TUC Special Congress, Saturday November 9 th 2023:
Report from the Trades Councils’ Committee observer
This Congress was held at Congress House, and although the lower hall was not full, my
guess is that the delegation strengths and the actual attendance were maybe 50% of the full
The format of the three-hour Congress was simple:
1. Speeches from the TUC President Matt Wrack, FBU, and General Secretary Paul Nowak; 2.
Short contributions, introduced by Deputy General Secretary Kate Bell, from ten or so trades
union activists who might be affected by the ‘work notices’ that would legally compel them
to cross a picket line;
3. The discussion-it was never going to be a debate-on the General Council statement;
4. A closing speech by Paul Nowak.
Matt Wrack, 2023/4 TUC President, called for one minute’s applause for prominent trades
unionists-including the CWU President Jane Loftus-who had died since the September
Congress. I do prefer this to a one-minute’s silence, and I wonder who first thought of it?
Matt has been up front in urging the trade union movement to prepare to defy the
Government’s ‘Minimum Service Levels’ Act. Matt made reference to previous special
conferences that were successful: on the 5 th June 1969, to oppose the Labour Government’s
‘In Place of Strife’ Bill; the 18 th March 1971, which threatened a general strike against the
Tory Government’s Industrial Relations Bill; but also the one I remember, which was a total
flop: the Special Congress of 1982 which pledged outright defiance of Norman Tebbit’s Anti-
Union Laws, which led to no action at all, and the free passage of all the rest of Thatcher’s
anti-union attacks to proceed. We are all hoping that the 1982 fiasco will never be
repeated. Matt praised all those trades unionists who had taken strike action in the past
year.
He did mention the risk of Congress ‘overpromising’ which was the first note of caution: ie.
Whatever radical intentions that might be passed in the hall, was the trade-unionised
working-class ready, willing and able to be mobilised if the call came to protest and strike
against activists being sacked, fined or jailed?
Matt expressed an admiration for the old USA syndicalist ‘Wobblies’ (Industrial Workers of
the World’) and quoted from them: “Without our own brain and muscle, nothing moves!”
I am usure if there was any debate, either at the TUC Executive or the General Council, as to
whether the agreed General Council statement, when put to the Special Congress, should be
open to amendment. The FBU delegate was the only one to mention this, and he regretted
the lack of that opportunity. This Special Congress was always goping to be a rally, a disp;lay
of unity and resolve, for the benefit of the Tory Government, as well as the movement’s
rank and file. You could argue that the Special Conference could have been a one-day or a
two-day affair, with full rights to amend the statement. Apart from giving delegates a rare
opportunity to have a real debate at the TUC, I’m not sure anything else would have been
gained by this. What matters, above all, is whether we can stir up our own members to
realise what is at stake, and to support any actions, legal or otherwise, to win back our right
to strike.
General Council statement - special Congress 2023
“The UK already has some of the most restrictive trade union laws in Europe. But instead of
a proper plan to boost jobs and raise living standards, the Conservative government is trying
to make it even harder to win fair pay and conditions.
Minimum service levels (MSLs) are a direct attack on working people’s rights to fair pay and
decent work. They are an ideological assault on workers’ and trade unions’ rights which are
intended to further inhibit the fundamental right to strike. This attempt to silence workers’
voices and reduce their power sits alongside wider attacks on all of our democratic rights.
The imposition of minimum service levels means that when workers lawfully vote to take
strike action they could be told to attend work – and sacked if they don’t comply. One in five
workers in Britain – 5.5 million workers – are at risk of losing their right to strike. The new
laws target the public sector where Black and women workers are disproportionately
represented. So, this new legislation will further entrench inequality.
This legislation follows wider Conservative anti-union activity including the ban on strike
action in the prison service, actions to clamp down on protests and demonstrations, and
efforts to add to anti-trade union legislation including attempts to end the prohibition of the
use of agency workers during strikes. It will impact on several live trade disputes that unions
are currently prosecuting and other trade disputes that may arise in the very near future.
