By Nick McCarthy

STRONG PCScampaigning hassuccessfullydefended check-offand representationrights in theDepartment forCommunities andLocal Government.

On 3 Septemberthe High Court ruled that the Departmentfor Communities and Local Government(DCLG) was acting unlawfully in endingthe decades old system for collectingunion subscriptions from salaries, knownas “check-off”.

In July, DCLG Minister Eric Pickles,gave PCS just six weeks’ notice to signup members to direct debit. We weredenied facilities in workplaces to do this

or to hold meetings. DCLG argued thatcollecting union subscriptions for PCSwas a waste of public funds – althoughcheck-off costs under £350 per year inDCLG and PCS offered to pay.

Civil Service trade unions have beenon the sharp end of the currentGovernment’s attacks, with theintroduction of new facilitiesarrangements designed to reduce thelevel of representation trade unions canprovide for members. The decision toend check-off was part of this process inDCLG, which included savage cuts infacility time.

In court the DCLG’s legal teamaccepted that union members have acontractual right to “ask” for check-offbut that this did not mean that thedepartment had to provide the service.In his judgement Mr Justice Popplewellreferred to these arguments as

“untenable”. He ruled that the moveswere a breach of contract and must bereversed.

Costs were awarded against theDCLG. So defending this ministerialdecision has wasted an estimated£90,000 of public funds. Despite thisthe DCLG released a highly politicisedstatement saying that despite the HighCourt ruling, it remained the Minister’sintention to end check-off.

DCLG had also denied PCSrepresentatives paid time off to attendannual delegate and group conferences.The delegates lodged formal internalgrievances for breach of contract whichthe department has now upheld,reinstating the annual leave taken by thedelegates in place of facility time.

The court victory has vindicated thecampaigning and dogged determinationfrom reps and members in the face ofstaff and budget cuts and worseningterms and conditions. Standing up forcontractual rights has created a morepositive atmosphere amongst reps andmembers, reinvigorating and reinforcingthe commitment to defend members’interests.

The case sends an importantmessage to other employers that PCSwill fight attacks on union rights. While inDCLG the execution of the policy wasincompetent, the politics behindattacking union membership,organisation and finances remains.

The approach taken by Eric Picklesechoes attempts to stifle public sectorunions in Wisconsin. Threats to check-offand union rights in DCLG continue andPickles has already advised localauthorities in the UK to end check-offsystems.

The battle is not over. Across the civilservice and the public sector employersare attempting to cut facility time andmarginalise unions. It is important torecognise these political threats andunite in a positive campaign for tradeunion rights and the benefits of collectivebargaining.

Nick McCarthy is PCS head ofcampaigns

Issue 3 Winter 2013 Free

Update

PCS legal win oncheck off rights

preventing strike action by cabin crew, inMalone and Ors v BA [2010] inrelation to the long running dispute withcabin crew which resulted in the loss ofvaluable travel facilities for those takingaction, and against the POA in Ministryof Justice v Prison Officers’Association [2008].

The terms of reference say it will lookat the “alleged use of extreme tactics inindustrial disputes, including so-called‘leverage’ tactics, and whether theresponse in terms of law enforcementhas been appropriate”.

By rolling blacklisting into the Carrreview, Cable may be trying to sweetenthe pill for unions, or even be trying tostop his Tory colleagues using it as anelection stunt, though it smacks more ofan attempt to bury his pledge to takeaction against rogue employers.

If he was serious about blacklistingwe would have a judge-led inquiry intoblacklisting, as has been demanded bythe TUC, not a QC-led review ofindustrial relations law focused on unionstrike tactics.

Tactics that, if the unions were acommunity campaign against, say, theclosure of an old people’s home or thebuilding of a bypass, would be seen bypoliticians as legitimate.

As Unite’s Len McCluskey points out,leverage tactics “are part of our basichuman rights, which include freedom ofexpression. They are as old asdemocracy – free speech and the rightto peacefully demonstrate”.

Cable is calling the review a clearwarning to both sides. The reality is thatthe Grangemouth employers have usedBritain’s anti-union laws, the mostrestrictive laws in the democratic world,to intimidate its workforce and bully theunions. Far from sending a warning toemployers, it will reassure them that thegovernment still considers unions to bethe enemy within and is prepared toremove the last vestiges of rights theyhave. As Unite says, no trade unionistshould collaborate with it.

