Strike breaking law

[PR1Berske]

Taken from: Government acts to make it easier for businesses to use temporary staff to help ease disruptions caused by strike action

A change in the law enabling businesses to supply skilled agency workers to plug staffing gaps during industrial action has been unveiled by the government today (Thursday 23 June).

Under current trade union laws employment businesses are restricted from supplying temporary agency workers to fill duties by employees who are taking part in strikes. This can have a disproportionate impact, including on important public services, causing severe disruption to the UK economy and society – from preventing people from getting to work to creating challenges for how businesses manage their workforce.

Today’s legislation, repealing these burdensome legal restrictions, will give businesses impacted by strike action the freedom to tap into the services of employment businesses who can provide skilled, temporary agency staff at short notice to temporarily cover essential roles for the duration of the strike.

Removing these regulations will give employers more flexibility but businesses will still need to comply with broader health and safety rules that keep both employees and the public safe. It would be their responsibility to hire cover workers with the necessary skills and/or qualifications to meet those obligations.

It would also help mitigate against the impact of future strikes, such as those seen on our railways this week, by allowing trained, temporary workers to carry out crucial roles to keep trains moving. For instance, skilled temporary workers would be able to fill vacant positions such as train dispatchers, who perform vital tasks such as giving train drivers the signal they are safe to proceed and making sure train doors aren’t obstructed.

During this week’s strikes, that role has had to be carried out by train managers who could have been better used in more safety critical roles, such as guards. This legislation would allow that, as well limiting the impact future strikes have on hardworking commuters and the economy.

The change in law, which will apply across all sectors, is designed to minimise the negative and unfair impact of strikes on the British public by ensuring that businesses and services can continue operating. For example, strikes in public services such as education can often mean parents have to stay at home with their children rather than go to work, or rail sector strikes stopping commuters getting to work or to other businesses.

Subject to parliamentary approval, these changes are made through a statutory instrument and are set to come into force over the coming weeks and will apply across England, Scotland and Wales.

 

[NoXion]

They'd rather spend money on shit like this than raise pay. Fuckers.

 

[Pickman's model]

Taken from: Government acts to make it easier for businesses to use temporary staff to help ease disruptions caused by strike action

But what do you think?

 

[stdP]

Plenty of people saw this coming and there's already been a lot of pushbacks (including from agencies and agency workers themselves) as to how it's unworkable.

A fairly decent precis of what was thought to be incoming from a few days ago:

Train strike: UK government’s plan to replace strikers with agency workers failed in 2015 – it still won’t work today

Recently announced government plans to lift a ban on hiring agency workers have been tried - and failed – as recently as 2015

theconversation.com

Dunno if the link to the live page will work but on the Graun this morn:

It is not something agencies want, and will not achieve the goals the government claims.

This is a fundamental change to the regulations that govern recruitment businesses, and the industry is strongly opposed to it - it is not a pro-business move. We urge government to drop their plans and think again.

In practice, this change in legislation will not work. Inserting agency workers into strikes will only lengthen disputes.

It will also not provide the workers that government wants, and it puts agencies and agency workers in a very difficult position, with potential health and safety and reputational risks to consider.

 

[platinumsage]

I wouldn't mind being a criminal barrister for a few days. Might pop my CV off to Staffline.

 

[cupid_stunt]

It would also help mitigate against the impact of future strikes, such as those seen on our railways this week, by allowing trained, temporary workers to carry out crucial roles to keep trains moving.

What bollocks, as if there's loads of agency train drivers and rail signal operators available.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

I’m wondering who will train them? Because it won’t be the in-house trainers.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

It’s a totally bizarre proposition that agency workers can be parachuted in to run a railway on demand. I doubt even management would want to take responsibility of that.

 

[Santino]

Might as well set up the public inquiry into the resulting rail disaster now, it will save time later.

 

[stdP]

Might as well set up the public inquiry into the resulting rail disaster now, it will save time later.

Lessons have been learned, we promise a multi-derail won't happen again until the next multi-derail. And can you imagine how many hundreds more would have died under Labour?

 

[muscovyduck]

.

 

[cupid_stunt]

.

Is that a rail track point?

