Unions Together

At the forefront

02.09.10

In 2001 the Labour Party campaigned under the banner of "A lot done - a lot to do."

That slogan holds true today when it comes to the equality agenda. I am truly proud of what Labour achieved in government - from the national minimum wage and vastly improved family leave, to getting more women into Parliament, and acting to end the slavery of migrant domestic workers, to so much more.

But we must do more. As the ConDem budget means the most vulnerable will be paying the highest price for the economic crisis, Labour has to ensure we speak for the whole of Britain. We must be a diverse Party, grounded in the communities we represent.

I believe that the next leader of the Labour Party, whoever that may be, must make sure that we continue to be the Party of equality. Over the past weeks, TULO have asked each of the leadership candidates to tell us what they would do to make Labour more diverse, and to ensure that we continue to be at the forefront of fighting for equality.

This week, Party members and members of affiliated trade unions will receive their ballot papers for this important election - that's why I'd like you to read the candidates' responses on equality and diversity in full, and think about what they have to say when you cast your vote.

http://www.unionstogether.org.uk/party-of-equality

This is a snapshot of what each of the candidates has said:

Diane Abbott argues, "I hope to be able to double the membership of black and ethnic minority Labour Party members in the course of this campaign. Doing this would change the face of the party forever and make sure our politicians not only look like our voters, but have their interests at heart."

Ed Balls argues, "I am proposing a special Diversity Fund to help more under-represented groups - including women, BAME groups, disabled people and those from ordinary backgrounds - to become MPs or Councillors."

Andy Burnham argues, "I will ensure that the proportion of women across Shadow Government reflects, as a minimum, the proportion of women in the Parliamentary Labour Party."

David Miliband argues, "I would also continue my longstanding support for All Women Shortlists (AWS) and will aim to increase transparency - at least 50 of the top 100 target seats should be AWS. As leader, I would appoint a Shadow Women's and Equalities minister and would make sure that the Shadow Cabinet is made up of at least a third women, to reflect the current balance in the PLP."

Ed Miliband argues, "I've pledged to ensure that 50% of the cabinet should be women. Having a Cabinet-level Shadow Women's Minister as a visible and valued champion is essential, as is supporting and encouraging more women to stand for local government - because we need women to be fairly represented at all levels."

This agenda matters. It's becoming all the more clear that under this ConDem coalition it will be women, children, the elderly, those suffering from long-term illness, disabled people and the unemployed who will be hit the hardest. We have to speak out against the Coalition when their policies are in such opposition to the values of fairness that we hold so dear.

But to do that, we must go further in becoming a Party that is truly representative. That means our Party leadership and membership needs to be more diverse. Whoever is our next leader, we need to see real action to get more women into Parliament, and we need to ensure that Labour is better connected with ordinary trade union members - and that's just the start.

As we elect our new leader over the next weeks, we have the opportunity to ensure that equality remains at the heart of our Party, as we write the next chapter of our history.

Please take a moment to read what the candidates have to say on this important issue, and think about it when you're casting your vote.

http://www.unionstogether.org.uk/party-of-equality

View Comments

Your questions answered - Week Eight - Equality and Diversity

27.08.10

The Labour Party has always prided itself on being the Party of equality and diversity. How will you ensure that Labour’s shadow cabinet and the PLP are representative of women and men? What one thing would you do to make sure that Labour is better connected with and representative of ordinary trade union members?

Diane Abbott:

As Britain’s first black female MP, it is no surprise to me that twenty three years later, I am the first black person to contend the leadership of a political party.

However, I am proud to be running to lead the party that has done more than any other to promote equality and diversity.

I am backed by BAME Labour in my bid to become leader, and with their help, I hope to be able to double the membership of black and ethnic minority Labour Party members in the course of this campaign.

Doing this would change the face of the party forever and make sure our politicians not only look like our voters, but have their interests at heart.

I am in favour of 50/50 ratio for the shadow cabinet.

I was a leading campaigner for all women’s shortlists in the 1980’s when it was not a popular idea. I was also equalities advisor to the former Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone. Because we took positive action on women’s representation, we saw the highest ever number of women MPs’ elected in 1997. The other political parties are still scrambling to keep up, years down the line.

As for the PLP, it is essential that we make similar changes as we would in shadow cabinet.

The one thing that would ensure Labour is better connected with ordinary trade union members is to pick me as your leader.

I have worked as a trade union official and have never been part of the Westminster elite that made decisions without consulting members.

Part of my promise as Labour leader is to listen and act in the interests of members and voters, not of party insiders.

 

Ed Balls:

Equality is at the centre of Labour’s beliefs. That’s why as part of my contract with the Labour Party in this contest I am proposing a special Diversity Fund to help more under-represented groups – including women, BAME groups, disabled people and those from ordinary backgrounds – to become MPs or Councillors.

As we champion equal pay, improve support for disabled children, tackle homophobic bullying or defeat the racist BNP in the wider society, so we must be determined to ensure equality in our own party.

I support the goal of having half of women in Labour’s shadow cabinet – and in the PLP too. To deliver this we need not only targets and all-women shortlists but a change in culture in our party and in Westminster too.

We have made great progress on equality, thanks to campaigns often led by women in the Labour Party, but Britain remains unequal and we need a stronger voice for the diverse range of women in our Party too, including trade union women.

So to strengthen links between the Labour Party and the union movement I have also said we should extend the £1 youth membership rate to all affiliated union members who haven’t yet joined the party.

You can read more about these issues in my response to the Lead for Women campaign here.

  

Andy Burnham:

"When we think of the milestones we reached in government the Labour family has a great equality and diversity record to be proud of: the Racial and Religious Hatred Act, the Equalities Act, the first black cabinet minister, the first Muslim minister, the first black woman minister to speak at the Commons dispatch box, Civil Partnerships, gay adoption and the repeal of Section 28.

