The Staggers

The New Statesman’s rolling politics blog

Why we are right to strike

There will be more to come if the government doesn't start meeting the needs of ordinary people.

By Mark Serwotka Published 30 November 2011 16:35

Two days before the largest strike in a generation, I addressed a packed hall of trade union members in Glasgow. They were united and determined to resist this government's raid on their pensions - and that was before they'd heard George Osborne's autumn statement.

Perhaps one prescient member had been given a sneak preview, since she told me: "If we don't stand up for pensions today, they'll come for our pay or our jobs tomorrow."

Public-sector workers face working longer and paying more to get a smaller pension, despite their existing arrangements being entirely affordable and sustainable. The proposed increase in pension contributions is a tax on working in the public sector - all going to the Treasury, not a penny towards improving pensions. It's robbery.

Workers are in the second year of a pay freeze - years that have coincided with rampant inflation. They now face two further years of below-inflation pay rises, at the end of which their living standards will be 15 to 20 per cent lower.

The government replies that many private-sector workers have suffered pay freezes and lost their pensions. My union has nearly 30,000 private-sector members, but we've never argued for an equality of misery. The government would like us to compare public- and private-sector workers in some sort of depraved competition for the worst lot, to distract us from the vast gap between what is imposed on ordinary workers and how a tiny elite at the top carries on.

The differences between public and private are overplayed: the average public-sector pension is £5,600, while for private-sector workers in defined benefit schemes the average is £5,800 - roughly the same modest amount. But while 85 per cent of public-sector workers are in defined benefit schemes, only 11 per cent of private-sector workers are.

Wilful greed

That scandalously low figure in the private sector is a result of the wilful greed of top directors, who have closed pension schemes while protecting their own nest eggs. These directors have an average pension of £175,000 per year and last year their pay increased by 49 per cent, on average.

All of us pay for that private-sector greed through higher prices in the shops, higher bills, higher fares and by missing out on tax revenues as many wealthy individuals and big business hide their money away offshore - an option not available to ordinary taxpayers - but which costs us all £120bn a year in lost revenues.

This cosseted elite, including many of the current Cabinet, have never had to worry about paying the bills, going into arrears on their rent or mortgage, or even having to choose - as many pensioners will this winter - between adequately heating or eating.

The day before the strike, the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) estimated that public-sector employment will fall by 710,000. In the past three months alone, civil servants have seen 24,000 of their fellow workers leave. This is damaging public services from borders to tax collection. Even in the so-called "protected" areas, such as the NHS, 26,000 staff have been forced out in the past quarter.

With falling living standards, the prospect of an impoverished retirement and their own jobs increasingly under threat, public-sector workers are understandably angry. As in any confrontation, some have wanted to keep their heads down and hope it doesn't affect them but there is an increasing realisation that we need to unite and stand up to this bullying government.

On picket lines and in marches and rallies across the country, that is being demonstrated. If the government does not change course and start meeting the needs of ordinary people, more and escalating strike action, occupations and protests will be inevitable in 2012.

Growth strategy

A BBC opinion poll just before the strike showed 61 per cent thought it was justified, while only 36 per cent disagreed. Why should that be? There is a growing awareness that the wrong people are being made to pay for a crisis they had no role in creating. That same poll showed only 28 per cent believed the government is handling the economy well; 67 per cent disagreed.

People are rightly asking why the government is slashing over £20bn from welfare and imposing £9,000 fees on students, when it can afford to give away £25bn in business tax breaks? Why public-sector pensions are now unaffordable yet nuclear weapons a necessity? Why young people get six months in jail for stealing bottled water, while big business can avoid paying billions in taxes with impunity?

There is a creeping sense of injustice and a realisation that the government is on the side of its fellow millionaires. But there's also something positive going on: solidarity - a further awareness that, underneath the millionaire cabinet and its City friends, we are all in this together.

