Workers' Notes: London strikes!

 by New Worker correspondent

At Heathrow Airport Easter is being marked by 10 days of strike action by over 1,400 security officers. The strike went ahead after unsuccessful pay talks. At present, the average salary of a Heathrow security guard, working endless shifts, is £30,000, of which £26,000 is the basic after three years experience, with a £4,000 shift allowance. Unite the union reckons that in real-terms this is 24 per cent less than in 2017. Heathrow Airport Limited (HAL) refused to substantially improve its pay offer and only offered a lump sum payment as an addition to the current offer.
    At the same time, HAL CEO John Holland-Kaye had an 88 per cent pay rise, which he surely deserved as in 2020 he was only on £800,000 and desperately needed a more reasonable £1.5 million. He had a hard time during the pandemic when he was energetically firing and rehiring its entire workforce, resulting in most workers suffering serious pay cuts.
    This sum he earned because of the huge £2.1 billion in dividends he paid out to such deserving cases as Spanish infrastructure company Ferrovial, the Qatar’s sovereign wealth fund, and the Qatar Investment Authority.
    Unite General Secretary Sharon Graham said: “Heathrow can afford to pay a decent pay rise to its workers. This is a wealthy company which is about to return to bumper profits. In recent years it’s approved an astronomical rise in salary for its CEO and paid out dividends to shareholders worth billions. Yet somehow Heathrow executives seem to think it’s acceptable to offer what amounts to a real-terms pay cut to its security guards and ground staff who are already on poverty pay.”
    Wayne King, a regional co-ordinating officer, added that: “Heathrow Airport has thrown away the opportunity to avoid strikes. Unite went into today’s meeting looking for an offer our members could accept. Unfortunately it seems HAL went in with no intention of avoiding industrial action.”
    The strikes affects Terminal Five, which is British Airways private terminal, and the security guards, who are responsible for checking all cargo.

Outsourcing Battles

The pay struggle continues, meanwhile, for ‘outsourced’ workers. On London’s Docklands Light Railway (DLR), contracted-out staff working for ISS and belonging to transport union RMT walked out on 48-hours strike last weekend.
    The workers involved in revenue protection, cleaning and security have rejected a pathetic 1.8 per cent pay offer, much lower than the rate for directly employed Transport for London (TfL) staff who perform equivalent roles. Despite promises from London Mayor Sadiq Khan, ISS staff have also not secured free travel, which other TfL workers have.
    RMT General Secretary Mick Lynch said: “ISS are a multimillion-pound company whose arrogance knows no bounds. They already pay staff poorly and with inflation rapidly increasing an offer of 1.8 per cent shows they do not care one jot for their staff.”
    “RMT will continue their campaign for pay justice for these workers who are some of the most exploited in the transport system…ultimately Mayor Sadiq Khan needs to end the injustice of exploitation of contracted-out staff by bringing these workers back in house as soon as possible.”
    Also in London, outsourced cleaners at the Great Ormond Street Hospital For Children (GOSH) are undertaking a collective legal action against outsourcing, claiming compensation for past injustices.
    The court case by 80 largely migrant workers was brought by the small street union United Voices of the World (UVW), which points out that for decades the cleaners were outsourced on lesser terms and conditions than other directly employed GOSH workers. This led to a dispute between UVW and GOSH at the start of the pandemic that saw UVW force the hospital to abandon its cleaning private contractor and employ the workers directly as NHS employees. The recently concluded UVW action, if successful, could net each claimant between £80,000–£190,000. A decision is expected later this month. UVW say it is similar to a case it brought against the Royal Parks in late 2021, when outsourced Royal Park attendants at won an Employment Tribunal case that ruled their lower pay was unlawful because it amounted to indirect race discrimination. This case was contested by the Government who feared it setting a bad example.
    Not far from GOSH, in Oxford Street, London’s longest shopping street, outsourced cleaners organised by another small union, the Independent Workers’ Union of Great Britain (IWGB), took over the offices of mobile phone company Vodafone early last month.
    They are employed by subcontractor Mitie, whose low wages are matched by overwork, a lack of company sick pay, and victimisation for those who complain.
    Some cleaners faced disciplinary action from Mitie for turning down extra responsibilities beyond their job description after many redundancies of catering staff were made during the pandemic. Mitie did well from Covid, with profits rising 187 per cent to £167 million on the back of short-term Covid-related contracts.
    Last year cleaners won the London Living Wage at Vodafone buildings nationally and forced them to hire new staff, which partly reduced overwork.
    An eight-year veteran of cleaning the Vodafone HQ said: “I risked my life cleaning throughout the pandemic for £8.93 an hour, and had to take 10 days off without proper sick pay when I got COVID‑19. We need better sick pay. We need management to replace cleaners who leave or take holidays, so we’re not faced with excessive workloads. It's time for fewer meetings and more action from both Mitie and Vodafone.”
    IWGB General Secretary Henry Chango Lopez attacked Vodafone because: “Pretending concern for employee welfare whilst exploiting their outsourced migrant workers for poverty pay is shameless hypocrisy. They make billions in profit but deny their cleaners’ calls for basic rights like a proper sick pay. Mitie management have attempted to shut down the workers fighting back by victimising them and threatening them with blacklisting, but we will campaign alongside them until they get justice.”