Strike action is already only used as a last resort. But where they have no other choice,
unions already undertake action responsibly and with due regard to public and worker
safety. This includes applying voluntary derogations to deal with emergencies.
Our public services are crying out for investment to address the recruitment and retention
crisis they face. But, instead, the Conservatives are seeking to poison industrial relations
with the result that services deteriorate even more, all driven by an unelected and out-of-
touch prime minister who has lost the confidence of the British people.
This malicious legislation imposes unworkable bureaucracy on unions and their members,
and also puts them at risk of huge and unacceptable penalties. The legislation seeks to
regulate the content of union communications with their members, requires unions to
police their own strikes, and asks unions to take on the role of employers, by informing their
members both that they must attend work, and what work they are expected to do.
Workers could be sacked for falling foul of the rules and unions hit with huge damages
claims. Unions deciding to not issue compliance notices to their members or unintentionally
falling foul of the unworkable demands of complying may be injuncted by an employer
and/or face fines and other sanctions. The government is even seeking to use the new rules
as a Trojan horse for other anti-union measures, including an attempted clamp down on
picketing. It is now clear that the increases in potential penalties on unions, sneaked
through parliament last year, were intended to enforce union compliance.
The right to strike is protected by the Human Rights Act 1998, Article 11 of the European
Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), the International Labour Organisation’s Convention 87
and Article 6(4) of the European Social Charter. It is therefore a core part of the UK’s
international commitments, and the government’s approach means the UK is now likely in
breach of international law. We have already reported the government to the International
Labour Organisation (ILO) – the UN workers’ rights watchdog – over the Strikes Act. And the
EU has raised its concerns about the laws too. The UK has become an international outlier
on workers’ and trade union rights. There has been widespread opposition to these
proposals, including from employer organisations such as NHS Providers, from the
parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights, from the Equality and Human Rights
Commission (EHRC), ACAS, civil liberties organisations, race and gender equality groups, and
from parliamentarians from around the world.
There is no case and no justification for applying minimum service levels. The government
has failed to demonstrate that these proposals are necessary or proportionate, and is riding
roughshod over workers’ and trade unions’ rights to take strike action to defend their pay
and conditions. This is already apparent from those minimum service levels already in train.
Ministers at the Department for Education have suggested that an education minimum
service level would apply to 74 per cent of pupils – meaning that the vast majority of
teachers and education staff would be prohibited from ever taking strike action. The scope
of coverage that has been set out by the government would disproportionately impact
women working in primary schools and special educational needs settings.
Regulations for passenger rail provide for train operating companies and light rail providers
to operate 40 per cent of a timetable. But this will require far more than 40 per cent of staff.
In rail infrastructure large numbers of staff on what are deemed priority rail routes, such as
those operating signals, will be denied the right to strike because their presence is necessary
for the route to run.
Likewise in border security, the government has provided for coverage akin to a non-strike
day. Even its own estimates suggest that three in four workers will be prevented from taking
strike action. It is likely that in smaller ports and airports this will amount to a ban on strike
action.
The legislation also raises significant concerns about data protection which ministers have
failed to treat seriously. This matters enormously because there is a long history of trade
union members and activists being targeted unfairly or even blacklisted by employers.
Minimum service levels will mean that the personal data of individuals will be shared and
held by unions and employers during the creation and monitoring of work notices. The rules
even allow for automated processes for picking individuals for work notices with limited
protection against biased algorithms.
Although this draconian legislation has now passed through parliament, the trade union
movement stands united in its continued opposition. We shall not rest until the malicious,
unnecessary and unworkable Strikes Act is repealed.
The Labour party has committed to repeal this pernicious legislation, as part of their
ambitious New Deal for Working People which will include the repeal of anti-trade
legislation, freeing trade unions to win better terms and conditions. The trade union
movement welcomes this commitment. The repeal of the Strikes Act must be part of an
employment bill in the first 100 days of a Labour government. But until we have a Labour
government, we will take all opportunities to challenge, frustrate and resist this legislation
and its implementation.
