LTB077/16 Trade Union Bill - Government Attacks Safety Reps

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Letter to Branches





No. 077/16
Ref: C1/16
Date: 5 February 2016


To: All Branches
All Safety Representatives
All Regional Safety Forums

Dear Colleagues

Trade Union Bill - Government Attacks Safety Reps: All Party Parliamentary Group on Occupational Safety and Health - Trade Union Bill Briefing to Peers on Union Safety Representatives:
Further to LTB 524/15 issued on 12 August 2015, this is an update on the Tory Government's Trade Union Bill and the specific attacks on Trade Union Safety Representatives.

The Bill has progressed through the House of Commons and is now in the House of Lords where it is being considered, debated and amended before passing back to the House of Commons for final consideration prior to Royal Assent and introduction as Law.

The Bill Stages in Summary - Trade Union Bill 2015-16:

House of Commons
First Reading 15 July 2015
Second Reading 14 September 2015
Committee stage 13-27 October 2015
Report Stage 10 November 2015
Third Reading 10 November 2015

House of Lords
First Reading 11 November 2015
Second Reading 11 January 2016
Committee Stage 8 - 25 February 2016
Report Stage
Third Reading

(THE BILL THEN PASSES BACK TO HOUSE OF COMMONS TO CONSIDER HOUSE OF LORDS AMENDMENTS - BILLS CAN PASS BACK AND FORTH AT THIS POINT UNTILL ACCEPTED BY THE HOUSE OF COMMONS PRIOR TO ROYAL ASSENT.)

The Labour Party via its MPs in the Commons and Peers in the House of Lords continue to fight, oppose and try to amend the Bill at every stage.

The next stage commencing on 8 February will be the Committee Stage in the Lords where there will be line by line consideration.

Attached for your information is an excellent and very informative 'Trade Union Bill Briefing to Peers on Union Safety Representatives' circulated by Ian Lavery MP, Chair of the 'All Party Parliamentary Group on Occupational Safety and Health'. Ian, who has been the Member of Parliament for Wansbeck since the 2010 general election, was previously the President of the National Union of Mineworkers before moving into politics and is a good friend of the Trade Union movement. Ian has worked previously with the CWU, supporting the 'Bite-Back' Campaign on Dangerous Dogs Law changes and also on the 'Cool-It' Campaign for a Maximum Workplace Temperature.

The all-party parliamentary group on occupational safety and health has identified concerns regarding the implications for workplace health and safety in the Trade Union Bill with the main concern being the inclusion of safety representatives appointed under section 2(4) of the Health and Safety at Work etc., Act 1974 and the Safety Representatives and Safety Committee Regulations 1977.

Clause 12 and 13 of the Bill specifically relate to facility time granted to relevant Trade Union officials within public authorities. Relevant Union officials are defined as including health and safety representatives.

The Bill proposes to amend the law and allow ministers to:-
Impose a cap on the amount of time off given to Union safety representatives.
Revise contracts of employment.
Revise National Agreements agreed by employers and Unions.
Require public sector employers to record and publish all the time off taken by Safety Reps and the facilities provided.
The all-party parliamentary group has importantly pointed out to peers (as has the TUC and Trade Unions) the time granted to Union safety representatives is not as such "facility time”, but a separate legal time-off requirement to perform legal functions and additionally it is also a requirement under European legislation, where the 1989 Framework Directive requires member states to ensure that “Employers must allow workers' representatives with specific responsibility for the safety and health of workers adequate time off work, without loss of pay, and provide them with the necessary means to enable such representatives to exercise their rights and functions.” This means that any restriction on this right would be a breach of EU law.

The Tory Government however has so far refused to remove the reference to safety representatives from the Trade Union Bill. During the House of Commons debates Nick Boles, Tory Government Minister of State at BIS said that “An employer must allow Safety Reps as much paid time off work as is necessary or reasonable to perform their statutory functions and we absolutely do not propose to change that rule. However hours spent by Safety Reps at the taxpayers’ expense has to be justifiable and accountable and represent value for money.” This dangerous proposal is clearly aimed at cutting back the time that Trade Union health and safety representatives take to perform their functions and is an attempt to undermine European Health and Safety Directives.

It is a matter of concern that the government has to date refused to accept amendments removing the reference to safety representatives from the Bill.

