Triple whammy for TU Bill

The government’s attack on trade unions faced a triple defeat last night (March 16), as the House of Lords moved to block key measures in the controversial trade union Bill.

 
Peers voted in favour by a resounding majority of 148 for an amendment that would scrap proposals requiring members to opt in to trade union political funding. As it stands now, members are automatically signed up to their union’s political fund but can choose to opt out.

 
As UNITElive has previously reported, the opt-in measure in the Bill would not only hit Labour party funding by an estimated £8m a year, but it would also significantly shackle unions’ ability to carry out any political work at all.

 
The government had gone even further in its attack by giving unions only three months to transition to the opt-in process for political funding.

 
The House of Lords condemned the assault on trade union funding as shamelessly partisan and divisive in an amendment drawn up by Lord Burns.

 
The amendment calls for the current opt-out system to be kept for existing trade union members. The new opt-in system should apply only to new members and unions would be given at least 12 months to implement opt-in.

 
The amendment also scraps the proposal that requires trade union members to renew their decision to contribute to trade union political funding every five years.

 
Unite political director Jennie Formby welcomed last night’s “Burns amendment”.

 
“The clear majority on the vote showed just how united peers of different political persuasions are in opposing a measure that harms our democracy,” she said. “Even two Conservative peers voted in favour of this amendment.

 
“At the same time, even if the measures in the amendment are eventually implemented, the threat to trade union political funding won’t be eliminated; it will only be slightly diminished,” Formby added.
“It will still be difficult to maintain our union’s political fund with the obligation that new members must opt-in.

 
‘Continue the fight’
“We must strengthen our resolve and continue the fight against this blatant move to silence our right to a collective political voice. After all, if no other organisation’s political funding is constrained in this way – including the millions in corporate money that fills Tory party coffers – then why should trade union funding be an exception?” she asked.

 
Strike ballot thresholds outlined in the trade union Bill – which would require a 50 per cent turnout for any strike action to be deemed legal – may also be put on hold.

 
Another cross-party amendment, backed in the Lords last night by a majority of 139, called for a review into electronic balloting, which will make it easier for trade union members to vote.

 
As it stands now, union members can only vote in industrial ballots by post.

 
No civil society organisation is constrained by such restrictions on the methods they use for their own elections. As the Electoral Reform Society highlights, the Conservative party itself uses electronic voting in its own internal elections, including most recently in selecting their candidate for London mayor.

 
Unite has long argued that secure workplace balloting would be the most effective way to increase turnouts and so bolster democracy in the workplace.

 
“The only way to increase participation in industrial action ballots is by using secure workplace balloting,” Unite general secretary Len McCluskey explained last month.

 
“It’s a method used frequently over the last decade by the government’s own Central Arbitration Committee in workplaces where trade unions are seeking recognition. During that period there has not been one case of irregularity.”

 
While the review in the amendment passed by the Lords last night only covers electronic balloting, Unite is hopeful that this will present an opportunity to bring workplace balloting back on the table.
Lord Kerslake, an independent crossbencher, led the way on the call for trade unions to be allowed modernised voting methods with his amendment.

 
“If we are to apply these high [threshold] tests before industrial action can be taken, then it is incumbent on us to provide trade unions with the best practical means available to achieve the full participation of their members,” he said.

 
Facility time
Good things come in threes and the third blow the House of Lords dealt the government last night involved voting down the proposal to cap facility time for public sector workers in local services.

 
Current proposals in the trade union Bill have taken aim at the time union reps in public services can spend carrying out essential duties. These restrictions include placing the onus on bosses to keep assiduous track of all union facility time.

 
Both unions and employers have criticised these restrictions because reps are instrumental in keeping workplaces safe as well as maintaining good relationships between bosses and workers.

 
In fact, the work union reps do with their paid facility time often ensures disputes don’t needlessly escalate into industrial action.

 
One academic study from a leading business school found that restricting facility time would be harmful for all concerned.

 
Kim Hoque of Warwick Business School, one of three academics who spearheaded the research said, “Restricting facility time for union representatives in the public sector would be counterproductive and may damage levels of trust between employers and employees, reduce co-operation when introducing change to improve public services, increase labour turnover, increase the number of industrial tribunal cases, and result in lower levels of labour productivity, service quality and financial performance.”

Unite assistant general secretary Gail Cartmail agreed, and highlighted the government’s hypocrisy as it seeks to control local authorities despite its supposed support of ‘localism.’

 
“Employers are objecting – it’s another administrative burden that they would have to undertake,” she explained. “We have good relationships with most employers where we have recognition and facility time agreements, and reasonable time off for trade union duties is allowed.

 
“This is an example of a government that says it wants local decision-making on one hand, but then on the other hand they are dictating these restrictions on facility time from on high, whether an employer wants to enter this complicated calculation of time off or not,” she added.

 
TUC general secretary Frances O’Grady highlighted that last night was a big step forward in the continued fight against the government’s attacks on trade unions.

 
“This is an important result for the six million trade union members across the UK,” she said. “But it’s a bad day for the government.”

 
“These defeats should be the nails in the coffin of the whole trade union Bill,” O’Grady added. “The government has tried to force this bill through Parliament, ignoring objections from all sides of the House. Once again, peers have rightly held them back.

 
“The government needs to think again and withdraw this damaging and divisive bill.”

 
The House of Lords will continue its deliberation of the Bill after Easter. Stay tuned on UNITElive for the latest updates.