New TUC survey finds low level of statutory paternity pay leaves families struggling financially – and stops 1 in 5 dads/partners from taking paternity leave at all
Low-income households and self-employed workers most likely to miss out on paternity leave
1 in 5 dads/partners who manage to take time off end up working during leave
Union body calls on ministers to increase statutory paternity pay and overhaul parental leave system
More than half (53%) of families struggle financially when dads/partners take paternity leave, according to a new TUC poll published today (Friday).
The survey also reveals that half (50%) of parents don’t feel they were able to take enough time off work as paternity leave to support their families.
And one in five (21%) parents told the TUC they didn’t take any paternity leave at all. The biggest reason for this – for more than one in four (27%) parents – is that they can’t afford to reduce their income.
Statutory paternity pay is currently £172.48 a week, or 90% of your average weekly earnings (whichever is lower), and paternity leave is one or two weeks.
Missing out
The TUC poll found:
Low earners: Household income has a big impact on take up of paternity leave. Nearly nine in 10 (86%) of parents where the household income is over £60,000 take statutory paternity leave provided by their employer, but this falls to two-thirds (65%) of dads/partners with a household income under £25k. And only one in seven (14%) dads/partners with household income under £25k take a more generous form of paternity leave than just the statutory – compared to more than one in three (35%) where the household income is over £80k.
Self-employed: Only one in three (31%) self-employed dads/partners took time off when their partner had a baby. Self-employed workers currently aren’t eligible for any statutory paternity pay. The TUC warns this reduces their ability to take time off work for the arrival of a new baby.
The poll also revealed that nearly one in five (18%) dads/partners are still doing some work whilst on paternity leave – rising to almost one in three (30%) part-time workers.
More than one in five (22%) do this because of the demands of their workload, and a similar percentage (19%) feel pressured to do this by their employers.
Government action needed
The TUC is calling on government to completely overhaul the current parental leave system.
The union body wants ministers to:
Increase statutory paternity pay: Statutory paternity pay needs to increase to at least the level of the real living wage, to make it feasible for dads/partners to take time out to care for their new-borns.
Extend parental leave: Both parents need a stand-alone right to their own individual period of well-paid parental leave – which is not dependent on the other partner sacrificing some of their leave (as it is in the current shared parental leave system).
Give parental leave and pay rights to all from day one: Parental leave and pay rights should be accessible to all, regardless of employment status – including those who are self-employed, agency workers or on zero-hours contracts. Qualifying periods for parental leave and pay rights should be scrapped and they should be available from day one in a job.
TUC General Secretary Paul Nowak said: “It’s not right that so many dads can’t afford to take time off work when their babies are born.
“The arrival of a new-born is one of the most special moments in life. No parent should miss out on these precious first days.
“The UK’s parental leave and pay system needs an overhaul.
“Without better rights to well-paid leave, too many new parents will still miss out on spending time with their babies. And mums will continue to take on the bulk of caring.
“Ministers should give all dads better-paid paternity leave – and create a new right to well-paid parental leave just for dads, that doesn’t rely on mums giving up some of their maternity leave.”
NEW REPORT: TUC report shows how austerity led to unsafe staffing in public services, a broken safety net, and decimated workplace safety enforcement when the pandemic began
“Austerity cost the nation dearly. The consequences were painful and tragic. The inquiry is our chance to learn from this” says the TUC
Austerity left the UK “hugely unprepared” for the Covid pandemic, according to a new report published by the TUC yesterday.
The report looks at four pillars of the country’s pandemic preparedness:
Safe staffing levels in public services
Public service capacity and resources
A strong safety net through the social security system
Robust health and safety protections at work
It finds that in each of these key areas, funding cuts reduced the country’s capacity to respond to the pandemic.
The report was published as the TUC held a joint press conference with the Covid-19 Bereaved Families for Justice about the lessons that must be learned through the inquiry, to save lives in the future.
Safe staffing levels in health and social care
The report details how safe staffing levels in health and social care were undermined by multiple years of pay caps and pay freezes, which impeded recruitment and increased staff turnover. This left both health and social care dangerously understaffed when the pandemic began:
Between 2010 and 2020, the number of nurses per capita in the UK grew by less than one per cent – despite demand for care rising by one-third. This is in stark contrast to the OECD average of nurses per capita rising by 10 per cent.
In 2019 the average NHS worker was earning £3,000 less in real terms than in 2010, with significant impacts on both recruitment and retention.
In social care, the turnover rate for staff in England increased from 22 per cent in 2012/13 to 31.8 per cent in 2019/20.
When the pandemic hit, a quarter (24%) of social care workers in England were employed on zero-hours contracts, with the turnover rate higher among these workers.
Public services capacity and resources
Public services capacity was damaged by steep cuts to almost every part of the public sector.
In 2020 when the pandemic hit, spending per capita was still lower than in 2010 in social care, transport, housing, childcare, schools, higher education, police, fire services, and environmental protection.
This limited the ability of public services to contribute effectively to civil contingencies, and to continue essential activities effectively such children’s education.
Between 2010 and 2020, school funding per pupil was cut by 8.3% in England, 6.4% in Wales, 2.4% in Scotland and 10.5% in Northern Ireland.
