The history of democracy in Britain is intimately tied to the workers’ movement. It is impossible to understand how it went from a pastime for the propertied few to a mass civic endeavour without the Chartists, a movement built on the foundations of working-class organisation.
In the many decades since, the workers’ movement has remained at the forefront of this fight. If democracy is to mean anything substantial, it can’t just be the preserve of Westminster or local government. It must be present in our daily lives – most of which are spent in the workplace. Beyond fighting for better wages and conditions, this is the role of trade unions: they are our democratic representation at work.
This brings us to the government’s latest proposed trade union legislation – one of the most dangerous attacks on the workers’ movement that this country has ever seen.
The right to withdraw your labour is essential. Without the threat of going on strike, workers have little leverage against bad bosses. But under the provisions of this new law, trade unions in sectors such as health, education, rail and fire would be required to keep “a minimum service level” running during a strike – effectively voiding the right of workers to withdraw their labour. If workers don’t abide by this, they could be sacked.
In practice, this means that significant numbers of workers who wanted to strike would be forbidden from doing so, and that trade unions would be required to ask them to cross their colleagues’ picket lines.
The new legislation could also threaten trade unions with bankruptcy. When workers walk off the job during industrial action, they are probably in breach of contract, and trade unions have been the cause of that breach. But if ballots are conducted according to the law, they can’t be sued for losses incurred due to strike action.
This sounds like a technicality but it is actually the basis of the right to strike in Britain. If this legislation passes, trade unions would be made liable for losses incurred by strike action that didn’t maintain a minimum service – and the sums of money involved could be astronomical.
There is a reason why the past year has seen more workers on picket lines than at any time since the 1980s. There hasn’t been a sudden bout of bolshevism in Britain; it’s a reflection of the bitter reality that real-terms wages were lower in 2022 than they were in 2008.
Recent research from the Trades Union Congress showed what this means: nurses have lost the equivalent of £3,000 a year on average, while midwives and ambulance drivers have lost £4,000.
The fundamental problem in Britain today isn’t strikes, it’s an economy that makes strikes necessary – one where record numbers are seeking help from Trussell Trust food banks and the majority of those in poverty are in working households.
Workers targeted by this legislation don’t want to be on strike. They haven’t decided to forgo wages easily. But years of evidence has shown them that this government won’t pay them fairly for the job that they do. They strike as a last resort.
There is an alternative. If workers are really essential, as this legislation implies, then pay them like it.
Unfortunately, it is clear this isn’t the path the government intends to follow. Instead of reversing the austerity policies that have led to a lost decade of weak growth, low wages and dysfunctional public services, it is intent on doubling down. And as more and more people object to the growing inequality, its only response is to introduce waves of authoritarian legislation that strip away our democratic rights in both civil society and the workplace.
In the coming weeks, Enough is Enough, a cost of living campaign group, will be organising a campaign to fight these laws. Already, 100,000 people have pledged to join us at rallies and protests across Britain. If you care about the fate of British democracy, then join us.
Ronan Burtenshaw is the national campaign coordinator for Enough is Enough and the editor of Tribune