Now in Opposition we must maintain the momentum we had in government. The party I lead will offer additional training and mentoring for our newly-elected representatives, which is particularly important for young, women and BAME members for whom the support has too often simply not been available. I will also ensure that the proportion of women across Shadow and Government reflects, as a minimum, the proportion of women in the Parliamentary Labour Party. My online manifesto calls for Labour to continue the great progress made with all-women shortlists to ensure there are more women in Parliament and on the Labour benches.

Providing support and listening to our members and those within the Labour family are key to Labour’s future success, to end the disconnection between the Party, its members and supporters. That means closer ties to the trade union movement, not just at the top of the Party, but from constituencies up. Working together, we can be a force for good within our communities and ensure that we never again lose sight of what it means to be Labour."

    

 David Miliband:

I am lucky to be surrounded by a number of strong women in my life: my mother, my wife and my key political advisers. They all tell me the same thing — we need a new kind of politics which promotes and supports women from the grass roots up. Only then will we see change at the top.

I want our parliamentary party to reflect our country – that’s why I want a 50:50 gender balance in the PLP by the next election. To achieve this, I am committed to raising money for a Leadership Academy to provide high quality mentoring and training, bringing in experts from the public and private sector. I would also continue my longstanding support for All Women Shortlists and will aim to increase transparency - at least 50 of the top 100 target seats should be AWS.

As leader I would appoint a Shadow Women’s and Equalities minister and would make sure that the Shadow Cabinet is made up of at least a third women, to reflect the current balance in the PLP.

I want to lead a living breathing Labour movement rooted in workplaces and communities, truly representative of the people we serve and a voice for working people. During the campaign I have trained 1000 future leaders in the techniques of community organising, drawing on the best traditions of the Trade Unions. This is just the start. I am targeting a doubling of the party membership by the next election, including a national drive to recruit trade union levy payers to the party.  I am also committed to a democratically elected Party Chair to lead the process of rebuilding our party in workplaces and communities across the country.

 

Ed Miliband:

The Labour Party has taken huge strides towards achieving equal representation in Parliament – far more than any other party – but there is more still to be done. We have many talented female MPs and it’s time that their talents and skills were fully utilised in Cabinet. That’s why I’ve pledged to ensure that 50% of the cabinet should be women. Having a Cabinet-level Shadow Women’s Minister as a visible and valued champion is essential, as is upporting and encouraging more women to stand for local government – because we need women to be fairly represented at all levels.  Labour’s rules on gender representation in local councils are there for a reason and they must be implemented. And we must never again fight a general election with so few women at the front of our campaign.

Our party changed the face of Westminster when so many Labour women were elected in 1997 but we remain far from achieving equal representation, both in our own parliamentary party, and across parliament as a whole.  While we strive for the day when All Women Shortlists are no longer needed because women’s voices are heard just as clearly as men’s, I will remain a strong supporter of All Women Shortlists as a practical tool to help us embody our values and tackle inequality.

Trade unions are a cornerstone of a civilised society. Labour’s link with the trade unions allows us to be connected to the lives of millions of working people and provides a key channel of communication between the leadership and the grassroots. We will only be able to organise effectively in opposition, and prepare ourselves for government, by listening to the concerns and aspirations of working people. And it is through the trade unions that we can encourage more people from various backgrounds into politics. One of the things that excites me about this campaign is the opportunity to work with trade unions to help organise the people, to ensure a better deal for working people and to rebuild the party into a force for governing and for transformative good in people’s lives.

 

View Comments

Your questions answered - Week Seven - Trade Union Rights

29.07.10

Britain has the most restrictive industrial laws in the western world, which stop unions from best representing their members. What one restriction do you think most urgently needs lifting and why?

Diane Abbott:

As a former trade union official, I know too well the struggle that some unions face in representing their members effectively. I worked as full-time Equality Officer in 1986 for ACTT (film technicians union) and I believe that post the industrial era, governments of whatever colour, have made it more difficult for trade unions to be the force for good they so often are. We often forget that trade unions do more than negotiate better pay deals - they are leaders in equality and diversity, experts in healthy and safe working environments and champions of international relations.

I support John McDonnell's Trade Union Freedom Bill and I have signed the Early Day Motion to demonstrate my support. I think we have to free up some of the legislation around industrial action which paints workers as criminals. I think we also have to simplify the technocratic rules and regulations around disputes.

But the most importantly, I want to make it unlawful to strike down an otherwise lawful ballot because of unintentional technical breaches of the regulations which would not have altered the outcome of the ballot. I would also change the law to stop employers taking vexatious injunctions.

The right to strike is a fundamental right and in Britain we have stifled this right for too long. As Labour leader, I would make sure this right is reinstated.

 

Ed Balls:

Being a union member seems tough right now: public service jobs, pay and pensions under attack; ideological cuts that risk a double-dip recession; lawyers thwarting democratic decisions on technicalities; and the Government plotting new restrictions.

But the biggest underlying threat facing unions is falling union membership - especially but not only in the private sector. That's why unions like Unite, the CWU, Unison and GMB have stepped up organising efforts.

Unions repeatedly proved themselves to be a force for good and I want to enable unions to organise to represent their members properly. The ILO proclaims a right to organise in free, democratic societies. I want to improve the Freedom to Organise in modern Britain.

Labour empowered workers to vote for recognition. But the right of access to staff only applies where a formal ballot process is underway. Catch 22 is how to get to this stage. It is currently too easy for employers to be obstructive.

Laws can't do the job for unions but laws can ensure fair and reasonable access to workers who are interested in joining.

And once established, trade union reps need training and proper facilities to represent members effectively - we must resist the impending Government attack on facilities.

