such as public healthcare, pensions, environment, globalisation, social and agricultural policy, local government and prisons.

The Lib Dem leadership seems to sit very easily in the Tory-led coalition. This is an arranged marriage between partners of a similar background and belief. Even the Tory-Whig coalition of early 1780s, although its members were from the same class, at least had fundamental political differences. Now we see a Government made up of a single elite that has previously manifested itself as two separate political parties and which is divided more by subtle shades of opinion than any profound ideological difference.

 

Continue ReadingPrivatisation, a very British disease

Firefighters to hold fourth strike over pensions

Spread the love

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/nov/05/firefighters-union-fourth-strike-pensions

Union members to walk out on 13 November in ongoing row with government over impact of rise in retirement age

Firefighters in England and Wales are to stage a fresh strike in their row with the government over pensions.

Members of the Fire Brigades Union will walk out for four hours from 10am on 13 November. It will be their fourth round of strikes in recent weeks.

The union also announced that it would ballot members for other forms of industrial action, in an escalation of the dispute.

Firefighters walked out on Monday and last Friday in their ongoing row over what will happen to firefighters who fail fitness tests as their retirement age is moved from 55 to 60.

The union fears there will be job losses if firefighters are not offered other work in the service.

Continue ReadingFirefighters to hold fourth strike over pensions

The women who sparked the Labour movement

Spread the love

http://www.theguardian.com/women-in-leadership/2013/nov/04/women-who-sparked-labour-movement

The Match Women of Bryant and May formed Britain’s first women’s trade union and won the right to better conditions. So why do so few know about their achievement?

by Lyn Brown, Labour MP for West Ham.

object on black match with smoke

Hearing of the grim conditions, Annie Besant investigated and published an article in her weekly newspaper, The Link, headlined: “White Slavery in London,” prompting Bryant and May to threaten libel action. The company put pressure on the women to discover who had spoken to Besant.

Bryant and May identified and dismissed “ringleaders,” provoking around 1,400 women to walk out on strike. The workers put a picket line in place. The factory was at a standstill.

The striking women marched daily through the streets, collecting money to sustain their families. They marched on parliament where they lobbied and impressed MPs. Bryant and May was forced, through public, social and political pressure, to accede to the women’s demands for safer working conditions and the cessation of arbitrary fines.

Crucially, the company allowed them to form a trades union, so that “future disputes, if any, may be laid officially in front of the firm.” The Union of Women Matchworkers, the greatest union of women and girls in the country, was formed.

The Star newspaper congratulated the workers on their “magnificent victory, a turning point in the history of our industrial development.” Truly, it was.

Given Bryant and May’s political and economic power, the strike by these impoverished women was particularly audacious and by no means predestined to succeed. The struggle of these women, played out in the glare of publicity, had repercussions far beyond the betterment of their own conditions.

The Match Women’s Strike was a vital catalyst for ‘new unionism’. It was openly acknowledged by the dock strike leaders a year later in 1889 when the call went out from John Burns to a meeting of tens of thousands of strikers to: “Stand shoulder-to-shoulder. Remember the match women, who won their fight and formed a union.”

The Match Women demonstrated to working people that it is possible for marginalised, unskilled workers to bind together in solidarity in trade unions and succeed in their demands for reasonable pay and conditions.

Continue ReadingThe women who sparked the Labour movement

Postal workers’ strike: Royal Mail should expect a battle royal

Spread the love

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/16/postal-workers-strike-royal-mail-cwu-privatisation

Image of post office van next to postboxIt’s been a case of third time unlucky for the postal workers’ union (CWU). It defeated the privatisation of Royal Mail in 1994 under the Tories and again in 2009 under Labour. Despite employing similar tactics of political lobbying and industrial action, on Tuesday the company was floated on the stock exchange. The share price has risen by almost 50% since then. And just a tiny handful of postal workers refused to take up the free share offer open to them.

Some have proclaimed it’s “game over” for the CWU and any planned industrial action – the left-leaning New Statesman pronounced striking now was “a little bit pointless”.

Yes, the CWU was caught on the hop by a sell-off timetable that was brought forward, a bargain basement initial share price and having to take extra time to fully check the accuracy of its membership records in order to avoid a possible high court injunction to stop any action.

But exactly the opposite is now true. So while industrial action is extremely unlikely to bring Royal Mail back into public hands any time soon – especially as the Labour leadership reneged on its own party policy within days of it being set , it is still vital. This is because it is necessary to allow the workforce to have the chance to contest what privatisation turns out be. And, that’s why postal workers today voted by 4-1 for action on a high turnout.