Local authority core spending power was cut by a third between 2010 and 2020. Over the same period, demographic changes increased pressures – for instance, leading to higher referrals and more complex cases in both adult and children’s social care. And new statutory duties in public health, social care and homelessness have stretched budgets further.
In 2019, capital investment in the UK health sector was 10% below 2010 levels. This forced NHS providers to close hospitals and delay equipment upgrades.
A strong safety net through the social security system
The social security safety net was damaged by direct cuts through benefit freezes, and by reforms that reduced entitlement to help and narrowed eligibility to fewer people.
Most of these benefits cuts were made in the period 2010 to 2016 when David Cameron was Prime Minister and George Osborne was Chancellor – both of whom are set to give evidence at the Covid inquiry.
The benefit cuts increased poverty levels. Living in poverty was associated with greater risks of exposure to Covid-19, and greater levels of vulnerability to more serious health consequences from being ill with Covid.
Since 2010, £14 billion has been cut from support to households through social security.
A family not in work has lost on average £1,160 a year in social security support since 2010, and a family in work has lost on average £460.
Disabled people have lost on average £1,200 of annual support, comparing 2021 with 2010.
Robust health and safety protections at work
The pandemic had a particular impact on workplaces – especially for key workers and those who could not work from home. But the enforcement of rules to keep workers safe at work was compromised by cuts that decimated public health and workplace safety regulators, and by confusion about who had responsibility to enforce the rules.
During the pandemic, when workplace risks multiplied, workplace inspections and enforcement notices fell to an all-time low, despite vast numbers of workplace-linked transmission caused by poor health and safety practice.
Funding for the Health and Safety Executive (HSE – the body responsible for workplace safety) in 2021/22 was 43% lower than in 2009/10 in real terms.
Staff numbers at the HSE have been cut by 35% since 2010.
The number of workplaces investigated by a safety inspector fell by 70% from 2010 to 2020.
TUC General Secretary Paul Nowak said:“To learn lessons and save future lives, we must take an unflinching look at the choices made by our leaders in the years before the pandemic.
“In the NHS and social care, funding cuts put staff levels in the danger zone. Cuts to social security pushed many more people below the poverty line, leaving them more vulnerable to infection. And cuts to health and safety left workers exposed to rogue employers who cut corners and put their lives at risk.
“Austerity cost the nation dearly. It left us hugely unprepared for the pandemic. And it left far too many workers unprotected. The consequences were painful and tragic.
“The inquiry is our chance to learn the lessons – and to understand why we have to rebuild our public services so that they are strong enough to protect us in a future crisis.”
It’s been 25 years since devolution in the UK started gathering speed, with the first legislative frameworks for devolution in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland agreed in 1998 (writes TUC’s ABIGAIL HUNT).
To mark this milestone, we decided to take stock of what devolution has delivered for working people. As a first step, we commissioned Centre for Research in Employment and Work (CREW) academics to research whether and how devolution has raised employment standards.
In this blog I consider key findings from their new report launched today – and reflect on what needs to happen next.
Where are we now?
As this helpful primer explains, devolution – the process of transferring power from Westminster to the nations and regions of the UK – has led to a patchwork of deals, with different levels of power and resources conferred on devolved authorities.
Since 1998 successive UK governments have pursued devolution. The pace has picked up in England in recent years, where two ‘trailblazer deals’ expanding powers have just been agreed and several other new devolution deals are underway.
The Labour Party is also looking to expand devolution. The Gordon Brown-led Commission on the UK’s Future wrapped up at the end of 2022 with proposals to ‘create a virtuous circle where spreading power and opportunity more equally throughout the country unlocks the potential for growth and prosperity’.
Since then Lisa Nandy MP, the Shadow Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, has pledged that under a Labour government, ‘every part of Britain that wants it will be able to access powers over skills, employment support and housing that support their local communities’.
So far, employment rights (collective and individual), health and safety at work and aspects of workplace training in Scotland, Wales and England have been reserved to the UK government, meaning devolved authorities in these areas have no power to legislate around these issues. Labour has endorsed keeping a national labour rights framework, as outlined in its New Deal for Working People.
What has devolution delivered for working people?
A few of things jumped out at me from the CREW report.
First, some devolved authorities have innovated in using the powers available to them to promote good work on their patch. This has seen them raise the bar above the currently weak national employment rights framework, which has seen poor quality, insecure work become a mainstay of the UK labour market in recent years.
For example, the Scottish Government’s Fair Work Convention has cemented a tripartite relationship between unions, government and employers. It has also helped increase the proportion of people earning the Real Living Wage, improved employment security, narrowed gender and ethnicity pay gaps and increased collective bargaining coverage in Scotland.
Across England, some elected devolved authority leaders have set up employment charters or pledges – essentially locally-developed yet voluntary employment standards. Perhaps the best known of these is the Greater Manchester Good Employment Charter established following a 2017 campaign pledge by Metro Mayor Andy Burnham. Members commit to various aspects of good work including improving employment security, flexible work, decent pay, health and wellbeing, and trade union recognition and collective bargaining.
Second, as the Manchester charter clearly shows, political will has been critical to advancing employment standards in devolved authorities. But when good work commitments are linked to individual leaders and not formally ‘baked in’ to devolution deals there is a real risk that change at the top can lead to a roll-back in localised gains.
