Public sector workers striking. Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

Frozen out of the recovery: 2,245 reasons why public sector workers are on strike today

The TUC’s calculation that public sector workers are on average £2,245 worse off in real terms since this government came to power is timely, and explains today's strikes.

The TUC’s calculation that public sector workers are on average £2,245 worse off in real terms since this government came to power is timely, published yesterday, a day ahead of the largest strike action to take place since 2010. The TUC highlights how the people affected by continued pay restraint – the home helps, refuse collectors, teachers and firefighters, among others – are often the public servants on whom we depend on most. These people are currently facing the prospect of another four years with pay rises significantly lower than the increase in the cost of living.

Just under half a million public sector workers are paid below the living wage. It was pointed out to me recently that some of these lowest paid workers might effectively lose more than the equivalent of the 1 per cent pay rise being offered if they go on strike. The implicit argument was that it would be better to put up with, what by 2018 will be over a decade of falling wages, than fight back. There comes a point, however, when gratitude that you have a job is outweighed by a sense that fairness ought also to be included in the mix. This is unsustainable. There is a limit to how long people can make do, juggling bills and food costs and getting by with rising rents and the threat of increased mortgage rates. Industrial action among unionised workers is sometimes an almost inevitable and entirely justified last resort.

A government that tells us "we are all in it together" when we can all accept things are truly tough needs to recognise the implied contract that everyone will benefit when things – as they tell us they are – start to improve. This is not happening. Public sector workers are being frozen out of the recovery in a high-handed manner that understandably breeds frustration and disillusionment.

This government has done little to help those on low pay. In work poverty is on the increase and we know many of those who resort to emergency aid from food banks are from working households. The voluntary approach to the living wage is currently failing and will only work if ministers and Mayors literally put their money where their mouths are. The Brixton Ritzy cinema workers, who will also be on strike tomorrow, are a case in point. If employees are told that if their employer can afford to pay a living wage, they should, will at some point stop asking politely. Equally, if Scotland and Northern Ireland can negotiate to resolve their fire pensions dispute, it is hardly surprising that the Fire Brigades Union believes the Westminster government should follow suit, and therefore escalate their action accordingly when it refuses.

At the other end of the scale, high paid executives apparently need to be rewarded to ensure they do their jobs, and we are not seeing the kind of restraint that Mark Carney, Governor of the Bank of England, has urged banks to adopt. The High Pay Centre, an independent think tank on pay inequality, calculate that today the average salary of a FTSE 100 chief executive so far this year is £2,208,829 and that a CEO at this level will take home more in three days than an employee earns in a year. To these people – and seemingly to the government – £2,245 is neither here nor there.

Strikes are always a last resort and, with individual strikes getting limited publicity, it is hardly surprising that trade unions are choosing to call co-ordinated action. Trade unions are there to defend their members and there are 2,245 reasons for a strike to take place now.

Fiona Twycross is the London Assembly Labour Group economy spokesperson

Getty
Show Hide image

Ed Miliband on Brexit: Labour should never be the party of the 48 per cent

The former Labour leader has not ruled out a return to the shadow cabinet. 

What do George Osborne, Jeremy Corbyn and Ed Miliband have in common? A liking for a soft Brexit, it turns out. 

But while Osborne is responding to the border lockdown instinct of some Tory Brexiteers, the former Labour leader, along with Chuka Umunna, Lisa Nandy and Rachel Reeves, has to start by making the case to fight for Brexit at all.

And that’s before you get to the thorny and emotional question of freedom of movement. 

Speaking at a Resolution Foundation fringe event, Miliband ridiculed calls to be the “party of the 48 per cent”, in reference to the proportion who voted to stay in the EU referendum.

Remain voters should stop thinking Brexit was a “nasty accident” and start fighting for a good deal, he urged.

Miliband said: “I see talk saying we should become the party of the 48 per cent. That is nonsense.

"I don’t just think it is nonsense electorally, but it is nonsense in policy because it buys into the same problem people were objecting to in their vote which is the old ‘I’m right, you’re wrong’”. 

Remain voters shared many of the same concerns as Leave voters, including on immigration, he said. 

Miliband praised the re-elected Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn’s comments that a hard Brexit would be a disaster. He said: “We have to engage in these negotiations.”

Although he said he “anticipated” staying on the back benches, he did not rule out a return to the shadow cabinet, and urged the party to use its newly recruited member, many of whom joined under Corbyn.

Miliband was backed up by Nandy, seen as a rising star of the party, who said there was longterm dissatisfaction with jobs and wages: “You throw freedom of movement into the mix and you create dynamite.”

She also called for Labour to throw itself into Brexit negotiations: “We have been stuck between two impossible choices, between pulling up the drawbridge or some version of free market hell.

“But the truth is we are a progressive, internationalist, socialist party and we can’t afford to make that false choice.”

Reeves, who wrote in The Staggers that freedom of movement should be a “red line” in Brexit negotiations, said: “I don’t buy this idea that people who voted Leave have changed their minds.”

And she dismissed the idea of a second referendum on the eventual deal: “If people voted against the deal, then what?”

But while the speakers received warm applause from the party member audience, they were also heckled by an EU national who felt utterly betrayed. Her interruption received applause too.

Umunna acknowledged the tensions in the room, opening and ending his speech with a plea for members not to leave the party. 

Having called identity politics "the elephant in the room", he declared: “We have got to stay in this party and not go anywhere. It is not just because you don’t win an argument by leaving the room, it is because we are the only nationwide party with representatives in every region and nation of this country. We are the only party representing every age and ethnic community. 

“Stay in this party and let us build a more integrated Britain.”