Mark Serwotka is general secretary of the Public and Commercial Services Union

Special Offer: Get 12 issues of New Statesman magazine for just £12

Tags: Public Sector Pensions Strikes Trade Unions

More from Mark Serwotka

20 comments

Wed, 2011-11-30 17:02 — Alan (not verified)

'An equality of misery' - A nice soundbite and alternative to 'the race to the bottom'. Good article. It is evident amongst my friends in the private sector - many of whom despair at my lefty politics - that they agree with the strikes and, like you say, are increasingly aware of the injustices that pervade a small section of our society.

Wed, 2011-11-30 17:08 — Brendan Caffrey2

Equality of misery: A good socialist idea?
In the New Statesman the leader of the civil servants union argues that his union has never argued for an equality of misery. Indeed, he opposes a rush to the bottom in comparing pensions for private and public sector workers.
He then points out that there is little difference between the pensions of private and public sector workers. This implies that we already have a successful rush to the bottom. Instead of lauding his own union for opposing this rush, which has already happened, he should be concerned with recruiting the private sector workers into his union.
Not that this would be easy, as his union is seen as having only public sector members. But this is not true. The union has a Commercial Services sector. There is also a prison services sector. Many of these workers may well have been union members before privatisation. Many more may never have been in a union.
The point here is that there needs to be more focus on growing the union, than in self-congratulation. Indeed, there is a risk of seeing unions as narrowly concerned only with their own members. Worse, they look as though there is little concern with the recently redundant, who may not be union members any longer.
Please see my website at:
whyworktoday2967.wordpresss.com/

Wed, 2011-11-30 17:10 — Terrible But True (not verified)

'A BBC opinion poll just before the strike showed 61 per cent thought it was justified, while only 36 per cent disagreed. Why should that be?'

----

Wild guess, but maybe BECAUSE it was a BBC poll?

Speaking of tangibles, how's the vast public support in complement to the vast membership turnout been so far?

Wed, 2011-11-30 18:02 — p j wall (not verified)

No doubt The Tory Misinformation machine will roll into action?, Most schools were open, Not as many strikers as first thought, Disruption was minimal, Most people are against the strikes, The strike action was a flop!,etc, etc, This Tory Party is getting increasingly desperate with it`s Lies and Vilification of normal everyday people!, getting back to the bad old Thatcher days when everyone who didn`t tow the line where classed as the enemy within?, All this coming from an out of touch, bunch of Millionaires!!, Happily justifying people in the private sector having no rights, or pensions!!, Let`s all fight our way to the bottom, and do as we`re told?, unless of course you`re a Multi Millionaire Tax Avoid/Evader, and a C.E.O, who can have a 49% pay rise, or a Banker who just tells the govt they deserve their bonuses!!, WE`RE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER?, The Limp Dems must be crapping themselves coming up to 2015?, They`re Toast!.

Wed, 2011-11-30 18:45 — kilgore (not verified)

61% agreed with a bbc commisioned poll

1005 were polled
613 people agreed

wow what a huge figure

not

Wed, 2011-11-30 19:39 — andyg (not verified)

Good and honest article. I'm glad to see at long last the ordinary folk standing up for what is right and just. For 20 years or so they have been trampled over and are now saying enough of this daylight robbery. Good for them and a welcome back to the Unions of old.

Wed, 2011-11-30 21:10 — ISC

Actually Mark some of us feel that 'public sector workers' are a 'cosseted elite' - I seem to be expected to pay for their pensions whilst I can't afford to pay for my own.

Wed, 2011-11-30 23:04 — capt-price (not verified)

You pay for public sector pensions you bandwagon buffoon?

Does that mean that public sector workers don't pay anything then. We're led to believe they pay no tax either- Pfft!

TIT!