Third, the formal role of trade unions in devolved structures has been mixed. In Wales, a “Welsh way” of social partnership working has led to development of a new Social Partnership and Public Procurement (Wales) Act. This offers significant potential to cement social partnership in Wales by putting a duty on public bodies to engage with trade unions when they are setting out what they will do to comply with the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2016.
Devolution looks set to stay firmly on the political agenda in the years to come. But so far it has not delivered enough for working people.
This needs to change.
Workers and their unions need to be meaningfully engaged in debate and decision-making related to devolution at all levels – from devo deals to devolved authorities’ support for union recognition and collective bargaining in-house and across their area.
The TUC is ramping up effort to make this a reality. Watch this space!
The TUC has warned that the right to strike of 1 in 5 workers in Britain is at risk because of the UK Government’s Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Bill.
New analysis published by the union body yesterday shows that 5.5 million workers in England, Scotland and Wales could be affected by the legislation. Workers in Northern Ireland aren’t subject to the Bill.
Those 5.5 million workers have their right to strike threatened because – if passed unamended – the Bill will mean that when workers lawfully vote to strike in health, education, fire, transport, border security and nuclear decommissioning, they could be forced to attend work – and sacked if they don’t comply.
The legislation continues to make it way through parliament, and had a third reading in the House of Lords yesterday.
The Bill recently suffered heavy defeats in the Lords, as all the opposition amendments laid were voted through, including an amendment to stop frontline workers getting sacked for exercising their right to strike.
Huge numbers of British workers
The TUC says the Conservative government must drop the Strikes Bill in its entirety and protect the right to strike.
And the EHRC recently warned that the legislation could see all striking workers in affected sectors losing their unfair dismissal protection as whole strikes could be deemed illegal.
The TUC says the Bill should provoke “serious opposition from UK politicians” as it continues its passage through parliament, given the huge numbers set to lose their right to strike.
The union body says the UK government has failed to come clean about the draconian nature of the Bill – and has accused ministers of “shortcutting” normal scrutiny procedures by “ramming” the Bill through the parliament.
The Bill will give ministers the power to impose new minimum service levels through regulation.
But MPs have been given few details on how minimum service levels are intended to operate.
TUC General Secretary Paul Nowak said: “This Conservative government is threatening the right to strike of as many as one in five workers up and down the country.
“This is a spiteful Bill. No one should be sacked for trying to win a better deal at work.
“But this draconian legislation would mean that when workers democratically vote to strike, they could be forced to work and sacked if they don’t comply.
“It’s undemocratic, it’s unworkable and it’s very likely illegal.
“Ministers have tried to keep the public in the dark about the true nature of this Bill.
“They are ramming it through– shortcutting normal parliamentary procedures and ducking scrutiny. And they are giving themselves the power to snatch away the right to strike of five and a half million workers.
“With inflation still running at over 10%, the last thing workers need is for ministers to make it harder to secure better pay and conditions.
“It’s time for ministers to protect the right to strike and ditch this Bill for good.”
May Day is a unique occasion in our calendar. It’s when we celebrate the bonds that unite workers and trade unionists across the world. When we reflect on our shared values of equality, justice and solidarity. And when we remember the huge advances won by the collective struggles of working people (writes TUC General Secretary PAUL NOWAK).
And this year, May Day has a special resonance. The cost-of-living crisis shows few signs of easing. Food prices are now rising at almost 20 per cent, hitting the poorest hardest. And across the economy, in both private and public sectors, hundreds of thousands of workers are striking for fair pay. I’ve been proud to visit scores of picket lines, meeting inspirational reps and workers, many on strike for the first time. Unions don’t accept we have to become poorer.
In the public sector, the government is refusing to deliver decent pay rises for the workers it lauded as heroes during the pandemic. Ministers had to be dragged kicking and screaming to the negotiating table following industrial action by health and education unions. But they are still failing to negotiate in the civil service – and the TUC will resist any attempts to play one group of workers against another.
Meanwhile, in the private sector, unions have been winning some impressive deals for their members. And a special mention to workers at Amazon in Coventry, who have been taking historic strike action for fair pay and union recognition.
But as workers fight for a fair deal, the Conservative government is attacking our right to strike. Their Anti Strikes Bill is undemocratic, unworkable and probably unlawful. It makes the UK an international outlier by imposing yet more draconian restrictions and penalties on unions.
Small wonder the legislation has been condemned by employment law experts and, earlier this week, by over 100 politicians worldwide. And on Wednesday, Labour, Lib Dem and crossbench peers in the House of Lords defeated the government four times on the bill.
That’s why the TUC has called an emergency “reject and repeal” protest outside Parliament to coincide with the final Commons votes on the bill. We can’t be sure about exact dates just yet, but it’s likely to be sometime in mid May.
Full details will be posted on our website as soon as possible. This is a big opportunity for us to put our concerns firmly in the political, media and public spotlight.
As working families struggle to stay afloat, those at the top are raking it in. Chief executives continue to trouser massive pay packages. Shareholder dividends have gone up three times faster than wages. And bankers in the City of London have just enjoyed the biggest bonus round since the crash. Britain is increasingly unequal: as hospitals set up food banks to feed their own staff, Porsche dealers report record sales.
Instead, we need an economy that rewards work not wealth. The TUC is demanding fair taxes, including a proper windfall tax on obscene energy profits. We want a £15 minimum wage, better pensions and a boost to Universal Credit. And we want stronger collective bargaining rights for unions, so we can win fair pay for all and ensure the gains of tech change and AI are shared fairly.