 

[A380]

I think the boss class have yet to grasp that for once there isn't an endless pool of people willing to agency scab for peanuts just now. Why do this for minimum wage and get all the shit of crossing picket lines if you can get the same or more at Amazon or McDonalds?

 

[Voley]

Every time I click New Posts and see this thread title I get Judas Priest stuck in my head.

 

[Pickman's model]

Every time I click New Posts and see this thread title I get Judas Priest stuck in my head.

Think of agadoo when this occurs

 

[Voley]

Think of agadoo when this occurs

Or Achey Breaky Heart.

 

[Pickman's model]

Or Achey Breaky Heart.

Yeh that'd do too. Or

 

[marty21]

I haven't temped for about 15 years but fuck that for a game of soldiers

 

[Voley]

I genuinely like Breaking The Law fwiw.

The video -particularly the bit where they crack the safe WITH THE POWER OF ROCK- is a classic of the genre imo.

 

[JimW]

a game of soldiers

Made me think of the Green Goddesses scabbing away back in the day.

 

[SpookyFrank]

And of course when (not if) there are deaths as a direct result of putting untrained people in safety-critical jobs, there will somehow be no criminal liability for the politicians that came up with the idea, or the employers, or the agencies. It'll be the fault of the unions for standing up for themselves in the first place.

 

[marty21]

And of course when (not if) there are deaths as a direct result of putting untrained people in safety-critical jobs, there will somehow be no criminal liability for the politicians that came up with the idea, or the employers, or the agencies. It'll be the fault of the unions for standing up for themselves in the first place.

There was an interview just now on Channel 4 news from someone in rail management, he admitted that they couldn't use agency staff for safety-critical jobs , they would only use agency staff for less critical jobs , he mentioned security.

 

[Pickman's model]

There was an interview just now on Channel 4 news from someone in rail management, he admitted that they couldn't use agency staff for safety-critical jobs , they would only use agency staff for less critical jobs , he mentioned security.

what could go wrong?

 

[cupid_stunt]

There was an interview just now on Channel 4 news from someone in rail management, he admitted that they couldn't use agency staff for safety-critical jobs , they would only use agency staff for less critical jobs , he mentioned security.

TBF, there are specialist agencies that have fully trained & licenced 'door safe' security staff available for all sorts of security jobs.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

what could go wrong?

I doubt security are on strike either as they tend not to be in-house so not on the same strike ballot.

 

[mojo pixy]

I've been told by my direct boss I'm not allowed to recommend trainees join a union ffs. I'm supposed to be "neutral". I've let them know how unhappy I am about it and why, but more usefully, today i gave the group a little speech I'm going to continue doing, that went something like,

I used to recommend joining a union but I've been told I can't. So I can't tell you your best options are Unison and the GMB, I can't tell you it costs about a tenner a month, I can't tell you it's a basic self-safeguarding measure in an insecure, demanding job. So won't say any of that.

I wonder how long I'll get away with it but seriously, WTF ?

 

[marty21]

TBF, there are specialist agencies that have fully trained & licenced 'door safe' security staff available for all sorts of security jobs.

It wouldn't stop strikes though , unless the government attacks H&S regulations attached to Rail Services (which wouldn't surprise me if they did)

 

[Pickman's model]

I doubt security are on strike either as they tend not to be in-house so not on the same strike ballot.

yeh well i only wish what happened to william huskisson could happen to grant shapps

 

[marty21]

I've been told by my direct boss I'm not allowed to recommend trainees join a union ffs. I'm supposed to be "neutral". I've let them know how unhappy I am about it and why, but more usefully with today i gave the group a little speech going to continue doing, that went something like,

I used to recommend joining a union but I've been told I can't. So I can't tell you your best options are Unison and the GMB, I can't tell you it costs about a tenner a month, I can't tell you it's a basic self-safeguarding measure in an insecure, demanding job. So won't say any of that.

I wonder how long I'll get away with it but seriously, WTF ?

Can you tell them that there are unions should they wish to look into them ?

 

[mojo pixy]

Can you tell them that there are unions should they wish to look into them ?

I'm not supposed to say anything at all. My only real get out is to explain I'm not allowed to while doing exactly that. I'm sure it's illegal to stop me talking about unions, but I'm freelance so I need to be a bit careful.