Forty years ago, another Conservative government attacked trade union rights – at GCHQ,
where union members were told to resign their membership or be sacked. After a long
campaign marked by the fortitude of the workers and their families, and the solidarity of the
whole movement, they were reinstated when an incoming Labour government repealed the
ban.
The Conservative government has failed to build any employer support for minimum service
levels and the Welsh and Scottish governments have rejected this approach. Minimum
services levels will mean more red tape and the risk of running unsafe services. They will
prolong disputes rather than resolving them. And they will likely have unintended
consequences. Employers have already raised concerns that sickness absence levels may
rise in response to the imposition of minimum service levels.
Unions call on employers across sectors not to impose work notices. While the government
is seeking to sow division between workers and employers, unions are committed to
engaging with employers who object to the government’s agenda, to ensure good industrial
relations without the need to impose work notices.
Only the worst employers would even consider imposing minimum service levels. But if they
do, we will remind them of the legal risks they will face and that they will face concerted
opposition from the entire trade union movement. We will not stand by while employers
sanction unions or their members or while public and worker safety is compromised. In
every workplace where employers attempt to deploy and impose these draconian rules they
can expect the trade union movement to respond with a show of force and solidarity for any
workers affected.
Be in no doubt: this is only the start. We should expect further attacks on the rights of
workers and trade unions in other sectors so far unaffected. That is why, today,
representing trade union members in sectors affected by these new restrictions and those
in sectors not, the whole trade union movement reaffirms our opposition to minimum
service levels.
At today’s historic special Congress, we agree to continue our campaign of opposition and
non-compliance - across workplaces and across the country.
We reassert in full the position taken at our annual Congress in September 2023, as set out
in Composite 1 - in particular that “we have no choice but to build mass opposition to the
MSLs laws, up to and including a strategy of non-compliance and non-cooperation to make
them unworkable, including industrial action” and that “we must use all means necessary to
defeat the unjust MSLs laws.” We also recommit to “100 per cent solidarity with any trade
unions attacked under these MSL laws”.
The Conservative government’s attack on working people may have finished its
parliamentary stages, but the campaign against the Strikes Act continues. Working people
will not accept this heinous attempt to drive down their living standards. We stand together
to resist and overcome it.
Congress resolves that we will:
Support
1. Equip every trade union member with the tools to resist this legislation in the
workplace. Unions will continue to work together to adopt different tactical
approaches to non-cooperation and non-compliance. We will support affiliates in
deploying novel and effective forms of industrial action to maximise resistance to
work notices. We will develop practical solidarity plans for unions actively engaged in
strategies of non-compliance.
2. Support any worker subject to a work notice, including with support from across the
trade union movement, if their employer disciplines them in any way. #
3. Ensure that where employers fail to resolve disputes, workforces are still able to
exercise their democratic right to withdraw their labour.
4. Ensure that where any affiliate is facing significant risk of sanctions because of this
legislation, we convene an emergency meeting of the Executive Committee to
consider options for providing practical, industrial, financial and/or political backing
to that union.
Resist
5. Continue our wider legal challenge to these undemocratic laws – leaving no stone
unturned internationally and in UK courts.
6. Call on all employers and public bodies with oversight to oppose this
counterproductive legislation. Employers and public bodies from across the public
sector and the country have already signalled their opposition to the Strikes Act. All
employers and public bodies must reject it.
7. Ensure that any employer tempted to deploy and impose work notices understands
that the union movement will unite to resist them - in the workplace and in the
courts.
8. Campaign to name and shame as anti-union and anti-worker all employers and
public bodies who deploy work notices.
9. Seek to challenge minimum service levels on the grounds of public safety, worker
safety, data protection, employees’ existing contractual agreements and equalities.
