I shall deal with the detail of new clause 2 shortly, but it seeks to ensure co-operation between the union and the employer and vice versa—that is all.
Let us consider the difficulties in the modern workplace. First, flexible work patterns have increased among the modern work force. In some industries, workers do not have a regular workplace—they often work from a distance or move between different work sites. Privatisation, out-sourcing and offshoring individual contracts in company departments have exacerbated the trend. Payment of union subscription is often made by direct debit and people do not notify the union of change of employment or workplace. Consequently, employers issue injunctions for minor technical issues, disputes escalate and the overall industrial relations climate deteriorates.
Let me give some examples of the farcical nature of the problems that are experienced. The Communication Workers Union and Royal Mail have already been mentioned. The Union of Construction, Allied Trades and Technicians—the building workers' union—finds it virtually impossible to comply with the law because so many of its members are on so many different sites that it is cost-ineffective even to try to ballot them. It is difficult to trace them at any one time.
The latest example involves Unite and the bus strike in London. Unite balloted its bus worker members on a wages matter. Bus drivers were being paid differently for doing the same job—even on the same route—because they were employed by different companies under the privatised system. There was 90 per cent. support for industrial action and the results were provided to the general secretary. As some hon. Members know, the procedure in Unite is that the general secretary receives the results, discussions take place with the national executive committee, the matter is passed on to the relevant region and it is decided whether to proceed with the action. That is perfectly appropriate and exhaustively democratic. However, because the process took 36 hours, Unite was injuncted and the industrial action could not go ahead. We are now told that the union may be threatened with damages for some action that took place.
Employment Bill [Lords]
Proceeding contribution from
John McDonnell
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 4 November 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Employment Bill [Lords].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
482 c160 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 01:23:35 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_505680
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_505680
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_505680