Finally I want to maximise participation. Union members should be allowed to vote in ballots in non-postal forms such as secure and secret internet and workplace balloting. Experience shows this means more people will take part.

The Freedom to Organise can help union members to help themselves.

 

Andy Burnham:

I have been concerned by the role of the courts in recent industrial actions, where decisions have been made on relatively minor issues which have effectively quashed legally constituted strikes. We should look again at the legislation to reassure workers who have been properly balloted and who have voted in favour of industrial action that their decision cannot be quashed on minor technicalities, brought about by unforeseen consequences of the legislation.

 

  

 David Miliband:

Unions should have the freedom to recruit new members. Preventing trade union reps from entering workplaces to speak to people about the benefits of joining a union also risks creating a confrontational relationship with employers, which is not the basis for good social partnership.

We made many positive changes to industrial relations in government, including the right to recognition and the Union Modernisation Fund. The challenge of maintaining and growing union membership is one shared by our sister movements in virtually all developed nations, despite very different employment legislation. But the insecurities associated with globalisation and desire of employees to be treated with respect and have a voice at work makes the need for trade unions as important today as at anytime in our history.

The opportunity for unions is to demonstrate their appeal to workers and to today’s economy – where being a decent employer and a profitable enterprise go hand in hand, and the best workplaces are those characterised by autonomy, engagement and innovation. That means standing up to those companies who think the route to success lies in squeezing every ounce of effort out of their workforce in return for low pay and poor conditions – as a substitute for management vision and investment.

In short, we need good trade unions now more than ever. Perversely, the Tories seem to want to re-fight old battles over strike laws. Industrial disputes are at a far lower level than during the 1980s – and the last thing Britain needs is a throwback to the confrontational prescriptions of that decade.

 

Ed Miliband:

I'm proud of what Labour achieved in government. But I think we have to realise we did too little to improve working conditions for those who work the hardest. Too many are stuck in low wage, long hours jobs. We didn't do enough to create routes to better work and a better life. The party of the minimum wage somehow became the party of maximum flexibility to work. But we all know that flexibility for employers can lead to low wages and poor employment conditions. We didn't take enough steps to offer better protection.

The Labour Party I want to lead will fight to build a different kind of economy. An economy with greater fairness in work, a greater number of higher quality and better skilled jobs, and with greater time outside of work for people to lead more fulfilling lives.

Britain’s Trade Unions are a force for good in society. Where Unions are recognised, pay is higher and conditions are fairer. Where Unions play an active role accidents are fewer, saving life, limb and the wasted money for companies and those who work in them. We need to deepen our links with the Trade Unions and recognise that some of the mistakes of the last decade could have been avoided if we had been prepared to listen more to our party.

I am determined to make sure that the Trade Unions are able to fairly represent the interests of their members and the wider workforce. Of course industrial action is a last resort, but the right to strike is a fundamental human right which must be protected and I will make sure it is. The British Airways dispute showed that the rules governing strike ballots are in urgent need of reform. Supporting strong, vibrant unions means we must re-visit the rules relating to access to workplaces and we must ensure that during a dispute either side can refer to the mediation service ACAS. It is a real shame that so few people in the private sector are trade union members. I want to see that change.

 

View Comments

Why ASLEF are backing Diane Abbott

22.07.10

Why ASLEF are recommending our members vote for Diane Abbott

ASLEF’s Executive Committee is recommending that its members give Diane Abbott their first preference vote in the leadership ballot. They met all five candidates before concluding that Diane is the only candidate committed to a publicly run, publicly owned railway who clearly understands the need for change in trade union laws.

The Executive was also impressed by her desire to put ‘life, enthusiasm and democracy’ back into the Party. She knows what needs to be changed because she’s worked in the Party at every level, and is untainted by ‘parachutes or patronage’. Finally she wants to end a culture where ‘people felt they couldn’t speak out, even in favour of popular policies which Labour should be supporting – like less privatisation, no Trident, putting rail back in public hands and more investment in public housing.’

ASLEF feels Diane represents an opportunity for genuine change at a time we desperately need it.

 

Simon Weller is ASLEF's  Acting General Secretary. ASLEF is Britain's trade union for train drivers. Its 18,500+ members are employed in the train operating companies, the freight companies, London Underground and some Light Rapid Transport.

View Comments

Your questions answered - Week Six - Agency Workers

20.07.10

The unfair treatment of agency workers causes many problems, not just for the agency workers themselves, but also for their directly employed colleagues. How should the Agency Workers Directive be implemented and enforced in order to put a stop to the exploitation of agency workers and the undercutting of permanent staff, and what other measures should be put in place? Why do you think progress was not made to sign up to and implement the Agency Workers Directive sooner under Labour, given supporting it was part of the Warwick Agreement of 2004?

 

Diane Abbott:

I think it was major error that the Labour government did not sign up to the Agency Workers Directive sooner.

It would have left another marvellous legacy for Labour had we begun implementing the directive in 2004.

But we did manage to get the directive through Parliament ahead of the last election, thanks to Unions who have lobbied for the support of the directive for a long time. It is down to them that we have finally been able to get it passed into law.

I voted in favour of the Agency Workers Regulations 2010, which will secure equal pay, holiday and terms for working time between vulnerable agency workers and their permanent staff counterparts after 12 weeks in the job. This will be implemented in the UK at the latest by December 2011.

However, now we are in opposition, we need to ensure the directive goes ahead as we intended.

The Tories vigorously opposed the directive from the start so we must ensure that they implement the directive as we intended. The worrying response from Ed Davey to a question from Lisa Nandy should make us raise our political antennae and be aware that this coalition could be willing to water down the proposals.