The attached briefing points out the important facts that all CWU Health and Safety Reps will be aware of and that is that the current UK Legislation has been in place for nearly 40 years because of the indisputable, universally recognised value that Trade Union Safety Representatives make to the workplace. Research has shown that those workplaces with Trade Union Safety Representatives and Safety Committees have half the serious injury rate compared to those without. They also have lower rates of occupational illnesses and disease. It's not surprising therefore that those employers with the best health and safety records welcome and support Trade Union Safety Representatives and are not calling on the Government to make any changes. It is therefore purely an unjustifiable attack on Trade Unions full stop.

The Trade Union Bill as proposed would be in breach of European Health and Safety Law and it will hinder attempts to improve workers’ health and safety, beginning with public service workers. It won't end there!

The attached briefing will hopefully be noted by the peers involved in the House of Lords debates and decision making when it comes to amending the Bill. The CWU Health, Safety & Environment Department is most grateful for Ian Lavery's interest, support and persistent, dedicated input on this issue.

Yours sincerely
 

Dave Joyce
National Health, Safety & Environment Officer

[TrueBlueTerrier]

ALL PARTY PARLIAMENTARY GROUP ON
OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH



TRADE UNION BILL
BRIEFING TO PEERS ON UNION SAFETY REPRESENTATIVES

At the last meeting of the all-party parliamentary group on occupational safety and health concern was expressed over the implications for workplace health and safety of some aspects of the Trade Union Bill. The main concern was the inclusion of safety representatives appointed under section 2(4) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974.

Clause 12 and 13 of the Bill specifically relate to facility time granted to relevant trade union officials within public authorities. Relevant union officials are defined as including health and safety representatives.

The Bill proposes to allow ministers to impose a cap on the amount of time off given to union safety representatives by amending the Health and Safety at Work Act. They will also have the power to revise contracts of employment and collective agreements which have been voluntarily agreed by employers and unions. All public sector employers, who has at least one union safety representative, will also be required to record and publish all the time taken and any facilities provided.

The All-party parliamentary group is aware that the time granted to union safety representatives is not “facility time”, but a separate requirement. It is intended to ensure that safety representatives are afforded sufficient time to perform their functions and is also a requirement under European legislation, where the 1989 Framework Directive requires member states to ensure that “Employers must allow workers' representatives with specific responsibility for the safety and health of workers adequate time off work, without loss of pay, and provide them with the necessary means to enable such representatives to exercise their rights and functions.” This means that any restriction on this right would be a breach of EU law.

The Government has stated that they accept that but have still refused to remove the reference to safety representatives from the Bill. Nick Boles, Minister of State at BIS is reported in Hansard as saying “An employer must allow them as much paid time off work as is necessary or reasonable to perform their statutory functions and we absolutely do not propose to change that rule. We simply want to ensure that the time that trade union reps collectively spend on union duties and activities during working hours at taxpayers’ expense is justifiable and accountable and that it represents value for money.” This is an extremely dangerous proposal. The Minister appears to be stating that the amount of time given to all the various types of trade union representatives can be aggregated. It appears to be an attempt to force public sector trade unions themselves to reduce the time that their health and safety representatives take to perform their functions, in order to allow other representatives to take facility time off, despite the fact that the time taken by safety representatives is not facility time but a legal requirement. As such this may be seen as a cynical attempt to circumvent the European regulations.

In the Annex to a letter to the Joint Committee on Human Rights the Secretary of State also confirmed that ‘Clause 13 contains a reserve power to cap the amount of facility time a union has. Should regulations be made in exercise of this power, they can be made subjects to exceptions where necessary – for example, to ensure compliance with EU obligations.” In spite of these statements, it is a matter of concern that the government has to date refused to accept amendments removing the reference to safety representatives from the Bill.

The current requirements are in place because of the indisputable value that safety representatives make to the workplace. Research has shown that those workplaces with union safety representatives and safety committees have half the serious injury rate compared to those without. They also have lower rates of occupational illnesses and disease. It is the experience of the all-party parliamentary group that those employers with the best health and safety record welcome and support union safety representatives.

Were this proposal to be enacted the Government would not only be in breach of European law but, more importantly, it will hinder attempts to improve both the health and safety of public service workers. At present the public sector has high levels of work-related ill-health and unions and employers have been working together to reduce these rates. The all-party group would suggest that the proposals in Clause 12 and 13 of the Trade Union Bill will make such activities by union representatives much less likely to occur and, as a result, workplaces across the public sector will be more dangerous and less productive.

Ian Lavery, MP.
Chair
All Party Parliamentary Group on Occupational Safety and Health.