[ad_1]
After ministers rejected an offer by nursing unions to suspend strikes in exchange for new pay talks, and with COBRA meetings on Monday to work through controversial contingency plans involving the military, there is little reason to expect a reprieve from the planned strike.
Industrial action already underway in December among bus, rail and postal workers will intensify and expand this week to other public sector workers, including ambulance drivers, baggage handlers and driving examiners. The result would be the most significant disruption to the British economy in recent memory.
The strike is a response to limited pay rises set against a backdrop of sharply rising inflation that the TUC says has left key public sector workers £180 a month worse off than a year ago. They have faced a barrage of criticism that calls the strikers irresponsible, selfish and unrealistic. So how do the following claims compare to reality?
‘This is effectively a general strike’
“This is looking more and more like a general strike” – Stephen Glover, Daily Mail, 7 December
“It’s almost like a general strike caused by the amount of disputes” – Dave Ward, CWU General Secretary, 3 December
Everyone agrees that industrial action will have a significant impact in the weeks leading up to Christmas. But both sides’ claims that a “general strike” would bring the entire economy to a standstill exaggerate past parallels.
As this explainer by Philip Inman sets out, it was possible for the TUC to organize a general strike without ballots in every area. But now the law prohibits strikes without a successful ballot in an individual workplace.
A “de facto general strike” is still possible if enough industries succeed in bringing industrial action at the same time. But union representation in the UK has fallen significantly since the winter of discontent in 1978 and 1979, from around 50% in 1979 to around 23% in 2021, although it is still around 50% in the public sector. The reality of the 1979 comparison is illustrated in Richard Partington’s December 8 piece, which shows that while the number of working days lost this year could reach 1.74m, 12m days were lost in September 1979 alone.
‘Striking workers are greedy and cannot meet their demands’
“Where are the [Rishi Sunak’s] A big attempt to mobilize the country against these greedy Sangh extremists?” – Douglas Murray, Sun, December 8
“Can’t afford inflation-matching or inflation-busting pay rises … there just isn’t the money.” Transport Secretary, Mark Harper, Sky News, 27 November
Critics of striking workers often portray their wage demands as excessive in times of economic hardship. But in this analysis from July, Ashley Kirk sets out Office for National Statistics data showing that real public sector pay has fallen by 4.3% since the 2009 financial crisis. Meanwhile, says the IFS, real private sector pay has grew up By 4.3% since 2010. New analysis published today by the TUC says 2022 will be the worst year for real pay growth for nearly 50 years.
Salary demands must also be set against the effect of inflation, which is rapidly reducing the value of liberal-sounding estates. For example, the offer to rail workers described in a Daily Telegraph headline on 4 December as “8%” is spread over two years, making it 4% in reality, against the most recent inflation figure of 11.1%.
One way to tackle the affordability question is to examine the government’s claim of costs to taxpayers. Rishi Sunak has claimed that it would cost around £1,000 more per household this year to provide a pay rise to offset 10% inflation. But Ben Zaranko, of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, points out in this BBC reality check that once you factor in the 3% average pay rise for public sector workers already budgeted for 2022-23, the real “extra” costs around £. 640 per family, of which about a third will be refunded in tax.
The question of whether just over £400 per household is affordable – with the heaviest burden falling on the richest – is ultimately a political judgement. We can also ask whether it is true, as is often claimed, that wage increases will spur inflation. This piece yesterday by Richard Partington argues that fears of a “wage-price spiral” are being overplayed. The Bank of England estimates that keeping overall wage growth to 2.5% could reduce inflation by 1.5 percentage points – a “drop in the ocean” compared to the impact of rising energy prices.
‘NHS strike putting people at risk’
“[Ambulance staff] Join the service to save lives, don’t put them at risk” – Conservative MP Mike Penning, Daily Mail, 6 December
“It will cause pain and discomfort to people and endanger lives” – Whitehall source, Daily Express, 6 December
A common theme in the coverage of strikes organized by nurses and other NHS workers is the potential risk to patient safety – and the action will clearly result in some discomfort or delay. But it is another step to indicate that life will be put in danger.
The “life-saving care model” guiding Royal College of Nursing industrial action excludes emergency interventions to save life or prevent disability from striking, as well as other situations where life may be at risk. Matthew Taylor, chief executive of the NHS Confederation, has called for an urgent clarification on the exemption but said the BBC’s strike days “look like a weekend or a bank holiday”.
Evidence from previous strikes suggests that it is possible to take industrial action without jeopardizing safety. An article in the Independent, published in August, points to a 2018 BMJ study which found no measurable impact on mortality during the junior doctors’ strike in 2016, although it added that A&E admissions and attendances were lower. The RCN says a strike in Northern Ireland in 2019 ended with “no adverse events” for patients.
‘Negotiations are beyond government’s control’
“My role is to facilitate and support – not negotiate.” – Mark Harper, RMT General Secretary, letter to Mick Lynch, 29 November
“The necessary discussions must take place between the rail operating companies, Network Rail and the unions.” – Work and Pensions Secretary Mel Stride, TalkTV, 23 November
Government ministers say they are staying away from negotiations, and their hands are tied by independent pay bodies – yesterday the Government rejected the nursing union’s request to negotiate on that ground. But there are reasons to doubt that account.
On Thursday, the FT reported that employers planned to offer RMTs a 10% pay rise over two years, only for the government to intervene. The final offer was 8% over two years, linked to the introduction of driver-only trains. That was not denied by the Department for Transport, while the FT called the intervention a “clumsy misstep” citing “industry figures” that had exacerbated the situation.
‘People oppose strike’
“Public Turns Against Terrorist Unions Determined to Ruin Christmas.” – Reported in The Sun, 6 December
“Civil servants should not expect sympathy for their strike from the working taxpayers who pay their wages.” – John O’Connell, Chief Executive taxpayerO Alliance, 10 November
Strike opponents naturally want to present themselves as the voice of ordinary working people. But the reality of voting is more complicated.
Last week, for example, YouGov poll It found that only 37% supported the striking rail workers, while 51% opposed. But the Observer poll found 40% blaming the government and rail companies, with 37% holding unions responsible – and also showed a large majority supporting nurses.
If that picture is mixed, that’s probably worse news for the government than for the unions, which certainly want public support but ultimately answer only to their membership. The battleground now is whether the reality of strikes over Christmas will turn voters against unions – or reinforce the sense that industrial action is part of a wider picture of government incompetence.
[ad_2]
Source link