Sat, 2011-12-03 15:34 — Pete (not verified)

I am a PCS member and was on strike on 30/11. However Mr Serwotka, I am heartily fed up with you and particularly your local officials making it only too plain that your real motive is not the pension issue but bringing down the government.
When my colleagues and I had a serious problem with possible downgrading PCS gave us no support whatever. Everything that happened, including our success, was down to us. You and your colleagues should be ashamed.
PCS does nothing to support the ordinary member unless you see a possibility of embarrassing the government. Nothing else matters to you. You're a disgrace.

Thu, 2011-12-01 02:19 — Fergus Pickering (not verified)

Ah, the Unions of old. Funded, many of them, by the USSR as I remember. Ah the USSR of old!

Thu, 2011-12-01 09:30 — swatantra nandanwar

Sky Twitter was showing 61% in favour of the strikers,a whole range of workers from Head Teachers to cleaners. Of course every worker has the right to withdraw their Labour and lose a days pay. Its a sacrifice for tose that feel strongly to make.
What was annoying was the Occupy Movement trying to capitalise on the DayofAction.
I feel sorry for women now expected to work till 68 in some physically demanding jobs, before picking up their pension. It simply is not fair.
Raising Pension age is a big mistake; just because you live longer doesn't mean you are capable of working in that same job. And staying on till 68 denies young people of getting into the employment market.
The fact is we will all in future have to downsize and lower our standard of living. But Govts will not admit to it.

Fri, 2011-12-02 13:59 — Lox (not verified)

I don't know about the UK as a whole, but there are around 300,000 Small or Medium sized Enterprises in Scotland, accounting for over 50% of employment.
We're not talking about big companies here-the vast majority of those enterprises will employ no more than a handful of people, and by the EC definition of an SME, 250 at the most: so what's wrong with giving business tax breaks?

Thu, 2011-12-01 10:35 — Stu (not verified)

I understand the public sector emotions but I'd like to say..
1) we in the private sector already have to work till 68
2) we have had pay freezes and no pay rise or reduction in pay for a few years already
3) most will not have a pension at all and if we do it's rubbish
4) we still work longer hours and rubbish leave allowance
5) we live longer and it's only fair to work longer, women and men.

it's not all rosey here and the union claim that they are striking for the good of all workers pensions will not hold water.

So we see the public sector striking because their standard of living is reduced and their working perks are going to be levelled off to private sector standards although their pensions will still remain some of the best.

We pay towards your perks and your argument is that we get public services. I can't comment on the general standard of services as they are so varied but there are some very shocking stats.

For example we have seen that our education system have slipped way down the ladder, old folks being abused in care homes, hospital are dirty etc... there is a long list so many will ask, 'are we getting value for money'?

Labour have grown the public sector (to unsustainable levels), good for people that are employed but over the years in the Labour govt they have failed to reform the public services, failed in making them more efficient and failed to get good value for money. Labour's policy was just to throw money in without consideration for the future finances since they believed there would be no more 'boom and bust'... how wrong they were, this is just another failure on Labours part funded by none other than the unions, their pay masters.

Now you can see why the private sector workers see you as selfish even some editors in the papers say so.

Thu, 2011-12-01 11:20 — Vorian (not verified)

"The day before the strike, the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) estimated that public-sector employment will fall by 710,000."

Excellent news. Will you now stop making specious arguments about pensions, and focus on saving the jobs of this three-quarter of a million unemployables?

Thu, 2011-12-01 11:49 — BigC (not verified)

"But while 85 per cent of public-sector workers are in defined benefit schemes, only 11 per cent of private-sector workers are.Wilful greed. That scandalously low figure in the private sector is a result of the wilful greed of top directors"

Sorry Mr Serwotka, that's a result of Mr Gordon Brown's raid on dividend tax relief for Pension Schemes, NOTHING else. (Which incidentally was WELCOMED by the TUC!) Before that and other stealth taxes and his subsequent trashing of the UK economy as PM, pensions for all were affordable.

"many wealthy individuals and big business hide their money away offshore - an option not available to ordinary taxpayers - but which costs us all £120bn a year in lost revenues."