We’re also campaigning for political change and the election of a new government on a worker- and union-friendly manifesto. But whatever happens, we must rebuild our collective strength, advancing our membership and organisation right across the economy.
My overwhelming priority remains to build a stronger, more diverse, more inclusive movement. And whether it’s fighting racism, rooting out sexual harassment or resisting the government’s spiteful Illegal Migration Bill, there’s plenty we can do. This May Day, let’s resolve to fight for all working people, in all our wonderful diversity. Ultimately, that’s the best way to win the change we need.
During Education and Skills portfolio questions yesterday at the Scottish Parliament, Lothian MSP, Miles Briggs asked the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills Jenny Gilruth, about the safety of schools in Scotland.
Mr Briggs said how it is critical that this government and councils acts as quickly as possible to remove asbestos from the Scottish schools estate to ensure that pupils, teachers and staff across Scotland are learning and working in a safe environment.
Across the Lothians 241 schools contain asbestos – 110 in Edinburgh (details below), 31 in East Lothian, 18 in Midlothian and 82 in West Lothian. In the last year, 58 schools had asbestos removed – 20 in Edinburgh, 0 in Midlothian, 38 in West Lothian and East Lothian declined to provide the information.
The Scottish Conservatives have previously criticised the SNP for continuing to pass on “savage” cuts to local authorities, meaning schools don’t have the resources to remove asbestos from school buildings.
The Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills of Scotland, herself a former teacher, was asked “what progress has the Scottish Government made in removing asbestos from schools, what impact assessment has been undertaken to look at where currently asbestos is in the school estate and where this will be removed and what timescale will government develop to make sure this happens”.
In response, Ms. Gilruth acknowledged the importance of the issue and said: “Obviously a number of the schools that we are talking about are historically old buildings, I confess that the last building that I worked in, over in Fife, had asbestos in it.
“It is soon to be replaced by a brand new building thanks to this government. I think that’s hugely important as we move forward in improving the school estate, but we will need to recognise some of the challenge here”.
Lothian MSP, Miles Briggs, said:“The danger of asbestos is common knowledge.
“Despite this we still have over 240 schools in across Lothian which still contain this hazardous material.
“It is vital that pupils, teachers and staff across Scotland are learning and working in a safe environment.
“Continued underfunding of local authorities by SNP Ministers makes it extremely difficult for council to carry out the necessary work in our school estates to remove asbestos.”
The TUC has highlighted the dangers of asbestos today, International Workers Memorial Day. Asbestos is the biggest cause of work-related deaths in Britain.
TUC’s Sally Asquith said: “Schools are some of the most likely buildings to contain asbestos, but also the most obvious site for safe removal.
“Many schools desperately need repair or replacing anyway: the Department for Education has admitted a serious risk of collapse in many school buildings. We know more than 90 per cent of schools contain asbestos, and that the rate of mesothelioma diagnoses among former teachers is rising rapidly, so the need for removal is urgent. In the past six months alone, four schools in England had to close after asbestos was disturbed.
“As well as providing adequate support, and research, for those affected, the only real way to prevent asbestos-related illness in the long term is to remove the substance once and for all.
“Only by removing asbestos from all public buildings can we avoid future risk of exposure and stop the thousands of early – and entirely preventable – deaths from this dreadful, fatal illness.”
#IWMD
Edinburgh
A total of 110 schools contain asbestos:
Nursery/EYC – 21
Primary – 73
High School – 12
Special – 4
We have removed asbestos from 20 schools since 1st April 2022.
The UK workforce expanded in the three months to February, driven by young people leaving full-time education and moving into work, but the longer-term problem of rising ill-health continues to worsen, the Resolution Foundation said in response to the latest ONS labour market statistics yesterday.
The UK workforce continued to expand in recent months, with employment up 170,000 on the quarter, and economic inactivity down 230,000. The fall in inactivity was driven by full-time students: the number of people inactive due to being a full-time student was down 180,000 on the quarter.
The labour market has loosened overall, with short-term unemployment (up to 6 months) rising by 52,000 to above normal pre-pandemic levels, and vacancies falling by 47,000 on the quarter.
Less encouragingly, inactivity among older workers aged 50-64 remains high – up 298,000 on pre-pandemic levels – while the number of people inactive due to ill-health rose to a record high of over 2.5 million.
Reversing this trend – which predated the pandemic – is a huge priority that is likely to take years to address, says the Foundation, and a key test of the new Health and Disability White Paper.
Nominal pay growth strengthened in February, driven by the gap between public-sector (5.3 per cent) and private sector (6.1 per cent) pay growth closing. However, with inflation still at double digits, pay packets continue to shrink in real terms.
Louise Murphy, Economist at the Resolution Foundation, said:“Britain’s workforce continued to expand in early 2023 as thousands of full-time students moved into work. But while the young entered work, but the old and sick did not. Reversing these trends are a major problem for policy makers across government to confront.
“Strong growth in the public sector has helped to close the gap in pay growth with the private sector. But the picture remains that almost all workers across Britain are seeing their pay packets shrink in real terms, which will continue for the foreseeable future.”
