Government introduces controversial anti-strike legislation

In an effort to mitigate the disruption of public services during strikes, the UK government introduced the Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Bill in January 2023.

This legislation, proposed by the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy and Business Secretary Grant Shapps, empowers the government to set minimum levels of service in critical public sectors such as rail, ambulances, fire services, health services, education, and border security during industrial actions.

The bill’s objective is to ensure the safety of the public and maintain access to crucial services, reducing risks to life and ensuring continuity of work and healthcare services.

The government has stressed that the bill is a protective measure for the public, intended to be used only when necessary​​.

Fire Brigades Union warns of unprecedented confrontation

The Fire Brigades Union (FBU) General Secretary, Matt Wrack, has issued a stern warning regarding the potential consequences of these new laws.

Wrack predicts that the legislation could trigger trade union defiance on a scale not seen since the 1970s.

He expressed concern that these laws represent a significant attack on workers’ rights, likening the restrictions to those found in authoritarian regimes.

The FBU has been instrumental in gaining the Trades Union Congress’s (TUC) support for a strategy of non-cooperation and non-compliance with the new laws.

A TUC special congress scheduled for December 9 will discuss plans for mass non-compliance, possibly marking the beginning of a widespread campaign against the legislation.

Wrack has highlighted the risk of a wave of strikes in response to the laws, potentially affecting the upcoming General Election​​.

Trade unions and advocacy groups criticise the Bill

Trade unions and advocacy groups have criticised the government’s approach.

UNISON, representing a range of public service workers, describes the bill as a frontal attack on workers and their rights.

General Secretary Christina McAnea has called on the government to focus on resolving pay crises and legitimate disputes rather than punishing workers.

UNISON’s analysis of the bill raises concerns about the lack of detail on the limits of ‘minimum service levels’ and the potential for forcing workers to work against their will, undermining existing strike provisions.

The bill also introduces ‘work notices’, which could compel union members to comply with government-set service levels or face legal and financial repercussions.

There are also fears that the bill could remove key protections for striking workers, making them vulnerable to dismissal and penalising unions financially.

UNISON’s Assistant General Secretary, Jon Richards, has called for more focus on addressing public service crises rather than fast-tracking this bill, which he believes undermines democracy and workers’ rights​​.

IFSJ Comment

The introduction of the Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Bill in the UK marks a pivotal moment in the relationship between the government and trade unions.

While the government’s intention to safeguard public interest during strikes is clear, the response from trade unions and public service advocates highlights a profound concern about the erosion of workers’ rights and the democratic process.

The bill’s potential impact on the fabric of industrial relations in the UK cannot be understated.

The prospect of unprecedented industrial action in response to these laws suggests a deepening rift between the government and workers, particularly in essential public services.

This situation warrants careful observation as it develops, given its potential to influence not only the upcoming elections but also the long-term landscape of labour relations and workers’ rights in the UK.