Agency workers are particularly at risk during recession and this directive is needed protect their interests. Currently they lack almost all of the rights guaranteed for normal workers from the Employment Rights Act 1996, which is just wrong.

These new regulations will see improvements for millions of workers across the UK.

For the Coalition to go back on the directive would be nothing short of a scandal.

I for one will do my best to make sure this does not happen.

   

Ed Balls:

While Labour put the minimum wage and other advances into law, we were far too slow to legislate for equal treatment for agency staff. The TUC's Vulnerable Workers project exposed heart-rending cases. And it was not enough to implement the posted workers directive when the floor was simply the minimum wage rather than the proper rate for the job.

Why did it happen? Because there was a school of thought in some parts of government that this would appease business. The election showed that this was futile, especially when business leaders signed a letter backing the Tories against the national insurance rise.

I support immigration and migration, which has made an immense contribution to our economy and the diversity and richness of our society. I’ve said this in front of a baying crowd of BNP supporters in my constituency and will do so again. But I don’t believe in free migration, I believe in fair migration – fair to migrant workers and to working people.

The scale and pace of migration from Eastern Europe in the second half of the last decade did have an affect on our communities, on housing, and on the wages and terms and conditions of many workers. Not acting quickly on implementing the agency and posted workers directives exacerbated that. So we should have a proper set of guarantees to stop exploitation of migrant workers and prevent unfair under-cutting.

I also support a Living Wage and was the first and only Cabinet Minister to implement it within my Department for all staff and contracted staff. But the law can’t do it all. In future unions must have the chance to organise and attract all types of worker to eradicate injustices.

 

Andy Burnham:

My dad was a telecomms engineer and, during the later part of his working life, he was an agency worker. That experience showed me first hand how precarious that sort of contract work can be. I have also seen the sometimes knife-edge existence that some of the families in my constituency face because of short-term contracts and the inability to access the sort of banking services the rest of us take for granted. That is why I have spoken up for agency workers during this leadership campaign.

Quite simply, the coalition's hesitation over the Directive in response to the 'the different points of view expressed by the business community' is an insult to temporary and agency workers, as well as anyone who wants Britain to be an economic and employment exemplar in the future.

I saw the Directive as a vital part of efforts to upgrade our laws for the current and future workforce, and I have already called for all job vacancies to be openly advertised, for instance. I regret that the Directive did not come into force without exemptions during Labour's last term, and we should learn from that and reform our policy-making processes accordingly. That is why I want to strengthen the trade union link, so that those mistakes are never made again and that we can truly be a Labour movement.

  

 David Miliband:

I strongly support the Agency Workers Directive, to ensure people receive the employment rights they are due and to prevent the exploitation of vulnerable workers. This is a basic issue of fairness at work. It required negotiation between government and the social partners both here in Britain and at a European level. In retrospect, it took too long to achieve, but it was an agreement that would never have been achieved under a Tory government; hostile to both employment rights and to European cooperation.

 

It’s now vital that we get implementation of the Directive right. Workers should not be denied a fair wage, holiday entitlement and access to parental leave just because they are not permanently contracted with their employer. That’s why I support the TUC’s efforts to ensure the regulations prevent unscrupulous employers and agencies from avoiding the new rights – such as by shifting agency workers between jobs within the same workplace or using bogus self-employment to avoid equal treatment. Where they believe these rights are being denied, employees and trade unions should have recourse to proper dispute resolution mechanisms, including an employment tribunal if necessary.

 

Ed Miliband:

Fairness and dignity in work is at the heart of my vision for a more equal and stronger Britain. I'm proud of what Labour achieved in Government. But we have to realise we did too little to improve working conditions for those who work the hardest. Too many are stuck in low wage, long hours jobs. We didn't do enough to create routes to better work and a better life. And we need to do more to tackle the gap between rich and poor. That's why I am campaigning for a living wage and a high pay commission for both the public and private sector.

There are more than a million agency workers in the UK and the Agency Workers Directive is vital to ensuring their employment rights are protected and also that agency workers can't be used to undercut permanent staff.

It's a fundamental Labour belief that work should pay and those who work hard should be properly rewarded. That's why it was so important for us to implement the directive quickly. It took far too long to us to do so. I have spoken before about how some of our mistakes in Government might have been avoided if we had listened more to party and union members, and the Agency Workers Directive is a good example of this.

Now I fear the Coalition are rowing back from this commitment and I've written David Cameron in the last couple of weeks to challenge him on his plans. I will fight to protect these regulations and take-on those who are trying to undermine them.

 

View Comments

Your questions answered - Week Five - The Pay Gap

13.07.10

Labour stands for equality and fairness at work and in the wider community. How do we tackle the gender pay gap, discrimination and low pay in the current economic climate?

 

Diane Abbott:

Labour has a fantastic record of supporting people at work and I am proud to have been able to vote for some of the most progressive and radical policies of the century – The Minimum Wage Act and legislation to end discrimination in the workplace form a very proud part of our history. But Legislation isn’t the panacea and we have so much more to do to equalise pay between men and women and make sure that elements of our workforce, such as temporary and agency workers are not put at risk of exploitation.

On the issue of the Gender Pay Gap which is something that we, as a society, should be ashamed of, something radical must be put in place. When women accountants are earning up to two thirds less than their male counterparts, for example, we have to make companies and business more transparent to expose and tackle inequalities in pay between the sexes.

I’m pleased that the UK Government finally signed up to the Temporary and Agency Workers directive, albeit after some needed lobbying from Trade Unions, but I wait to see how the current Government puts the Directive into practice. My worry is that this Government led by a coalition who have shown their willingness to cosy up to sections of the business community to the detriment of the most vulnerable, will bow to pressure from some groups and water down the Directive. We must resist this vehemently.