Commenting on the Resolution Foundation’s Low Paid Britain Report, which criticises the UK’s lack of decent sick pay, TUC General Secretary Paul Nowak said: “Nobody should be plunged into financial hardship if they become sick.
“But Britain has one of the most miserly sick pay rates in Europe.
“This is disproportionately punishing low-paid workers and leaving them without a safety net.
“We must fix our broken sick pay system by making statutory sick pay available from day one and raising it to the level of the real living wage.
“The lack of decent sick pay cost us dear during the pandemic. The government should have learned this lesson.”
On the need for a higher minimum wage and sector-wide fair pay agreements, Paul Nowak added: “Let’s not kid ourselves. Low-paid workers remain under huge financial strain.
“Energy bills have shot up by £67 a month and food prices are through the roof.
“It’s time to put an end to low-pay Britain once and for all. That means getting the minimum wage to £15 per an hour as soon as possible.
“And it means introducing industry-wide fair pay agreements so that all workers have a minimum set of pay and rights.”
Experts say government’s Strikes Bill will make Britain an international “outlier” on union laws
Unions will be forced to “undermine” their own strikes, lawyers say
Leading employment lawyers have warned that government’s new Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Bill will give ministers “unfettered power” to restrict the right to strike.
In a joint statement, the legal specialists say the new legislation will make Britain “an outlier” on strike laws compared to other European and Western democracies.
Those adding their names to the statement include:
Alan Bogg, Professor of Labour Law, University of Bristol
Keith Ewing, Professor of Public Law, King’s College London
Ruth Dukes, Professor of Labour Law, University of Glasgow
Highlighting the new sweeping powers the Bill will give to ministers, the lawyers say:
“The legislation gives a Secretary of State a largely unfettered power to determine what a minimum level of service should be in a particular service, and consequently the circumstances in which and the extent to which workers in these sectors can lawfully exercise their freedom to strike.”
Highlighting how Britain risks becoming an international outlier on strike laws, the lawyers say:
“The Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Bill would place an unacceptable restriction on a worker’s right to take strike action to defend their terms and conditions of employment. It adds to an existing body of highly restrictive laws on strikes, including the Trade Union Act 2016.
“It would make Great Britain an outlier among comparable countries. If ministers are keen to learn from overseas, a more promising place to start would be the creation of a culture of social dialogue and balanced cooperation through the introduction of sector-wide collective bargaining, together with the clear legal recognition of a positive right to strike.”
Highlighting the strain the Bill will put on industrial relations, the lawyers say:
“Trade unions will be required by an employer acting with the authority of the state to take steps actively to undermine its own strike, for which its members will have voted in a ballot with high thresholds of support. Such an obligation is unprecedented in British law, and it places trade unions in an intolerable conflict with their own members.
“The legislation also removes significant protections for individual workers exposing them to the risk of dismissal and victimisation. It will do nothing to resolve the current spate of industrial action, which will be settled by negotiation and agreement, rather than by the introduction of even tighter restrictions on trade unions.”
The TUC has accused the government of ducking scrutiny over the Bill.
If passed, the Strikes Bill will mean that when workers democratically and lawfully vote to strike they can be forced to work and sacked if they don’t comply.
The Bill gives ministers power to impose new minimum service levels through regulation.
But consultations on how these regulations will work in specific services have not been completed, and parliamentarians have been given few details on how minimum service levels are intended to operate.
The TUC says the new legislation will “do nothing” to solve the current disputes across the public sector, and “only make matters worse”.
Alan Bogg, Professor of Labour Law at the University of Bristol said: “This Bill would risk leaving Britain an international outlier in its restrictive laws on trade unions.
“When combined with existing legislation, these proposals constitute a further departure from established norms and international treaty obligations.
“Rather than bringing Britain into line with other European countries, it deviates significantly from the legal traditions of our neighbours where the right to strike is often given explicit constitutional protection.”
Ruth Dukes, Professor of Labour Law at the University of Glasgow said: “These minimum service requirements will do nothing to help workers and employers reach agreement.
“But they might well prolong and inflame disputes.”
Commenting on the lawyers’ letter, TUC General Secretary Paul Nowak said: “This is a damning assessment of the government’s Strikes Bill. Make no mistake – these new laws are a naked power grab that will allow ministers to severely restrict the right to strike.
“This spiteful legislation would mean that when workers democratically vote to strike, they can be forced to work and sacked if they don’t comply.
“Compulsory work notices during strikes will place a huge strain on employer and union relations and will do nothing to help resolve disputes.
“If this nasty legislation gets on to the statute book, the TUC will fight it all the way – including through the courts.
“The Conservatives cannot legislate away worker dissatisfaction.”
The full statement reads:
We the undersigned are specialists in employment law.
Between us we have decades of experience as academics and practitioners in analysing the existing statutory regime for industrial action and the wider industrial relations landscape in Great Britain and internationally.
In our view the Strikes Bill (Minimum Service Levels) Act would place an unacceptable restriction on a worker’s right to take strike action to defend their terms and conditions of employment. It adds to an existing body of highly restrictive laws on strikes, including the Trade Union Act 2016. The cumulative effects of this legislation would place the UK well outside the mainstream of industrial relations in comparable countries.
