That Teresa May’s failed Brexit (and now withdrawn) ‘deal’ would have been bad for jobs, the economy, employment rights etc. etc. is a given simply because it’s a poorer deal than we presently have as EU members. Here’s what the TUC General Secretary Frances O’Grady had to say about it:-
But of course, every form of Brexit deal will only deliver a worse outcome than we presently have so no one can ever promise one that will meet, never mind better, our present situation as EU members. The TUC knows this better than most because it’s the millions of trade union members across the UK who are at risk from us leaving the EU under ANY deal.
However, I fear that Frances O’Grady has to be careful what she says with TU leaders like UNITE’s Len McCluskey trying desperately to stop Labour from adopting a pro-EU stance. Sadly there’s always been a wing of the trade union movement who have been anti-EU despite it being a really positive force for good on things like employment rights and protections. How on earth they can call themselves trade unionists beats me. As a life-long supporter of the TU movement, I’m ashamed that it has Little Englander’s in its ranks.
The Liverpool Echo has the story on its web site about the ongoing Merseyrail and the separate Arriva buses strikes that are hitting the Liverpool City Region – See link above
The Arriva buses strike is over pay and the Liverpool Echo article below tries to pin down what Arriva drivers are paid:-
Merseyrail’s new Stadler Trains, to be delivered in a couple of years time, are at the heart of the dispute about driver only operated trains.
The Merseyrail strikes are of course over the next generation of Merseyrail trains being run without Train Guards. A decision taken by Merseytravel (the public sector Transport Committee for the Liverpool City Region) not by Merseyrail who employ the guards.
Public support for the RMT union’s ‘Keep the Guards’ campaign seems to be holding up but I’m not sure that buses are held in the same affection as trains so life may be tougher for Unite and GMB unions who are fighting for pay rises. I guess Arriva buses passengers who have not had a pay rise themselves in many a year may be reluctant to stand with the Arriva staff who are striking. But on the other hand if workers do not fight for pay rises who will?
Whether we are entering a ‘winter of discontent’ scenario here on Merseyside with regard to public transport is yet to be seen but things are presently not looking good and I say that having been a trade union officer virtually all my working life.
The BBC has the story – see its web site via the link above
I don’t know about you but I see Tom Watson as one of Labour’s many problems rather than someone who is trying to unite his Party.
As Deputy Leader he has gone along with Labour backing the Tories over Brexit so I rest my case.
When on earth will Labour realise it is the official opposition in Parliament rather than a Tory lap dog?
Peel’s cranes at Liverpool 2’s deep water river berth for colossal sized container ships, Seaforth.
The BBC has the story on its web site – see link above
Makes you wonder how when so much investment is going into the Port of Liverpool such a basic necessity of life i.e. toilets have been overlooked.
The other odd part of the BBC story that struck me was why it was seemingly being suggested that local councils should provide toilet facilities. Now I could just about understand the Port saying to say Sefton Council can you erect appropriate toilets and run then for us and we will pay whatever the cost is. But if the suggestion is that Sefton Council provide toilets funded from the public purse that is surely a non-runner.
The BBC web site has a detailed report on the ‘saving’ of the refinery today.
As a former trade union officer I really do worry that the crisis at Grangemouth was one that was brought on by oil/gas market circumstances, a long-running internal industrial relations dispute and probably Unite, in trying not to blink first, almost ensuring that its own members lost their jobs.
Falkirk and Unite ring a bell as well over the huge Miliband/Unite dispute over the section of Labour’s parliamentary candidate recently so a heady brew of trouble was inevitable.
We British don’t do industrial relations well; it seems to be in our make up to do all we can to ensure that we don’t do industrial harmony! Of course, it is our ‘us and them approach’ that is fundamental to this industrial relations dysfunction.
But what if Unite was in effect making things worse? What I mean is were the Unite leaders more concerned with beating the Grangemouth management than they were about preserving as many jobs as possible? Sadly, this has to be a worry because British trade unions are more than capable of not seeing or ignoring the big issues in a dispute especially if they are being driven by socialist idealism.
Independent analysts seem to be pointing to the non-viable nature of the refinery in its present form and that fundamental restructuring of the oil refining business is required not only at Grangemouth but across the whole industry. On that basis were Unite simply unwilling to negotiate on the reality of that situation? If they were they were very wrong and they seem to have had to climb down a long way. They must have lost a lot of credibility with their own members but will they learn from this damaging dispute?
I do despair at times with the trade union movement as it can often be its own worst enemy.
As a PCS member and former Branch Secretary of some 22 years service, this question both concerns and interests me and it features in Private Eye edition 1344.
The Eye seems to think that the trade union barons in both of these huge unions will want to merge to create more political muscle and that this could well be outside of shovelling more money into the Labour Party.
PCS has helped sponsor trade union candidates for UK elections and did so at the recent Eastleigh Parliamentary by-election. Clearly, it was PCS (and other unions) waving two fingers at Labour; trouble is their candidate got so few votes (62 in fact which was 0.15% of the votes cast) the move was pointless and merely cost PCS members and others a few bob in a lost deposit and other election costs.
PCS and indeed its predecessor unions were all basically been non-politically aligned i.e. their members being mostly public servants have not paid a political levy to the Labour Party. Personally, I have always thought that stance correct as public servants have to serve the Government of the day no matter who they are and to do so whilst paying a party political levy would hardly make public servants look impartial.
But UNITE is presently Labour’s biggest financial supporter (and problem?) and its members are affiliated to Labour. So how can two unions merge that are fundamentally split on supporting Labour? UNITE backs Labour and PCS backs trade union candidates who stand against Labour!
PCS is certainly playing down the merger and simply talking about forms of co-operation with UNITE.
An odd situation all together but I think PCS would be well advised to stop wasting PCS member’s money in local or Parliamentary elections. But underneath this process the real problem is the inability of the trade union movement to effectively find a way forward during our present economic down-turn.