  

Ed Balls:

For me, equality sits at the heart of our socialist principles. It is 100 years since the women chainmakers’ strike for a minimum wage, 42 years since the famous Ford women’s dispute and 40 years since the landmark Equal Pay Act they inspired. Though Labour has acted to narrow the pay gap, there is still a 17% pay gap for full time workers and 40% for part timers.

It's not enough to study the pay gap; we must take decisive action to narrow it. To begin with, we must defend Labour’s Equality Act from Tory back-sliding and extend the requirement to promote equality to the private sector, starting with those on government contracts and publishing every large company’s pay gap.

We cannot succeed by individual case law alone. I want to promote union-negotiated collective settlements, pay audits, equality reps and representative legal actions.

The National Minimum Wage improved women’s pay. It should rise above £7 an hour. I support the Living Wage and was the only Cabinet minister to implement the Living Wage for all my staff and contractors.

Finally tax credits and child benefit are essential in tackling family poverty and we must defend them against Tory- Lib Dem attacks.

The Tory-Lib Dem government threatens to widen inequality by reneging on equality law, undermining enforcement, slashing tax credits and benefits and cutting public sector jobs which pay women more. This could set us back decades and Labour’s new leader must put equality at the heart of our concerns.

 

Andy Burnham:

First off, we don’t let the boulder roll back down the hill on the advances we have made. Whether it’s on low pay, discrimination or the gender pay gap, we will not stand by and see hard won gains under Labour wither on the vine under the Tory/ Liberal coalition.

That is our main task as an Opposition over coming months. We will not allow the Conservatives to get away with dismantling progressive measures for their ideological ends under the cloak of “we can’t afford it”. We will put pressure on those shame-faced Lib Dems MPs to ensure they support us as we protect what we have built during our 13 years in office. The coalition says that it is committed greater gender equality. An easy thing to claim. We will hold them to it.

In terms of low pay, we must fight to ensure the value of the Minimum Wage does not diminish. The Tories hate the fact that the National Minimum Wage has been such a success. They will roll-out the old Tory arguments about the country not being able to afford regular increases, but it’s good for the economy, especially during such a fragile recovery, to have the low paid with more money in their pockets.

  

 

 

 David Miliband:

In Government, Labour made real progress on tackling discrimination at work. Our Equalities legislation made provision for extra protection for employees and we were absolutely right to introduce gender pay audits.

However there is still a long way to go and the gender pay gap is still too wide. 40 years after equal pay legislation came into force, women working full-time earn on average 17% less per hour than men. For ethnic minority women, the gap is even higher at 20%. Over the course of a working life women earn £330,000 less than men.

To tackle this we need to make sure we improve the enforcement of employment rights. Proper inspection and follow up of breaches of employment laws will help tackle discrimination at work.

We also need to look at ways of ensuring employees are properly involved and informed about important decisions in the places they work. Workers need the power to tackle discrimination and improve fairness in the workplace. That’s why we need to reform corporate governance by requiring an employee representative on the remuneration committees of firms – and promoting the rights to information and consultation.

Finally, despite the minimum wage, it is wrong that there are still over 5 million low paid workers in our country today. That’s why we should campaign to ensure that anyone working in the public sector is paid a living wage – showing a lead to the private sector.

 

Ed Miliband:

Fairness is part of Labour’s DNA, but at times we have lost sight of what it takes to achieve a more equal society, one where people can get on whatever background they come from, one where we are not divided as we currently are by gross differences of class, wealth and power.

Above all, if we are to really achieve a fairer society we need to do more to improve working conditions for those who work the hardest. Too many are still stuck in low wage, long hours jobs. And although we achieved a lot in Government, we didn't do enough to create the routes to better work and a better life. The party of the minimum wage somehow became the party of maximum flexibility to work. But we all know that flexibility for employers can lead to low wages and poor employment conditions. We didn't take enough steps to offer better protection.

The Labour Party I want to lead will fight to build a different kind of economy. An economy with greater fairness in work, a greater number of higher quality and better skilled jobs, and with greater time outside of work for people to lead more fulfilling lives.

That’s why I am campaigning for a living wage for everyone. No one who works should live in poverty. It’s a fundamental Labour belief that work should pay and those who work hard should be properly rewarded. That’s why it was so important for us to implement the agency workers directive, although it took far too long to do so. Now the Coalition are rowing back from this commitment, and I’ve written to David Cameron to make sure the regulations stay.

We must also fight to tackle discrimination in the workplace. There can be no justification for paying people differently according to gender and firms need to be open about what people are paid and about how they determine people’s pay scales.

Time outside of work matters as well, particularly to those working long hours in the hardest jobs. I want everyone to have the right to request flexible work and we need to focus more on the responsibilities of employers to invest in their workforce and develop their skills.

 

 

 

View Comments

Agency workers’ protection at risk from Coalition?

06.07.10

Labour’s affiliated trade unions long campaigned for the last Labour government to sign up to the Temporary and Agency Workers Directive, which are due to come into force next year and provide crucial protection for the thousands of workers who miss out on workplace rights just because they are employed through an agency.

Whilst the UK Government is now signed up to the Directive, the way that they will put that into practice in this country will determine how effective that protection is. The CBI recently called for the government to “look to simplify the agency rules to ensure existing work opportunities are maintained and new openings can be created”.

That’s why it’s so worrying that Ed Davey, a Lib Dem Minister in the Business Innovation and Skills department, recently answered a question from Labour’s Lisa Nandy by saying: “The Government are aware of the different points of view expressed by the business community about certain aspects of the agency workers regulations and is currently considering the way forward.”

Any watering down of the protections due to come in would be worrying indeed – this is one issue we’ll be keeping an eye on as it progresses.