The right to strike is guaranteed in international law by a succession of important treaties. These include the Council of Europe’s Social Charter of 1961; and the UN’s International Covenant on economic, social and cultural rights of 1966. It has also been recognised as a human right by the International Labour Organisation, and by the European Court of Human Rights. Our obligation to respect ILO conventions and the Social Charter was reinforced by the 2020 Trade and Cooperation Treaty with the European Union.
In Great Britain the right to strike is already heavily limited. The statutory regime places significant requirements on trade unions contemplating industrial action including the need to conduct a postal ballot under highly complex rules, the need to clear high thresholds of support (even higher in ‘important public services’), and to give 14 days’ notice of action.
The Strikes Bill as drafted would remove none of these requirements while placing a hugely onerous new set of requirements on unions and union members.
The legislation gives a Secretary of State a largely unfettered power to determine what a minimum level of service should be in a particular service, and consequently the circumstances in which and the extent to which workers in these sectors can lawfully exercise their freedom to strike. If a strike takes place in these services, an employer will have the power to issue a work notice effectively to requisition workers during the strike.
Trade unions will then be under a duty to take “reasonable steps” to ensure that workers comply with the work notice. Trade unions will thus be required by an employer acting with the authority of the state to take steps actively to undermine its own strike, for which its members will have voted in a ballot with high thresholds of support. Such an obligation is unprecedented in British law, and it places trade unions in an intolerable conflict with their own members.
The legislation also removes significant protections for individual workers exposing them to the risk of dismissal and victimisation. It will do nothing to resolve the current spate of industrial action, which will be settled by negotiation and agreement, rather than by the introduction of even tighter restrictions on trade unions.
The proposed minimum service legislation constitutes a further departure from established norms and treaty obligations. It would make Great Britain an outlier among comparable countries. If ministers are keen to learn from overseas, a more promising place to start would be the creation of a culture of social dialogue and balanced cooperation through the introduction of sector-wide collective bargaining, together with the clear legal recognition of a positive right to strike.
Professor Alan Bogg, Professor of Labour Law, University of Bristol
Professor Nicola Countouris, Director of the Research Department, European Trade Union Institute (ETUI) and Professor in Labour Law and European Law, University College London
Professor Ruth Dukes, Professor of Labour Law, University of Glasgow
Professor Keith Ewing, Professor of Public Law, King’s College London
Professor Lydia Hayes, Professor of Labour Rights, University of Liverpool
Dr Ioannis Katsaroumpas, Lecturer in Employment Law, University of Sussex
Professor Aristea Koukiadaki, Professor of Labour Law and Industrial Relations, Head of The University of Manchester Law School
Professor Virginia Mantouvalou, Professor of Human Rights and Labour Law, University College London
Dr Ewan McGaughey, Reader in Law, King’s College London
Professor Tonia Novitz, Professor of Labour Law, University of Bristol
A year ago on Friday P&O Ferries made nearly 800 workers redundant with only half an hour’s notice.Experienced sailors with an average of 20 years on the job were replaced with inexperienced and poorly paid agency staff.
But for all the strong words from ministers, 12 months later British workers are more vulnerable than ever.
P&O Ferries was able to get away with its actions because weak UK employment meant any sanctions would be outweighed by the savings they could make on their wage bill.
We know this because the chief executive Peter Hebblethwaite openly admitted P&O Ferries had broken the law when questioned by MPs.
The government promised swift action to prevent a scandal like P&O Ferries occurring again.
But the Insolvency Service declined to pursue criminal charges for P&O Ferries’ failure to inform the authorities of its plans in time. It also hasn’t sought to disqualify P&O Ferries’ directors.
Ministers have done little to close the legal loopholes P&O Ferries exploited
The Seafarer’s Wages Bill is intended to ensure that all vessels that dock at UK ports a minimum of 120 times a year have to pay at least National Minimum Wage equivalent. This gives a lot of scope for employers to avoid it.
On top of that, the surcharges imposed on operators who fail to pay NMWe are determined by port authorities. These might be the same companies that operate the ferries; and if not they will be motivated to set the charges low to secure business from ferry operators.
In either case there is ample potential for charges to be set so low that it is economical for operators to pay well below the NMWe and pay the surcharges as the cost of doing business.
Laws intended to force employers to consult with workers, inform state authorities of their plans and do proper health and safety checks have been left untouched.
The right to strike is under attack
Not only have ministers failed to prevent another P&O Ferries, they have gone out of their way to undermine workers rights and leave them more vulnerable.
The government is rushing through legislation that could impose minimum service levels if workers in transport workers, teachers, nurses, border force, fire and ambulance services and in nuclear decommissioning take industrial action. This is a draconian attack on the right to strike.
It has already been condemned by trade unions across the world and criticised by the International Labour Organization (ILO).
Rest assured if the government succeeds, it wont stop there: more and more workers will find their democratic right drastically undermined.
The government that swept to power promising to enshrine workers rights in law has done little but undermine them.
It’s been a year since the P&O Ferries sackings, but nothing has been done to stop another one.
ONE YEAR ANNIVERSARY – NEW REPORT: Another P&O Ferries style scandal could be on the cards because of ministers’ failure to boost worker protections and close legal loopholes, TUC warns
Ministers borrowing from the P&O Ferries’ playbook by attacking the right to strike and threatening to rip up hard-won workers’ rights, says union body
TUC general secretary Paul Nowak to speak at RMT rally today in Hull to mark the one-year anniversary
The Conservative government has given rogue employers a “free pass to act with impunity” after the P&O Ferries scandal – the TUC has warned, referring to the unlawful mass sacking of 800 seafarers a year ago today (Friday).
