Anti-strikes legislation is ‘unworkable’, say trade unions

The government’s new anti-strikes legislation is unworkable and will simply lengthen industrial disputes, the Trades Union Congress said on Friday, as it prepared to fight the bill’s passage through parliament.

Ministers have said powers to impose minimum service levels on much of the public sector during strikes are essential to “protect the lives and livelihoods of the British people”.

The government has unveiled the anti-strikes bill as Rishi Sunak, the prime minister, grapples with the worst wave of industrial action in decades, as public and private sector workers demand higher pay amid the cost of living crisis.

Nurses are due to walk out again on Wednesday and Thursday. Health secretary Steve Barclay is looking at offering nurses a one-off lump sum payment to try to end the dispute, but has been told by the Treasury it would have to be paid for from within the existing NHS budget.

The legislation that would force a proportion of workers in key sectors to keep working during industrial action is due to have its second reading in the House of Commons on Monday, and could be on the statute book by the summer.

Unions said the bill could prevent hundreds of thousands of public sector workers exercising their fundamental right to strike.

They also said it was impractical and would make it harder to believe the government was acting in good faith in talks to resolve the current pay disputes.

“We think the bill as written is unworkable,” said Kate Bell, assistant general secretary at the TUC, the umbrella body that supports 48 member unions and serves as the voice of the UK labour movement.

She termed the legislation a “spiteful” initiative that would “drive a coach and horses through the good relationships that do exist” with public sector employers, which would be forced to implement it.

The TUC said the bill, which replaces an earlier version targeted only at the transport sector, removed “any pretence at collective negotiation”.

It highlighted how the legislation allowed ministers to specify the level of service required in a very wide range of services, potentially including inessential ones.

The government will use the bill to impose minimum service levels on ambulance, fire and rail services after a public consultation that could run in parallel to the bill’s passage through parliament.

If voluntary agreements cannot be reached in other sectors, including education, border security and other health and transport services, ministers can set requirements unilaterally.

Bell said this ignored the reality that ministers in Whitehall are poorly placed to stipulate what is needed on the ground in local NHS trusts or transport networks, or to improve on the voluntary agreements that unions have reached with health service employers to ensure “life and limb” cover during strikes by ambulance staff.

The TUC noted the government’s own reasoning for limiting its previous bill to the transport sector was that “life and limb” arrangements already existed for emergency services, while the large number of employers in education would make minimum service levels “difficult and very burdensome”.

Bell said the TUC had held meetings this week with Cabinet Office minister Jeremy Quin and with the minister for small business Kevin Hollinrake, at which it underlined the need to revisit pay deals for the current financial year of 2022-23 to “unlock” the current disputes.

So far, however, the TUC has received no response to requests to meet chancellor Jeremy Hunt, and it said his engagement was essential to resolve pay disputes.

The TUC is seeking support from MPs of all parties to oppose the passage of the anti-strikes legislation through parliament, and believes it will have good grounds to challenge the bill in the courts should it become law.