John Usher is director of theCampaign for Trade Union Freedom

by John Usher

VINCE CABLE’S“major reviewof industrial

law”, announced inthe wake of theGrangemouthdispute, comeshard on the heels ofTory chair GrantShapps’ attacks on

Labour and the unions at his party’sconference.

Shapps’ speech – greeted bydelegates with little enthusiasm – wasintended as a signal that anti-unionlegislation would be in the Conservative2015 election manifesto.

We’ve long known which union rightslaws the Tories have in their sights,though Cameron’s promise of no suchlegislation in this parliament hasenabled ministers and the LondonMayor to continually re-spin them asnew proposals. This lets them rack upthe rhetoric in the attack on the union-Labour link while diverting attention fromthe cost of living crisis as part of the Torygeneral election strategy.

The measures Shapps’ people briefedjournalists on as the intended target ofhis speech do not, of course, havemuch to do with the Labour link. Theend to check-off and time off for unionduties, increasing the threshold before aunion can apply for statutory recognition

from 10 to 30 per cent of the workforce,raising the threshold for strike ballots to40 per cent and axing funding for theUnion Learning Fund represent afundamental attack on trade unionrights and freedoms, not “giving unionsback to their members” (as Shapps putit).

And now Cable’s review, headed byBruce Carr QC, is to look at uniontactics in industrial disputes. Carr is nostranger to limiting union action – heacted for London Underground in itsfailed attempt to stop ASLEF takingstrike action on Boxing Day 2011, forBritish Airways against Unite in 2009

law at work

UNISONbids forjudicialreviewTRIBUNAL FEES

The High Court is to rule on a bidby Unison for a judicial review onthe government’s introduction ofEmployment Tribunal fees.The union says new figures from

the government which show asignificant drop in the number ofindividual claims being taken. Thestatistics are not straightforwardas there are a number of large on-going claims which skew thefigures, but the underlying trend isa massive fall in claimants. Unison general secretary Dave

Prentis said: “The latestgovernment statistics show asignificant drop in the number ofindividual claims being taken toemployment tribunals, which isprecisely why UNISON ischallenging these unfairfees. Putting a price on justice isimmoral and allows unscrupulousemployers to ride roughshod overthe employment rights of theirworkers.“Experience shows that the

balance in the workplace favoursthe employers and pricing workersout of court is unfair andunderhand.

A Cable Carr that only goes downhill

Far from sending a warning to employers, it will reassure them that the government still considers unions to be the enemy within and is prepared to remove the last vestiges of rights

AcrossEuropeworkers’rights areunder attackby Bob Crow

Not just in Britain, under thisvehemently anti-uniongovernment, but in every cornerof the continent austerity, and thedemands of the EU and the banks,are being used as an excuse tohammer down the working classat every opportunity.

Under the guise of “deregulation”,code for giving the bosses carteblanche, the EU Commission recentlyproduced a communique “Refit – fit forgrowth”, a manifesto for hacking backon consultation, information and healthand safety.

It is these kind of far-reachingproposals, smuggled out with littlefanfare, that are mapping out the futureframework for a resurgent, neo-liberalEurope where even the pretence ofprotecting jobs and working conditionsis stripped away and the true nature ofthe beast is allowed to run free.

As the myth of “social Europe”disappears down the corridors of theBrussels bureaucracy groups of workersare fighting back. In Portugal, in Greece,in Spain and in a barrage of otherdisputes that a pro-business mediawould rather we didn’t know about,

resistance is building and brave groupsof men and women are fighting back.

Here in Britain we know exactly whatthe deal is with this government.

The “Tax on Justice” from the levyingof punitive of fees on workers seekingfairness in the Employment Tribunals isprobably the most overt and cynical ofthe recent attacks.

This move, supported by the Liberalsand not opposed by Labour, has oneobjective and that is pricing workingclass people out of the justice system.

Repeatedly we here talk frombusiness and the Tory right about a new

raft of anti-union laws to impose anartificial system of bent and distorteddemocracy on our class that no moneygrubbing politician would be prepared tosubject themselves to. The heirs ofThatcherism consider their anti-unionagenda to be unfinished business.

So, through the CTUF, we have tomobilise our forces to fight off everynew attack on workers’ rights andfreedoms that comes our way. Ourcampaign is the focal point for everyone of those battles both now and inthe future.

