College Lecturers Stage One-Day Strike

Workers' Daily Internet Edition: Article Index :

College Lecturers Stage One-Day Strike

Trade Unions Support of Australian Workers

Thousands of college lecturers across England went on strike on Wednesday in a long-running dispute over pay. The lecturers' union NATFHE said that up to 26,000 members of staff in about 220 colleges were affected by the one-day strike.

            The focus of the action was the speech by the education secretary Ruth Kelly to the annual conference of the Association of Colleges (AoC) in Birmingham. She promised to tackle the 13% funding gap between colleges and schools, which she acknowledged was resented in the sector. But this “promise” of better prospects for colleges fell on deaf ears, given that over 60% of colleges have not yet even implemented the 2003-2005 “agreement”. Lecturers want to know where the funding promised by Charles Clarke as education secretary has gone, as individual colleges in England are claiming that despite the national agreement there is no money to pay for it.

            NATFHE points out that there is a 10% pay gap between college lecturers and schoolteachers and the union balloted for industrial action over what officials have described as "a lowly 2.8% pay offer" for this academic year. The NATFHE claim is for 7%.

            The head of colleges at NATFHE, Barry Lovejoy, said: "We have not only had an inadequate pay rise this year, we have also in some of our colleges not received the pay rise from last year." He said future strikes were possible if college employers, represented by the AoC, refused to negotiate a satisfactory settlement. "Our members have demonstrated quite clearly that they will dig in for the long haul if necessary," he said.

            The Education Secretary said that she wanted to address the funding gap between schools and colleges. She said, “I know that many of you feel resentment about that gap. I understand that resentment. I also feel strongly that the gap is unfair. I can't solve the problem overnight, but I am determined to tackle it as rapidly as I can.”

            But her first step in this direction seems to be designed to cut money for school sixth forms. The Department for Education and Skills is to change the rules under which schools receive funding for sixth-form students for a whole academic year, and make it dependent on the students being in attendance for the whole year.

Tuesday, November 15, was an international solidarity day with Australian trade unions who are fighting to defend workers' rights in the face of repressive new anti-worker, anti-trade union legislation proposed by John Howard's government. Trade unions around the world protested at their local Australian Embassy. In Britain, unions were encouraged to hand in letters to the Australian High Commission. TUC General Secretary Brendan Barber delivered his letter at 11am.Letters and messages of support were delivered to the High Commission throughout the day, a selection of which are below:

NASUWT letter to the Australian High Commission

Mr Alston

Australia House
The Strand
London

WC2B 4LA

15 November 2005

Dear Mr Alston

Industrial Relations Law in Australia

I am writing to register with you the serious concerns of NASUWT, the largest union representing teachers and head teachers in the UK, about your Government’s plans to introduce repressive new industrial relations legislation, which will dramatically reduce the rights of workers to union representation, collective bargaining, minimum employment standards and protection from unfair dismissal. 

            NASUWT has two major concerns.  The first is out of solidarity with the workers of Australia.   NASUWT believes that the changes proposed will fundamentally damage Australia’s reputation as a country where workers are treated fairly.  The second is that the laws being proposed would breach the conventions of the International Labour Organisation and thereby undermine the rights of workers everywhere, including in Britain.

            The Union is particularly concerned that minimum wages will in future be determined by a Government appointed Commission which will set them on the basis of competitiveness, without regard for fairness and decent living standards. This does not follow the example set by the UK’s Low Pay Commission in raising real wages for the poorest paid but will in fact do precisely the opposite and reduce the earnings of those least able to cope.  

            I believe that as a result of the proposals, the independent Australian Industrial Relations Commission will have virtually all its powers removed, except for its powers to stop unions taking industrial action and that system of Awards setting out core terms and conditions of employment for different occupations and sectors will be replaced by a system where the employer will have virtually total power to decide terms and conditions.   This is the view of NASUWT would be a retrograde step as the new law would:

remove protection from unfair dismissal for all workers in workplaces employing less than 100 workers;

push workers onto individual employment contracts;

restrict trade union activities, including the right to talk with workers in their workplace;

impose extremely narrow limits on the matters which can be the subject of collective bargaining;

remove the right to public holidays for many workers, and weaken provisions for annual leave;

allow employers to decide unilaterally on annual leave bonuses, meal and rest breaks, overtime rates and other provisions for many workers, especially younger workers and those starting a new job;

reduce protection for employees who refuse unsafe or unhealthy work; and

allow the government sweeping powers to stop industrial action if it decides the action is detrimental to the economy .

            It is in our view inconceivable for a progressive country to consider introducing legislation which is contrary to the fundamental ILO principles of freedom of association and free collective bargaining. NASUWT urges the Australian Government to reconsider.