£120 Billions? Hmmm, which cloud did you pick that figure from? Even the left wing think tank the "Tax Justice Network" puts it at £70bn!still too high I would agree, but nowhere near the daft figure you made up!

"the average public-sector pension is £5,600"

Maybe it is, but the "average" is made up from those working 30-40 years full time and those only working 3-4 years part-time. When I retire from the Public Sector I'll get a pension (in today's money) of about about £15000, for very little contribution from myself (compared with the private sector), so yes, that IS a gold plated pension.

I'm sure you will have given up some of your huge salary and pension to stand shoulder to shoulder with your striking comrades...no? Thought not. Rank Hypocrisy.

You and the rest of your fat cat union baron friends might want a return to the good old days of the 1970's, but I certainly don't.

It is people like you that made me leave the PCS.

Thu, 2011-12-01 12:13 — Chris (not verified)

Stu,

I think you've fallen into the trap of viewing this as a Private vs. Public argument, which is a myth that Mark Serwotka was trying to dispell here. These strikes were not the public sector saying "we should have it better than the private sector." This was a fundamental disagreement with the way they have been treated. Now, you might cry out "well the private sector have it worse", and that may be so [the argument is essentially irrelevant], but just because some people have it worse doesn't mean that people shouldn't complain about there own position if, as they feel, it's bad. The unions feel that the pension changes are not fair. This in turn means that they also feel that the state of private sector pensions is not fair. There is no sense that the public sector "deserve" better pensions than "everyone else", it's that everyone deserves a better pension, but the private sector don't mobilise to press for it.

It's not the public sector's fault that the private sector isn't unionised.

Also, I think I'm right in saying that the abuse in care homes took place in private care homes, and that cleaning services in hospitals have been contracted out to private companies - along with much else. But that's another matter...

Thu, 2011-12-01 12:43 — Fiona (not verified)

It is truly dispiriting to see this division between private and public sector workers: they are both under attack and they have interests in common. A decent pension is a basic right for everyone: we are a rich country and that some have to choose between heat and food is nothing less than barbaric.

There are those who argue that changes to the pension arrangements are necessary because we cannot afford them at a time when we are living longer. But those who assert this do not show the relevant calculations, or at least not that I have seen. Where is the evidence that this is true? Not saying it does not exist but I have not been able to find it and I will be really interested to see any analysis rather than the mere assertion. I would like some of the questions in this post to be answered in a form I can understand, mainly

http://thosebigwords.forumcommunity.net/?t=45641796&p=318210087

Thu, 2011-12-01 13:40 — Fergus Pickering (not verified)

Of course a decent pension is not a basic right. What a load of cobblers. A pension is something you pay for. If you don't pay then you don't get. The State may giev charity to the poor, but that is hardly the same thing.

Sun, 2011-12-04 08:31 — Vorian (not verified)

Pete: "your real motive is not the pension issue but bringing down the government."

To those of us in the private sector - who saw unions stay quiet while Brown's stealth tax degraded our pensions - that motive is painfully obvious. The position of unions here is unprincipled, and based on specious excuses for an argument.

Thu, 2011-12-01 14:24 — Vorian (not verified)

@Fiona:

"Where is the evidence that this is true? Not saying it does not exist but I have not been able to find it and I will be really interested to see any analysis rather than the mere assertion."

Here you go:

http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/d/hutton_final_100311.pdf

http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/d/hutton_pensionsinterim_071010.pdf

While Hutton is clear that "affordability" is a judgement, Ex 15 + 16 of the interim report may be helpful to you. I recommend reading the whole thing, particularly the observations on the unfairness between low and high-paid that are a feature of the status quo Serwotka claims to be defending.

Also of interest: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/sep/15/unions-and-hutton-exchange...

"they are both under attack": yes - attack by a massive state that has grown by a million functionaries in the last decade-and-a-half. Losing 710,000 of them sounds like a fair start.