10. Seek to ensure that the data protection and privacy rights of trades union members
are fully respected and protected at all times, as we resist the imposition of these
undemocratic restrictions.
11. Refuse to tell our members to cross a picket line.
Mobilise #
12. Mobilise the whole trade union movement to march with the sacked GCHQ workers
through Cheltenham on 27 January, to commemorate their struggle, and to
recommit ourselves to defiant opposition to Conservative minimum service levels,
trade union restrictions and any threat to the right to strike.
13. Call an urgent demonstration in the event a work notice is deployed and a union or
worker is sanctioned in relation to a work notice.
14. Coordinate communications and campaigning activity across the trade union
movement.
Repeal
15. Hold Labour to their commitment to repeal this legislation within their first 100 days
of office as a key part of promoting and fully implementing the wider New Deal for
working people as a flagship policy in the forthcoming general election.
For more than 150 years, unions have fought for safer workplaces with decent pay and
conditions. And we have won. We will respond to this shameful Conservative attack on our
rights by redoubling our efforts to build a stronger more diverse movement that keeps
winning for workers. We will stand together. Our message is clear, we will not rest until this
legislation is repealed.
First panel of activist speakers, introduced by Kate Bell:
Sarah Rhode, NEU; Simon, a GMB paramedic (“A wave of anger over the Government’s lies
led to our strike action; when one group of workers win, we all win!”); Maxine, UCU
President-elect, College Lecturer (We have had no real pay rise for ten years! It’s really
hard, but we had no option but to strike”); Pete Wright, PCS, A Border Force security officer
from, Kent (We had to try SO hard to make sure we got over the minimum voting turnout
threshold! Striking got us the 91,000 job losses stopped, the redundancy pay loss of 30%
removed, and an 8% rise plus £1,500! The government says that going on strike will have no
effect, then they pass laws to try and stop us!). Dawn, ASLEF: (“Government orders to run a
40% service level on a strike day would mean 60/70% of drivers would have to cross a picket
line.”). Apologies for not noting some full names.
Paul Nowak’s speech, effectively moving the General Council statement, is available on
the TUC Website. Some quotes that I noted, maybe not verbatim:
“I have to be careful what I do say here, as employers and their lawyers are listening in.”
“We will fight to defend your right to strike.”
“This government is threatened by the organised working-class.”
“Time to call a General Election.” (a few baited breaths between ‘General’ and ‘Election’.)
“If they come for one worker, they come for us all.”
“Recently, 700 NHS clinical support workers went on strike in the Wirral and they won, but
they all left that picket line to help out when a fatal coach crash happened!”
“We will defy their ban on strikes!”
Second panel of activist speakers, introduced by Kate Bell:
Sam, UNISON, a paramedic (We already arrange our own emergency cover, if the calls get
too high. I wish we had Minimum Service Levels on non-strike days!); Ava, NASUWT,
Birmingham (“Recruitment now is so difficult, record numbers of teachers are leaving our
profession. This Bill is awful!”); Jim Buchanan, Dorset RMT (“We would have settled our rail
dispute much earlier if it had not been for Government interference. Our strikes ARE
effective! This is an ideological offensive by the Tories to criminalise organised labour. Now,
opposition is a big ask for individual RMT members, we might have to box a bit clever: for
example, with all the stresses of being forced to cross a picket line, am I really mentally,
medically fit for duty?”) Jim, a Junior Doctor in the HCSA (“170,000 staff left the NHS during
2022! Why don’t they apply their MSL on ordinary days, instead of running down the NHS
with poor pay which drives staff out? It won’t work!”) Izzy, FBU (“We got offered 2%, that’s
all, but when we smashed the strike turn-out thresholds, that went up overnight to 5%!
Some firefighters are using Foodbanks! In the Fire Service the MSL would mean a 90%
crossing of picket lines. We cannot wait for a Keir Starmer Labour Government to save us.
