[UK] Anti-strike bill will set minimum service levels

In the UK, business secretary Grant Shapps has confirmed that legislation to establish and ensure minimum safety levels in health, education, fire, ambulance, rail and nuclear power sectors will be introduced in the coming weeks as parliament resumes, HR Magazine reports.

The legislation will include a consideration of the minimum service level required in certain sectors to uphold public safety as it recognised “disruption to blue light services puts lives at immediate risk".

The government is reportedly set to consult on the adequate level of coverage that will be needed in fire, ambulance and rail services. Other sectors covered by the bill will be expected to reach voluntary agreements on how to uphold minimum safety levels.

The bill has been met with union opposition since its introduction in October 2022.

The Trades Union Congress (TUC) called Mr Shapps' 5 January announcement, - which included an invitation to speak with union leaders - an “attack on the right to strike to defend workers’ pay and conditions".

TUC general secretary Paul Nowak said, “The announcement offers nothing more to help with this year’s pay and the cost of living crisis.  

“The only offer of talks is for next year. But we need to resolve the current disputes and boost the pay of public sector workers now.”

There are concerns that the proposal will only increase employees’ discontent.

Julia Kermode - founder of independent worker support company Iwork - said, “The government seems hellbent on eroding workers’ rights. This draconian law is a worrying step in the wrong direction and will only exacerbate an already ugly situation.

“People don’t take the decision to strike lightly. They are facing severe financial problems and industrial action is a last-ditch attempt to get their voices heard and be paid what they deserve.”

David Hopper - employment partner at law firm Lewis Silkin - said the bill is also unlikely to affect any short-term incoming industrial action.

Mr Hopper said, “This new legislation won’t resolve the current disruption across the country. It will take time to be enacted and there is no guarantee that it will make it past the House of Lords, as only transport strikes are covered by the government’s 2019 manifesto commitment to introduce minimum service levels.”

Even if it should become law, Mr Hopper said unions are expected to resist the bill and it may be ineffective.

He added, “Minimum service levels also actually risk prolonging strikes, by preventing unions from being able to generate sufficient leverage through causing disruption to secure their demands.”

On 5 January, Kier Starmer - the leader of the opposition - also made his first major speech of 2023. It included a pledge to repeal anti-strike legislation introduced by the current Conservative government.

Mr Hopper said, “The Labour Party has already promised to repeal the legislation if enacted. So, with the polls as they are, these reforms may be of no lasting significance in any event.”

Source: HR Magazine

(Links and quotes via original reporting)

In the UK, business secretary Grant Shapps has confirmed that legislation to establish and ensure minimum safety levels in health, education, fire, ambulance, rail and nuclear power sectors will be introduced in the coming weeks as parliament resumes, HR Magazine reports.

The legislation will include a consideration of the minimum service level required in certain sectors to uphold public safety as it recognised “disruption to blue light services puts lives at immediate risk".

The government is reportedly set to consult on the adequate level of coverage that will be needed in fire, ambulance and rail services. Other sectors covered by the bill will be expected to reach voluntary agreements on how to uphold minimum safety levels.

The bill has been met with union opposition since its introduction in October 2022.

The Trades Union Congress (TUC) called Mr Shapps' 5 January announcement, - which included an invitation to speak with union leaders - an “attack on the right to strike to defend workers’ pay and conditions".

TUC general secretary Paul Nowak said, “The announcement offers nothing more to help with this year’s pay and the cost of living crisis.  

“The only offer of talks is for next year. But we need to resolve the current disputes and boost the pay of public sector workers now.”

There are concerns that the proposal will only increase employees’ discontent.

Julia Kermode - founder of independent worker support company Iwork - said, “The government seems hellbent on eroding workers’ rights. This draconian law is a worrying step in the wrong direction and will only exacerbate an already ugly situation.

“People don’t take the decision to strike lightly. They are facing severe financial problems and industrial action is a last-ditch attempt to get their voices heard and be paid what they deserve.”

David Hopper - employment partner at law firm Lewis Silkin - said the bill is also unlikely to affect any short-term incoming industrial action.

Mr Hopper said, “This new legislation won’t resolve the current disruption across the country. It will take time to be enacted and there is no guarantee that it will make it past the House of Lords, as only transport strikes are covered by the government’s 2019 manifesto commitment to introduce minimum service levels.”

Even if it should become law, Mr Hopper said unions are expected to resist the bill and it may be ineffective.

He added, “Minimum service levels also actually risk prolonging strikes, by preventing unions from being able to generate sufficient leverage through causing disruption to secure their demands.”

On 5 January, Kier Starmer - the leader of the opposition - also made his first major speech of 2023. It included a pledge to repeal anti-strike legislation introduced by the current Conservative government.

Mr Hopper said, “The Labour Party has already promised to repeal the legislation if enacted. So, with the polls as they are, these reforms may be of no lasting significance in any event.”

Source: HR Magazine

(Links and quotes via original reporting)