Continue ReadingPostal workers’ strike: Royal Mail should expect a battle royal

Royal Mail offers £300 to postal workers to cross picket lines

Spread the love

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/oct/15/royal-mail-cross-picket-lines-strike

Image of Postal workers rally

 

The Royal Mail is offering a £300 bonus to any of its 150,000 staff who cross the picket line in any forthcoming nationwide postal strikes.

Moya Greene, its chief executive, wrote to all employees before Wednesday’s strike ballot result to offer the sum if they continue working while colleagues are out on strike.

… <about shares being ridiculously undervalued >

Greene’s last-ditch attempt to avert the first nationwide strike in four years came as the Communication Workers Union (CWU) said it was confident workers would back industrial action when it announces the results of a strike ballot on Wednesday afternoon.

Postal workers described her offer as an “act of desperation and discrimination” and a “scab bonus”. Paul Firmage, one of the 371 of Royal Mail’s 150,000 staff to rejected free shares in the privatisation, said the £300 bonus was “yet another bribe”.

“They are offering people money to be a scab. It is a scab bonus,” he said.”

The CWU said: “It’s an act of desperation and discrimination. We believe it’s irrelevant and will make no difference to the strike ballot.”

In a consultative ballot this year 96% of postal workers were opposed to the privatisation, which they said will erode their pay and conditions.

If staff have voted in favour of industrial action, the first strike could take place on 23 October and would likely be followed by a series of rolling strikes in the runup to Christmas.

Continue ReadingRoyal Mail offers £300 to postal workers to cross picket lines

Postal workers push ahead with strike plans over pay and conditions

Spread the love

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2013/oct/13/postal-workers-strike-ballot-pay-conditions

Postal workers union says staff concerns are about longer term issues not Friday’s 38% rise in the price of free shares

Image of post office van next to postbox

Royal Mail staff are pushing ahead with plans for strikes in the run up to Christmas as the battle over privatisation intensifies.

The Royal Mail’s 150,000 workers were handed £2,200 worth of free shares as part of the privatisation, handing them at least an £800 instant paper profit on the first day of trading.

Billy Hayes, general secretary of the Communication Workers Union (CWU), said the 38% rise in value would not make “one scintilla of difference” to employees, who are expected to vote for strike action on Wednesday. Staff are prevented from selling their shares for three years.

The union is planning a nationwide strike as early as 23 October – before balloting for further strikes in the run up to Christmas.

“It is likely to be an all-out strike first, then rolling strikes in the run up to Christmas,” a union source told the Guardian.

The union, which represents more than 100,000 postal staff, had wanted to hold the strike – the first since 2009 – before the privatisation but the government started the sell-off sooner than expected. More than 95% of Royal Mail staff were opposed to the privatisation in a consultative ballot earlier this year.

[Royal Mail privateers get thousands of pissed-off posties.]

 

Continue ReadingPostal workers push ahead with strike plans over pay and conditions

Royal Mail warns thousands will lose jobs after sell-off

Spread the love

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/oct/09/royal-mail-warns-thousands-job-losses

Company spokesman indicates substantial job losses following controversial privatisation of 500-year-old institution

Image of back of postman and post sacks

Royal Mail has warned that thousands of postal workers will lose their jobs following its controversial privatisation. On Tuesday the 500-year-old national institution saw unprecedented demand for its share offer, with more than 1 million people thought to have applied. In its written submission to parliament on Wednesday, Royal Mail said: “The company will employ fewer people in the future, whoever owns it.”

The company refused to state how many jobs will be axed, but a spokesman indicated it would be thousands if not tens of thousands of Royal Mail’s 150,000 employees.

Moya Greene, Royal Mail’s chief executive, who was paid £1.6m last year, has said the company needs to be “sized appropriately for the [declining] traffic we have to process”.

The forthcoming cuts come on top of 50,000 jobs lost over the past decade. The company said it “remains committed to the overarching objective of achieving this without compulsory redundancies”.

“Over the past decade, the postal services sector has changed dramatically. A decline in mail volumes has coincided with the liberalisation of the market and the emergence of competition. In recent years, we have seen a significant increase in the number of parcels being sent. All of this has meant a difficult process of change for our people,” Royal Mail said in its submission to the business, innovation and skills select committee.

“Many of Royal Mail’s employees have seen changes to their working practices as the company has adapted its operations to the changed mix of mail. Change will continue and the company will employ fewer people in the future, whoever owns it.”

Royal Mail workers, who are 96% opposed to the privatisation, continued their campaign against the sell-off with a protest outside parliament ahead of committee meeting. Activists dressed up as highway robbers carried banners saying: “The Great British Royal Mail Robbery”.

Continue ReadingRoyal Mail warns thousands will lose jobs after sell-off