View Comments

Your questions answered - Week Four - Royal Mail

02.07.10

If elected as the Labour leader, would you support a three-line whip for the PLP against the Coalition government's Bill to privatise, and break up, Royal Mail?

 

Diane Abbott:

Yes I would. I have long made it clear that I do not support privatising the Royal Mail. In my opinion if a service is important, it is too important to be privatised.

We need to be wary about privatising and breaking up an institution that is one of Britain's greatest public services.

Coalition ministers have this idea that Royal Mail can be the new John Lewis, where employees are 'partners', owning shares and receiving annual dividends based on its profits. But they forget that the history behind the two companies is very different.

During last year's post strike, Royal Mail recruited 30,000 temporary workers to counter the effect of the strike.

Also, if the employees are to ‘own’ the business and receive profits, surely they would also be forced to bear the burden should profits fall? Would employees want to take on this risk?

An injection of private cash is urgently needed the coalition says. But would a private company also be prepared to address the black hole in the pension scheme or would they force employees to pay up themselves? What would be the government’s position should we have a revolt on our hands?

I know the Hooper report said change was needed. But we need to be wary of handing over institutions to private companies without proper consideration.

  

Ed Balls:

Yes. Postal workers delivering letters for the same stamp price, from John O’Groats to Land’s End, 6 days a week, makes Britain proud.

The CWU has attracted huge support for its campaigns to retain the Post Office as a public service. It keeps friends and families in touch, and keeps the economy connected. So I fully back the manifesto pledge to invest in Royal Mail in the public sector.

Yes there is pressure on letters from emails, but the internet is also boosting delivery of packages. So the future need not be gloomy.

The big challenges facing Royal Mail are:

• Modernisation. Royal Mail and the CWU have made massive strides to agree tough modernisation plans, backed overwhelmingly by CWU members. This requires investment and we should explore innovative ways to achieve this.
• Transforming the Post Office into a ‘People’s Bank’, as we propose.
• Pensions. Like millions of public sector workers, postal staff are threatened by a Tory-Lib Dem government attack on their pensions. The Post Office is not going to do a moonlight flit, so a long-term sustainable solution to the deficit is the answer.
• The wider economy. Did you know that the Con-Dem government's unfair VAT rise will apply to postage stamps too? We have to get the economy right and prevent the double-dip recession the Tories are recklessly flirting with.
• Con-Dem plans to privatise Royal Mail. It is a good idea for postal staff to be more involved in Royal Mail. But a small stake held in trust for staff would not give employees any significant control, is certainly not a John Lewis model and would not disguise the overall sale to private owners which the Government plan.

I will fight against the Con-Dem plans, which endanger this vital and popular public service.

 

Andy Burnham:

We've not yet received Andy's answer, but we'll publish it as soon as we have.

  

 

 

 David Miliband:

I support our manifesto commitment to maintaining Royal Mail in the public sector, while bringing in both new investment and reform. This is the best way to protect the vital principles of a single price and universal provision that underpin a postal service operated in the public interest. Competition from other forms of communication – not least e-mail – is only going to continue, so we must encourage innovation and creativity from all quarters to safeguard the future of Royal Mail.

I am very concerned by suggestions that the Tory-Lib Dem government is considering privatisation. As Labour leader, I would oppose any Bill that gave the private sector a majority stake in Royal Mail, which would mean the controlling interest of the company was not democratically governed in the public interest.

I also think we should be finding ways to sustain and capitalise on the Post Office network, which is part of the fabric of our communities. We should be exploring ways to use the Post Office network to provide banking and other financial services to people – as well as to provide credit to families that keeps them out of the hands of exploitative loan sharks and enables them to borrow at a reasonable cost.

 

Ed Miliband:

Yes I would have a clear position against the Coalition's plans for privatisation. They are the wrong answer for the workforce and citizens.

CWU have worked hard with the Royal Mail to agree comprehensive modernisation plans and these are supported by CWU members. I believe that we need to show as a party, including in the case of Royal Mail, that we can modernise and improve public services without resorting to privatisation. So we need to back up the modernisation plans by finding innovative ways to enable the Royal Mail to work in the public interest as a publicly owned service with the investment it needs and the improved management at the top of the organisation. And we also need to examine the competition regime to ensure that we don't have a situation which unfairly disadvantages the Royal Mail.

Britain needs a strong modern Post Office, which provides a world-class postal service and also diversifies into new areas, like the Post Office Bank. As we made clear in the Manifesto, we need to invest and develop the Post Office as a public service, vital to our economy and vital to millions of people across the country who want to stay connected with their friends and family.

 

 

 

View Comments

Your questions answered - Week Three - Public Sector Pensions

22.06.10

What should be the future of public sector pensions? Would a future Labour Government led by you stand by the agreement reached between the TUC and the Labour Government in April of this year and commit to provide 'good quality, index-linked, sustainable, defined benefit pensions' for public sector workers?

 

Diane Abbott:

A large number of my constituents work in the public sector The idea that they should have to contribute more to their pensions because of a deficit caused by bankers is ludicrous.

We should not be hitting as many people as we can with these cuts, which is what the coalition seems to be doing. Public sector workers traditionally earn lower wages than those in the private sector and often good quality pension schemes are their ‘bonuses’.

The coalition cuts are hitting ordinary people the hardest. When David Cameron says our way of life must change, he means our way of life not his. It is unfair that we should be taking money from the pockets of the poorest people to appease private sector workers in the City.

The actual cost of public sector pensions to taxpayers will not rise, as the coalition government is suggesting. Several trade unions have backed this and suggested the government needs to look long term rather than drastic cuts in the short term.

As leader of the Labour Party, I would stick by our promise to provide sustainable public sector pensions. In fact, I would reconsider the cuts altogether. Instead I would look at increasing tax for high earners as a way of evening out the playing field.