We must mobilise and campaign now! A national demonstration is also needed. This Act is a
travesty of democracy!”). Diana, NAHT (“The government is removing a vital part of our
democratic processes. This draconian legislation should have no place in our society. It is
clear that this government no longer respects education.”)
Paddy Lillis, USDAW, seconded the General Council statement:
Sharon Graham, Unite: Spoke of the factory women who struck to bring in the Equal Pay
Act. Unite has won £420 million extra for its members during the 1,000 disputes that have
taken place. “There are difficult questions to try and answer. Unite stands for non-
compliance. We may have to break the law. Better to break the law than break the poor!
We must prepare to break the law if necessary. The real decision is not here, but the
decision to act. See you on the picket line!”
Daniel Kebede, NEU: “Teachers are being reduced to poverty, as are our children. What
REAL minimum service levels could do to benefit education! The government wants 74% of
children in school on strike days, this means 100% of teachers must break their own strike.
We know about totalitarian states like Russia and China, but here in the UK? The NEU since
1 st September has trained up a record number of new reps. The response of the NEU will be
to deepen our commitment to industrial action.”
Gill Walton, Royal College of Midwives General Secretary: “We would NEVER endanger the
lives of women! When we struck, safety was NEVER compromised! There are 2,500 midwife
vacancies, while we work on average 100,000 extra hours a week UNPAID! We MUST invest
in the NHS, in the midwifery service, and, today, my daughter gave birth to my grandchild!”
Barbara Plant, GMB President: “We are not a threat to the safety net of society, we ARE the
safety net! GMB members who work in schools, the ambulance service, nuclear
decommissioning, will all be threatened with this Act. We must defeat it.”
Mick Whelan, ASLEF: “16 disputes this week. If they want to take ASLEF on, let them,
because we will win! Holing the country to ransom? WE ARE THE COUNTRY! We must repeal
all the anti-union laws from the last 3o0 years, including those that Labour did not repeal.
Let’s win for the future generations of trades unionists!”
Fran Heathcote, PCS President: The GCHQ ban on unions is nearly 40 years old. 14 brave
civil service union members, including Mike Grindley who, sadly, died this year, refused to
throw away their trade union memberships, and were sacked. Let’s have a massive show of
strength on Saturday January 27 th in Cheltenham.
Jane Peckham, NASUWT: “We must use all means at our disposal. We are ordinary workers
who do extraordinary things! When we fight, we win!”
Andrea Bradley, Educational Institute of Scotland/EIS: “ We held our first strike over
pay in four decades. Our pay had eroded 25% in real terms since 2008. We teach class sizes
of 33! We are disrupters? Sorry, but an overworked, underpaid teaching profession IS
disruptive of education! It took eight days of strike action to force the Scottish Government
to oppose this Act, but their stance on opposing the other anti-union laws is poor.”
Mick Lynch, RMT: “We need to do this ourselves: the politicians will not do this for us. Nor
can we rely on our employers. The General Council statement is a starting point. We need to
resist this legislation at the workplace. We must force the London, other regional mayors
and the devolved governments not to issue the ‘Work Notices.’ We may end up with a
perpetual trade dispute with our employers. We shall not rely on Mr Starmer. After 40 years
of anti-union laws, Solidarity is the only way our movement will win, we need to act as one
union. Let’s bring this government down!”
Jo Grady, UCU: “Universities and FE Colleges have taken huge bouts of strike action.
University lecturers’ pay has gone down by 25%. FE lecturers get £9,000 less than a teacher.
We will never comply with legislation that will require a member to cross a picket line. But,
weak or strong, we need proper solidarity. We must raise millions of pounds-co-ordinated
by the TUC- so we can fight this effectively in the courts. But who knows about this Congress
today, unless you read the Daily Mirror? We need to mobilise people, not the people in this
room, but the millions out there in our communities.”