The warning comes as the TUC publishes a new report which reveals that of the four ways P&O Ferries broke the law, the government has failed to act on every single breach – both failing to punish the company and to strengthen worker protections.
The TUC says P&O Ferries also exploited loopholes in minimum wage law, which the government has failed to close – despite the introduction of the Seafarers Bill.
The union body warns that without government action, another P&O Ferries-style scandal could be on the cards.
Flagrant law-breaking
The TUC sets out four breaches of law by P&O Ferries which have gone unpunished:
The duty to consult when making collective redundancies: P&O Ferries knowingly broke the law because they could price in the low cost of the financial penalties. Following the P&O Ferries scandal, the TUC called on the government to increase protective awards and sanctions to a level that would ensure employers are deterred from brazenly flouting the law. The government did nothing.
Unfair dismissal of workers: Since the P&O Ferries sackings the government has taken no action to strengthen unfair dismissal protections. Ministers have launched a consultation on a draft statutory code of practice that would apply in similar situations. But even when the statutory code is in place an employer would only face a 25 per cent increase in financial sanctions, if they flouted the law – the TUC says this won’t stop rogue employers from breaking the law.
Failure to notify the relevant government authorities: P&O Ferries failed to notify the correct state authorities. This meant a jobs rescue bid couldn’t be launched. Following the P&O Ferries scandal the government has failed act, meaning that any employer making large scale redundancies can price in the likely sanction for failing to notify the authorities.
Breach of Director duties: P&O Ferries’ directors admitted deliberately breaching the law – and the TUC believes that the directors breached their fiduciary duties. The Insolvency Services is responsible for the initiation of director disqualification proceedings but despite serious acts of misconduct, no action has been taken against the P&O Ferries’ directors. The government has also failed to take action to deter other directors behaving like this in the future.
The TUC adds that the government inadequately acted after P&O Ferries bypassed the law by exploiting loopholes in minimum wage legislation.
The new Seafarers Bill widens the scope of the minimum wage, which currently has very limited application to seafarers.
However, the TUC warns there are gaping loopholes in the Bill, including requiring ships to make a certain number of UK stops to fall within the law, meaning that employers whose ships don’t reach a required threshold of using UK ports a certain number of times could still dodge it.
According to the union body, when the replacement crew were first introduced after the mass sacking, P&O Ferries breached international safety standards by failing to ensure that the replacement crew were properly acquainted with safety procedures.
Maritime inspectors listed an unprecedented 31 separate failings on a P&O Ferries vessel detained last year, ranging from problems with fire safety to lifeboat drills.
Failing working people
The TUC has accused the government of “failing working people” following the P&O Ferries dismissals.
The mass sacking was a national scandal, which provoked serious uproar at the time from politicians across the political spectrum – including government ministers.
Then business secretary Grant Shapps stated that “where new laws are needed, we will create them, that where legal loopholes are cynically exploited, we will close them, and that where employment rights are too weak, we will strengthen them.”
Paul Scully, then business secretary, conceded that unlimited fines would be in stopping another P&O Ferries-style scandal.
The TUC says promised sanctions failed to materialise – adding the government did not rigorously pursue P&O Ferries or change the law to prevent future conduct similar to the company’s actions.
Pete Hebblethwaite, P&O Ferries CEO, faced calls for the sack by senior government ministers – but one year on since the mass sacking, Hebbelthwaite remains in post.
The TUC says ministers are rewarding P&O Ferries for its law breaking with government contracts.
The company has lucrative deals including with the Ministry of Defence, and new freeports have been awarded to DP World and P&O Ferries – despite Grant Shapps pledging to review all their government contracts since March 2022.
Urgent action needed
The TUC says that urgent action is needed to clamp down on fire and rehire style practices and make sure another P&O Ferries-style scandal is never allowed to happen again.
The union body is calling on government to:
Increase sanctions on employers who deliberately breach the law to provide a proper deterrent
Introduce fair pay agreements to help lift wages and prevent a race to the bottom, starting in low-paid industries, including ferries
Give workers protection from unfair dismissal from day one in the job
Ensure employers are required to reinstate workers where employers breach consultative duties
TUC General Secretary Paul Nowak said: “The mass sacking by P&O Ferries was a national scandal. It should have marked a new chapter for employment rights in the UK.
“But this Conservative government has failed working people and given rogue employers a free pass to act with impunity.
“Despite behaving like corporate gangsters, P&O Ferries has been allowed to get away scot-free because of our lax labour laws.
“Instead of boosting worker protections and closing legal loopholes, ministers sat on their hands and did next to nothing.
“And to add insult to injury, ministers are now actively borrowing from the P&O Ferries playbook.
“They are brazenly attacking the right to strike and threatening to rip up hard-won workers’ rights like holiday pay, equal pay for women and men and rest breaks.
“Workers need more power in the workplace, not less. It’s time for the government to put in place proper protections for workers who are at the mercy of bad bosses. That starts with a fair pay agreement for the ferry sector.
“Make no mistake. Without stronger regulation, another P&O Ferries style scandal is on the cards.”