            Yours sincerely,

           

            Chris Keates

General Secretary

           

           

NATFHE letter to the Australian High Commission

The Hon Richard Kenneth Robert Alston

Head of Mission
Australia House
Strand
London WC2B 4LA

           

           

           

14 November 2005

           

           

Dear Mr Alston

Proposed changes to industrial relations law in Australia

I am writing on behalf of AUT and NATFHE, representing some 120,000 lecturers in post-school education in the United Kingdom. We wish to register with you our deep concern about your Government’s plans to introduce repressive new industrial relations legislation, which will dramatically reduce the rights of workers to union representation, collective bargaining, minimum employment standards and protection from unfair dismissal.   We have worked closely with the educational unions in Australia for many years, and know that their system of carefully regulated employer / employee relations works well and is widely respected both in Australia and in other countries. We are also aware of the globalisation policies pursued by your government of which this legislation is just the latest example, and which have put Australian workers and their families in the front line for exploitation. Next month, a major international trade union conference for higher education teachers in Melbourne will hear first hand reports of the legislation and the ruthless methods by which it is being driven through Parliament.

            Our concern is, in part, out of solidarity with the workers of Australia (many of whom were born or have roots in the UK) and our colleagues in the Australian Council of Trade Unions. We believe that the changes proposed will fundamentally damage Australia’s reputation as a country where workers get “a fair go”. But we are also concerned that the laws being proposed would breach the conventions of the International Labour Organisation and thereby undermine the rights of workers everywhere, including in Britain.

            We are particularly concerned that minimum wages will in future be determined by a government appointed Commission which will set them on the basis of “competitiveness”, without regard for fairness and decent living standards. This does not, as some have suggested (including your Prime Minister, we believe), follow the example set by the UK’s Low Pay Commission in raising real wages for the poorest paid but will in fact do precisely the opposite and reduce the earnings of those least able to cope.  

            We understand also that the independent Australian Industrial Relations Commission will have virtually all its powers removed, except for its powers to stop unions taking industrial action.  The system of Awards setting out core terms and conditions of employment for different occupations and sectors will be replaced by a system where the employer will have virtually total power to decide terms and conditions.  

            We believe that the new law would:

remove protection from unfair dismissal for all workers in workplaces employing less than 100 workers;

push workers onto individual employment contracts;

restrict trade union activities, including the right to talk with workers in their workplace;

impose extremely narrow limits on the matters which can be the subject of collective bargaining;

remove the right to public holidays for many workers, and weaken provisions for annual leave;

allow employers to decide unilaterally on annual leave bonuses, meal and rest breaks, overtime rates and other provisions for many workers, especially younger workers and those starting a new job;

reduce protection for employees who refuse unsafe or unhealthy work; and

allow the government sweeping powers to stop industrial action if it decides the action is detrimental to the economy.

            We believe that these changes are unpopular with the people of Australia, are being opposed by the Australian trade union movement, and are contrary to the fundamental ILO principles of freedom of association and free collective bargaining, and we would ask you to urge your government to reconsider.

           

Yours sincerely

           

           

Paul Mackney

General Secretary

           

Bob Crow brings solidarity to Australian trade unionists fighting anti-union laws

RMT press release – November 15, 2005

RMT General secretary Bob Crow today pledged solidarity to Australian trade unionists battling against the proposed introduction of draconian anti-union laws by the country’s conservative government.

            Speaking at a rally at Southport, south of Brisbane, Bob Crow paid tribute to the Australian trade union movement’s determination to resist the imposition of individual contracts and the undermining of collective bargaining.

            “These laws add an even nastier twist to those in the standard Thatcher textbook, and British trade unionists will want to stand shoulder to shoulder with their Australian brothers and sisters in resisting them.

            “British workers have suffered for two decades from laws designed to deny workers the right to take effective collective action – and even under a Labour government we are still fighting to get Britain back in line with international law.

            “It is a great honour to be taking part in a country-wide demonstration that has seen hundreds of thousands of Australian working men and women take to the streets to defend their rights as workers.

            “At a time when employers across the globe use every trick in the book to play working people off against each other to bring down wages, lengthen hours and slaughter conditions, the slogan Workers of the World Unite has never been more relevant,” Bob Crow said.

ASLEF letter to the Australian High Commission

The Hon Rickard Kenneth Robert Alston

Head of Mission

Australia House

Strand, London WC2B 4LA                                                                14 November 2005

Dear Mr Altson

Industrial Relations Law in Australia / TUC Correspondence

I am in receipt of a copy of correspondence that is being delivered to you at Australia  House at 11 AM on Tuesday 15^th November 2005.

            The content of the correspondence centres around your Government plans to introduce new industrial relations legislation which will dramatically reduce the rights of workers to trade union representation, collective bargaining, minimum employment standards and protection from unfair dismissal.  

            I also understand that the International Transport Federation (ITF) intends to deliver a similar letter on the same day.

            For my part I urge you to reconsider your stand. What you are proposing seems similar to the proposals introduced by the Thatcher Government of the 1990’s. That legislation was disastrous to both employers and employee’s alike. Some of that legislation has been replaced by the current Labour Government.

            Finally I believe that your proposals are in contradiction to the ILO principles of freedom of association and free collective bargaining that previous Australia Governments have signed up to. On that basis I urge your Government to reconsider its proposals and instead actively encourage building a partnership approach between employers and trade unions in Australia that would subsequently benefit both parties.

            Yours sincerely

 

Keith Norman

General Secretary ASLEF