Claire Sullivan, CSP: “In 2023 we held our first strike ever! We need to fight for our patients,
for the NHS, for our fellow members, and our families. This Act will erode all the
relationships built up at local, regional and national level with our employers.”
Paul Whiteman, NAHT: “It is nonsense that we would put up with this patronising,
contemptuous government saying about their Act: ‘Well, you can still go on strike.’ If you
overwork us, if you underpay us, all we have left is the right to strike! This is not our usual
style but SOLIDARITY!” (Raises his fist).
Robert Merrick, Nautilus International: Peter Hebblethwaite, CEO of P&O, sacked all those
800+ workers in Dover and Hull on 17 th March 2022. The worst boss in the world! He said,
‘Yes, I broke the law, so what?’ Even the ILO supported our appeal, but the government did
nothing. Have the lessons been learnt? We are now balloting, with the RMT, our Royal Fleet
Auxiliary members, for the first time in 13 years.”
Maryam Estandoust, TSSA: Remember the Taff Vale dispute of 1906 and the anti-union law
that came from that?
Izzy, FBU: “We would have preferred a statement that we could amend. Those in power
need to understand that we will never accept these laws. We must mobilise in each and
every workplace, stir up a hornets’ nest: they will get stung! We need to build mass
opposition. The trade union movement is smaller than what it was but we can still win! The
TUC must rise, and smash this Act, we have to fight, we have no alternative!”
Annette Mansell-Green, British Dietetic Association/BDA: “After 13 years of pay cuts we
had our first national strike mandate ever. Let’s use the ILO and the European Court of
Human Rights. This is ideological. It will fail. The NHS employers don’t want this. Let us not
heed an unelected Prime Minister.”
Speaker from the Royal College of Podiatry.
Dave Ward, CWU: “We missed the boat after the pandemic. The pandemic should have
changed the balance of power in our favour but we did not take that opportunity. As a
result, our own members suffered. We must now fight back using the same courage and
collectivism that we showed as workers during the pandemic and in our recent wave of
strikes. This is a great statement, but what our next steps? We ask you, Paul, to make sure
that every TUC union is held to account to carry out the terms of this statement. Each union
MUST draw up its own action plan and through the TUC, you again Paul, to share them, and
discuss any tactical issues and problems. We smashed all those legal ballot thresholds, now
we must engage with our members as never before, to smash this Act! We cannot wait for
the next General Election to get the New Deal for Workers implemented, we must do this
ourselves, through agreeing a common bargaining agenda, and from that, massive increase
in sectoral bargaining and strike action between unions. We must fight for the future like
never before, and we have to mean it this time!”
Ian Lawrence, General Secretary, NAPO: “This Act is the biggest existential threat to the
trade union movement. We have to engage with young workers and non-members, college
students, school children: patiently explain what is at stake here.
Paul Nowak, replying to the discussion: “We have all 48 unions represented here ready to
respond. We will not wait 13 years, as the GCHQ workers had to, for justice, we will not wait
until a general election, we will do this ourselves. Who are the real enemies within? Not
works, but those now in power, in the Tory cabinet!”
TUC President then put the General Council statement to the vote, and it was declared
carried. Unanimously, I think.
The Special Congress ended with a photo session with the general council, delegates and
many national trade union banners as the backdrop.
So, the rally ended. I do understand the need for a rally. However, the mood, despite the
strong words, was, if anything, subdued. Two attempts at standing ovations for general
secretaries both fell flat. Nonetheless, rather than what seemed at times like a public
speaking competition between budding and practiced orators, between rival unions, a few
more contributions exploring what the mood is, what the feelings are, of trade union
members might have made a more useful session. Now that most of the strikes and disputes
have individually settled and ended, without the escalation into combined anger at the
government, the rich and the powerful, that some socialists including myself had thought
possible a year ago, how can we best get out there, and warn trades unionists to prepare for
the battle of their lives?
Dave Chapple
South West TUC Trades Councils’ Rep on the TUC Joint Consultative
No comments:
Post a Comment