Neil Todd, a senior trade union lawyer at Thompsons Solicitors, who acted on behalf of the RMT union at the time, said: “P&O Ferries took the callous business decision that sacking its staff unlawfully – despite the financial penalties and public backlash it would cause – was more convenient and cheaper than engaging in meaningful consultation and complying with legal obligations.
“What message does it send to unscrupulous employers if P&O Ferries can get away with paying out what are to them small sums and carry on trading? P&O Ferries should have been a pivotal moment in recognising UK employment law does not go far enough to protect working people, but nothing has changed and three Conservative Prime Ministers later it is clear this is not a priority for any Conservative government.
“The financial penalties for sacking staff without notice and without any meaningful consultation need to be strengthened and there needs to be legislation that would more easily allow employees to take pre-emptive legal action before any dismissals take effect. It is only these sorts of changes which will ensure no company is emboldened ‘to do another P&O’.”
New TUC analysis finds more than 1.46 million women are kept out of the labour market because of their caring responsibilities
Women in their 30s are hardest hit – one in 10 women in this age group drop out of the jobs market because of pressures of looking after their family
Union body calls for funded childcare and flexible working rights for all to keep women in work and to address the gender pay gap
Women are around seven times more likely than men to be out of the labour market due to caring commitments, according to a new analysis published by the TUC today (Wednesday).
The analysis of official statistics – published as the annual TUC women’s conference starts in London today – finds that more than 1.46 million women are unable to work alongside their family commitments, compared to around 230,000 men.
Women in their 30s hardest hit
The research shows that women in their 30s are the hardest hit compared to men of the same age.
One in 10 women in their 30s – more than 450,000 women – is out of the labour market because of caring responsibilities – compared to just one in 100 men in their 30s.
So, women in their 30s are 10 times more likely than men to be unable to work due to family commitments at home.
But at every age – from the very start right through to the end of their careers – women are more likely than men to have to drop out of paid work because of caring commitments.
The TUC says that this illustrates that high-quality childcare that is free at the point of use should be available for all parents from the end of maternity leave to the end of primary school. This would help women stay in their jobs and continue with their careers once they have children.
The union body also found that women shoulder most of the care for older and disabled relatives too. But the TUC warned that the staffing crisis in social care was making it harder for women to stay in work alongside their caring responsibilities.
Women and low-paid work
The new TUC analysis also finds that women are much more likely than men to be working in low-paid jobs – and are far less likely to be in high-paid work.
Women make up two-thirds (65%) of the 10 lowest-paid occupations in the UK, like jobs in cleaning, catering and care.
But less than two in five (39%) women are working in the 10 highest-paid occupations, in industries like finance, law and IT.
Gender pay gap
The gender pay gap for all employees currently stands at 14.9%, and it widens with age.
Analysis published last month by the TUC found that this pay gap means that the average woman in paid employment effectively works for free for nearly two months (54 days) of the year, compared to the average man in paid employment.
The union body says that at current rates of progress, it will take more than 20 years to close the gender pay gap.
Flexible work
Millions of people across the UK work flexibly. The TUC says that flexible work helps parents and carers balance their work and caring commitments and stay in their jobs.
But a survey by the union body found that half of working mums don’t get the flexibility they request at work.
The TUC says the law needs to be changed to require all jobs to be advertised with the possible flexible working options stated – and to give all workers the legal right to work flexibly from their first day in a job.
Normalising and improving flexible working options would also encourage more men to take up these options and share caring responsibilities, says the TUC.
TUC General Secretary Paul Nowak said: “Women shouldn’t have to give up or cut down paid work because they can’t find or afford the right care for their children or older or disabled relatives.
“Too many women take a financial hit from caring for the rest of their lives – and it is a key driver of the gender pay gap. At the current rate of progress, it will be 20 years before women get pay parity with men.
“We desperately need funded high-quality childcare for all families, free at the point of use, so women can stay in work once they have kids.
“Ministers must change the law so that every single job is advertised with the possible flexible options stated, and all workers must have the legal right to work flexibly from their first day in a job.
“And ministers must fix the staffing crisis in social care so every family can find and afford the social care they need.”
Government action needed
The TUC is calling on ministers to act now to keep women in work, make sure they are paid fairly, and to properly address the gender pay gap. The union body wants the government to:
Introduce funded, high-quality childcare, available to all, free at the point of use. This would begin when paid maternity leave ends and would enable women to stay in work when they have children.
Create greater flexibility in all jobs. There should be a duty on employers to list the possible flexible working options for each job when it is advertised. And all workers should have a day one right to work flexibly – not just the right to ask – unless the employer can properly justify why this is not possible. Workers should have the right to appeal any rejections. And there shouldn’t be a limit on how many times a worker can ask for flexible working arrangements in a single year.
Strengthen gender pay gap reporting: From 1 April 2017, the government ruled that large companies must publish information about the difference between average male and female earnings. The TUC believes the government must go further and wants employers to be made to carry out equal pay audits, and to produce action plans to close the pay gap in their workplace. The TUC also wants companies that fail to comply with the law to receive instant fines.
Fix the staffing crisis in social care: There are a record 165,000 vacancies across adult social care. The TUC believes this is placing a huge strain on women with caring responsibilities for family members. The TUC says the government must work with unions and employers to tackle widespread insecure work and poverty pay in the sector which are driving high staff turnover rates.
