I also made the point to Ed that whilst the media have spent the past week writing about trade union affiliation they seem to have forgotten the devastating changes that are due to be made to people’s rights at work on the 29th of this month. Workers who have been unfairly dismissed or discriminated against by their employer, and who seek redress at tribunal, will now be charged for taking that claim to hearing and have no assurance that if their claim is settled they will have their money repaid to them. Employers will also be able to make 'offers' to employees to leave their organisations - without the need for that employer to go through normal dismissal, grievance or performance procedures – through conversations that will later be inadmissible in any future tribunal proceedings. That is tantamount to giving employers carte blanche to hold 'car-park conversations' with anyone they don’t like, pressing them to give up their jobs before they are pushed or dismissed, with the employee having no means of referring to that conversation, or how threatened they felt by it, in any future case. While 'bad practice' in the operation of these conversations is supposed to be prohibited, it will, in many instances, be almost impossible for employees to prove that it has taken place. All of those changes are being introduced after the government has already made it harder for workers to seek redress by increasing the qualification period before they can submit an employment tribunal claim and has cut legal aid for employment issues. So whilst others review our structures I asked that Ed ensure he talks about the issues facing those working people trade unions represent right now.I can't imagine The Sun or the Daily Mail will be criticising this direct attack on the interests of the overwhelming majority of their readers.
Unite have allocated funds so none of its members will have to pay a single penny if they wish to take a bullying boss to a tribunal, and I know other unions are following suit. After the end of July, you cannot afford *not* to be in a trade union.
I think I know what you're on about, but it really isn't very clear.
ReplyDeleteMost people won't read past the first couple of lines.
I think it's pretty obvious for anyone with a modicum of patience and half a brain.
ReplyDeleteCan't imagine that useless Ed will raise this issue at all. A reminder that there are worse people than Martin Smith to get hung up about. And worse organisations than the SWP!
ReplyDeleteWell as Labour are committed to ending zero hour contracts, I'd say it's not as useless as your preconceptions have it!
ReplyDelete"Well as Labour are committed to ending zero hour contracts"
ReplyDeleteDidn't they explode under the New Labour organisation? I would read the small print if I were you.
No.
ReplyDeleteThe explosion of Zero Hour contracts are a Coalition phenomenon. Why? See here.
The stats tell me that there has been no significant rise since 2004, couple of % points.
ReplyDeleteThe New Labour organisation particularly introduced casual work to the public sector, as councils sought savings from around 2003 they begin a process of replacing full timers with Agency. The agency were the first to go under the current austerity. I don't think they even counted as staff cuts but indirect employee cuts!