Labour lost out at the polls because people thought we had stopped listening to them. These cuts suggest the coalition might also be in danger of losing touch with the ordinary man and woman. This is a lesson they may have to learn the hard way, as Labour had to.

 

Ed Balls:

Britain’s public service workers will have been shocked at the sudden review of their pensions announced on Sunday, especially since Cameron and Clegg have repeatedly said they want to target public sector pensions for cuts.

It is wrong for the new government to pre-empt this review, and to restore some faith in its independence, the commission must at least have a proper trade union voice.

I am right behind Dave Prentis' call last week to stand up for public sector workers’ pensions. The picture of 10 million public servants retiring into shameless luxury is a media myth - the GMB calculates the average pension in local government is just £77 a week dropping to £50 for women. Moreover pensions are for the long term and should not be based on short-term share prices.

Yes we are all living longer. But Labour and the trade unions have already acted since 2005 to keep public sector pensions affordable for the future. The NHS, civil service and teachers’ schemes are still based on final salary but now have a ceiling on taxpayer contributions. And for years employers like the Post Office took ‘contribution holidays’.

Teachers, nurses, postal workers, police officers, local government staff and other workers who have dedicated their lives to public service deserve to retire in dignity. We all rely on their efforts.

So the Tory/ Liberal attacks on public sector pensions are hypocritical, unfair and unwarranted – at worst they are an excuse for cuts - and I will fight them tooth and nail.

 

 Andy Burnham:

Decent pensions for public sector workers are an important recognition of the vital work that public servants do. It is insulting for the Government to infer that all public sector pensions are ‘gold plated’. What they don’t say is that the vast majority of those working in the public sector provide vital services, for far lower wages than the few headline cases of those who earn more than the Prime Minister. What they also won’t tell you is that whilst telling us that schemes for the people who deliver our health services, teach our children and collect our rubbish are ‘unaffordable’, that they’ve significantly increased the pensions bill to provide for those who work in Downing Street.

Pensions are going to come under increasing pressure, and will start to cost a lot more over the next five years. However, my response wouldn’t be to deny access to high quality pension schemes, but to work with public sector unions to see how we can tackle the problem together. With a report this month from Age UK showing that the wealthiest in society benefit disproportionately from the tax relief given to private pension schemes, those schemes must also be considered within my review. It wouldn’t be honest to say that I don’t think anything needs to change. However, change should start at the top, with the highest earners in the public sector having to step up their contributions. Once changes to ensure that the highest earners are paying more have been implemented, then it may be necessary to see what else needs to change, in consultation with the unions. There may be a need to increase employee contributions across the board, payment periods may need to increase and there might have to be a review at the rate at which pensions are paid out – but I will campaign for decent, index linked, final salary schemes to remain in the public sector.

 

 David Miliband:

We should stand up for good public sector pensions and good privates sector pensions. My priority is tackling pensioner poverty and enhancing pension provision in our country, not engaging in a race to the bottom – and Labour’s manifesto is the right place to start.

According to the National Audit Office, most pensions paid to former NHS and civil service staff are worth less than £110 a week. A quarter of former health workers get less than £40 a week. By contrast, fewer than 0.2 per cent of teacher pensioners, 1.8 per cent of civil service pensioners and 2.5 per cent of NHS pensioners get pensions of more than £40,000 a year. When the Tories seek to undermine public sector pensions, we need to remind people that they would end up targeting many formerly low paid workers.

Second, cost. There has been a two per cent increase in the average pension in payment since the turn of the century. Ironically, one of the reasons the Office for Budget Responsibility recently projected an increase in the net cost of public sector pensions is because of the negative impact of the planned public sector pay freeze on employee pension contributions.

The most pressing problem with pension provision in this country is that nearly two-thirds of private sector workers have no employer backed pension scheme at all. It is estimated that 7 million workers are not saving enough for retirement, with 750,000 employers in the private sector still not operating an occupational pension scheme.

Labour’s pension reforms addressed this problem – and any government delay to our plans for workplace pensions, with compulsory employer contributions, would be a massive hit to the future of British pension provision, especially amongst the low paid. After all, the real ‘pensions apartheid’ is not between the public and private sector, but between low paid workers with no pension coverage and high paid workers who have taken the lion’s share of the generous tax breaks on pension contributions.

Following the announcement of a review, the government should commit to not making any changes to public sector pensions without consensus, including with the relevant trade unions. This was an essential part of Labour’s pension reforms, through both the Turner process and the measures already agreed which will increase contributions to public sector pensions by 1bn a year from 2012/13.

 

Ed Miliband:

We owe a debt of thanks to our public sector workforce who are there for us every day of the year, providing some of the most vital services on which families across the country rely. It’s not just pensions that the Tories and Liberals are planning to cut, its also public sector pay and the cuts they are demanding risk bringing vital public services to their knees. They will hit those who work in the public sector and those who rely on public services. It is vital that Labour commits itself to fight on the side of the public sector against the savage and unfair cuts being pushed through by the Tories and Liberals.

Of course I stand by the agreement we reached with the TUC earlier this year. It is a fair way forward, protecting the pensions which public sector workers have worked hard for and ensuring they are sustainable in the long-term and I will stand by it just as I stand by our public sector workers.

 

 

 

View Comments

Your questions answered - Week Two - Living Wage

15.06.10

How would you practically implement a living wage? For example, would you support legislation to ensure that companies can only get government and local government contracts if they pay a living wage?

 

Diane Abbott:

Ensuring we have a living wage is extremely important. Working hard should mean being able to provide for your family and lead a decent standard of living – not living on the breadline.

 Implementing a living wage doesn't only benefit the employees. It improves staff loyalty and boosts morale, and therefore productivity. It also reduces training and recruitment costs, which is overall better value for money for employers.