But, importantly, we have to maintain

the momentum behind the continuingcampaign to sweep away every lastshred of the anti-union laws imposed bythe last Tory government, laws attackingordinary working men and women thatLabour, after thirteen years in power, didnothing to repeal.

Tough times call for strongorganisation and a militant response.They also call for the maximum unityand solidarity on an international basis.

The CTUF is the unifying vehicle fordelivering just that.

Bob Crow is CTUF President

International

The Campaign for Trade Union Freedom is sponsored by 25 national trade unions and over er 200branches, trades councils and individuals and financed solely by supporters fees from trade union bodies andindividuals. By becoming a supporter you or your organisation show your agreement with the call to repeal theanti-trade union laws, and aid the Campaign’s fight. Please make cheques payable to Campaign, for TradeUnion Freedom and send to the CTUF, 4th Floor, 1 Islington, Liverpool, L3 8EG Donations are gratefully received.

Union / TUC:National/Region/Branch:Name (of Secretary):Address:

Email:We may contact you with information about the Campaign.

Affiliation costso National Unions - 100,000 pus £650o less than 100,000 £150o Regional Unions £75o Union Branches - 500 or more £75 o Union Branches - less than 500 £35o Associations of TUCs £35o Trade Union Councils £35o Strike Committees, non-union £15organisations & individuals

Trade unionsgive Qatar thered card

by Tony Burke THE EUROPEANTrade UnionConfederation hasstepped up itscampaign to securebinding guaranteeson employmentrights from theauthorities in Qatarwho were awardedthe FIFA World CupFinals in 2022. The

ETUC says using Qatar for the finals mustbe reconsidered.

FIFA made some noises aboutemployment and human rights followingcontinuing pressure from unionsworldwide. However FIFA’s boss Sepp

Blatter shrugged off callsfor reconsideration with the statement:“Qatar will host the FIFA World Cup in2022. Voilà.”

The media’s main concern is the ideaof moving the finals to winter rather thanhave footballers wilting in 50 degreeheat and also on the effect on domesticfootball fixtures this would have – ratherthan the appalling employment rightsrecord in the country.

The International Transport Workers’Federation (ITF), which represents 4.5mtransport employees globally, hasrecently exposed the treatment of QatarAirways cabin crew.

A crew member complained to the ITFwho said that her employment contractcontained “flagrant human rightsabuses”. Employees are required to“obtain prior permission” from QatarAirways if they wish to get married and awoman employee can be fired if shebecomes pregnant (which she iscontractually obliged to disclose “fromthe date of her knowledge of itsoccurrence”).

Cabin crew also alleges harshtreatment with rigid curfews andrestrictions. Akbar Al Baker, the airline’sCEO, when asked about the oppressiveworkplace environment after 35 pilotsresigned en masse said loftily:

“I don’t need the services of spies. Weare not running an intelligence agency.We are an airline company. The reasonwhy I know everything happening in thecompany is that I’m deeply involved inthe smooth running of the company. I’msimply everywhere, talking to everyone,listening to them.”

Qatar Airways (which sponsorsBarcelona FC) also made the fascistic

statement: "If you did not have unionsyou wouldn’t have this jobless problem inthe western world. It is caused by unionsmaking companies and institutionsuncompetitive and bringing them to aposition of not being efficient. If you goand ask the politicians in most of thecountries in the western world theywould love to have the system we have:where the workers have rights throughthe law, but they do not have rightsthrough striking and underminingsuccessful institutions that provide jobsto their knees."

In Qatar, foreign workers are legallyforbidden from leaving the countrywithout being granted an exit visa bytheir employer.

The case of French footballer ZahirBelounis alerted football’s authorities toQatar’s feudal attitude has towardslabour. Belounis, a Frenchman ofAlgerian descent, had been trapped inQatar after his club – Al Jaish – refusedto issue an exit visa until he dropped acourt case challenging 18 months ofallegedly unpaid wages.

A worldwide campaign by trade unionsand football’s global union FIFProeventually pressurised the Qatargovernment to let Belounis out of thecountry.

Earlier this year Abdeslam Ouaddou –also a French citizen and a formerFulham defender – said he was thevictim of a similar situation in Qatar.

"When you work in Qatar you belong tosomeone," he told FIFPro's websiteearlier this year. "You are not free. Youare a slave."

Tony Burke is chair of the Campaign For Trade Union Freedom