I would support introducing legislation to ensure that government tenders are not able to be taken up by contractors who are not prepared to pay a living wage to their staff.

As a party, we must lead by example and those who are not willing to offer a decent wage for a decent day’s work, should not benefit from government contracts.

My father worked as a sheet metal worker. He was able to provide for my mother and buy the odd treat for me and my brother. This is what working should be about; providing for your family and been proud of what you earn.

Keeping people’s wages below the breadline has a knock-on effect on not only on the family unit, but the wider community in terms of anti-social behaviour and crime. This in turn places further burden on services like the police. Insisting on a living wage would alleviate this.

The gap between rich and poor in the UK is far too wide. As leader of the Labour Party, this is something I would want to tackle. My government has done much to address this over last 13 years and in particular, work to help reduce child poverty. We have made good progress but more needs to be done.

Implementing a living wage for all government contractors would be a step in the right direction to addressing this inequality.

 

Ed Balls:

It was a scandal that in 1997 jobs were still advertised for as little as £1 an hour. Labour’s rising National Minimum Wage and tax credits improved living standards for low-paid workers and narrowed the pay gap for women whilst avoiding job losses.

But low pay is still a problem - and we need to recognise that higher living costs in some parts of the country, particularly in London and the south, mean the minimum wage and tax credits are having a reduced impact there.

Ken Livingstone instituted the London Living Wage, responding to calls from unions and London Citizens to recognise the higher cost of living in London.

If campaigns for a living wage are to be successful then we have to set the example and show leadership ourselves, as Ken did when he was Mayor.

I did not just talk the talk - I was the one and only Cabinet minister to introduce the Living Wage within my own government department for all staff and contracted staff.

But a living wage cannot be implemented in isolation. Our plan must be to:

• Raise the National Minimum Wage every year at least in line with average earnings.
• Follow Ken Livingstone’s example by having the Low Pay Commission properly assess the level of a Living Wage.
• Reflect different family circumstances through child benefit and tax credits. We cannot base a living wage on a 1950s notion of the family.
• Beef up enforcement – I want to see local council and tax inspectors empowered to blow the whistle on employers who evade the legal minimum. There is a strong case for a unified Employment Inspectorate.
• Strengthen laws on agency and posted workers to combat undercutting.
• Ensure low paid workers have access to trade union organisation if they so wish.
• And ensure the public sector leads the way on fair pay, both directly and through procurement.

 Now we must reject the Tory counsel of despair and press the case for a living wage.

 

 Andy Burnham:

Under my leadership, introducing a living wage in the public and private sectors will be a priority. But first we’ve got to practice what we preach. We should work towards a requirement in government contracts that only those companies paying at the agreed level, region by region, should be entitled to bid. As resources allow, we should ensure that those employed in government departments also receive a living wage

It is important that it is set at the right level. I would establish a joint consultation of unions, business and a range of stakeholder groups to ensure that it is set at the appropriate level for each region and that it is workable.

We must also remember the importance of policing and enforcing the minimum wage. In Opposition it is essential not only to press the Coalition government to ensure that the minimum wage keeps its value in real terms but also that government ensures that checks and enforcement continues to stamp out bad business practice.

Finally, I will set up a scheme, where good employers who were paying at the level of a living wage would receive accreditation and gain the recognition of being a good employer with positive employment practice. Such a scheme would provide an incentive to encourage employers to pay a living wage and help embed a living wage within employment practice going forward.

 

 David Miliband:

A fair days pay for a fair days work has always been a core principle of the Labour movement. That’s why the minimum wage is one of Labour’s proudest legacies – and we were right at the general election to argue that it should rise at least in line with average earnings over the next few years.

But when nearly five million people earn less than 7.15 an hour, we know that the fight for fair pay is not yet won. That’s why I support calls for a living wage, to complement the National Minimum Wage. I think we should pursue this goal through the government becoming a living wage employer – and committing to only doing business with contractors who pay a living wage. This would set a bar and show the way for the private sector – where campaigns involving community groups and trade unions have already made a big difference.

I want Labour to return to its roots as a living, breathing movement for change precisely so it can play its part in these community actions. It’s also important to remember that successful living wage campaigns do not just strike a blow for social justice – they make good business sense too. Major companies, like Barclays, who have implemented the living wage, have seen real benefits in lower staff turnover and higher productivity.

 

Ed Miliband:

I've put the Living Wage campaign as the centre of my campaign for labour leadership because it sums up both the Labour party's values and its activism.

It speaks to our values because it touches our deep sense of justice, of fairness and of a belief in the dignity of work. And it speaks to our activism because this has never been a party to rest on its accomplishments or believe change only comes from those with the most power. To equip us for government once more the Labour party needs to become a vibrant movement for change - and taking on grassroots campaigns like this are crucial to that endeavour.

I've already thrown my support behind Labour councils and Labour groups who have led the way on the living wage - like Tower Hamlets, Lewisham, Glasgow, Preston, Oxford, Lambeth and Hackney - and I'll be working with others to do the same.

Businesses too have a chance to show they are responsible employers by adopting the living wage and Labour members can and should campaign to raise the wages of the lowest paid employees in shops and banks as well as councils.

When in government I pushed to make Whitehall a Living Wage employer – a commitment that appeared in our manifesto. When in government again we need to throw its entire weight behind the campaign, by supporting councils who adopt it, broadening the range of public sector workers who get it and by moving towards a procurement process that supports living wage employers bidding for external contracts.

The living wage campaign can become the hallmark of a Labour party engaged in local communities, campaigning for change. It can show that even in Opposition we can help some of the poorest people in society to do better.

Labour brought in the minimum wage, we now have an opportunity to lead the fight for a living wage. I hope we will seize it.

View Comments