On the street;...

by New Worker correspondent

Outsourcing was one of the issues exercising the security guards employed by Bidvest Noonan belonging to the small street union, the Independent Workers Union of Great Britain (IWGB) at University College London (UCL) who joined in the massive day of strike action on Wednesday 1 February.
    In addition to a demand for a £15.00 hourly rate (which is the equivalent to that paid in 2002), they are seeking an end to outsourcing, and union recognition. In October UCL attempted to break a IWGB strike by employing subcontracting workers on a lower rate of pay in an attempt to break the last IWGB strike, despite running a £90 million yearly surplus.
This was condemned by University and College Union and the IWGB as an intimidatory strike breaking tactic and as a violation of UCL’s theoretical commitment to parity on account of these workers receiving lower rates of pay.
    The IWGB states that commitment to parity of terms and conditions with directly employed staff was won following IWGB strike action in 2019, while this resulted in improved pay, pension contributions and sick pay and annual leave entitlements full equality has not been achieved.
    Matteo Tiratelli, UCU’s Anti-Casualisation Officer at UCL added: “Outsourcing creates terrible working conditions for workers on the lowest grades at UCL, yet UCL management is determined to keep up this discriminatory practice. It is one of several ways in which working conditions are being worsened across the board. All staff at UCL are seeing our pay fall behind inflation, our jobs casualised and rights stripped away, and it is sadly not just staff, but students who are paying the price.”
    Yusuf Nur, a striking security guard, says: “I have young children and on the poverty pay I receive as an outsourced worker I am struggling to support them. I’ve been left with no choice but to strike - it’s the only way we can make our voices heard. After bullying, mistreatment and consistent basic errors with paying us our wages and pensions from Bidvest Noonan and neglect from UCL, we must fight for better conditions for each other and our families.”
The same union also claims victory in one of the north London borough of Barnet, which for two decades was held up as model of economical outsourcing by the Tory controlled council, who outsourced just about anything that was not nailed down.
    Now under Labour control, 330 affected workers presently employed by outsourcing multinational Capita, (or Crapita to Private Eye readers) will be brought back in-house from 1 April.
    2012 saw the Tory council hand over much of its services to Capita on decade-long contracts. Capita lived up to its nickname, with a decade of controversies including a multi-million-pound fraud and contracts running vastly over budget.
    After the May elections Labour won control of the council, and although the contracts had already been due to end next year, the council has fast-tracked plans to bring some services back in house.
    John Burgess, the union’s Barnet local government branch secretary declared: “This is good news for staff, good news for residents and good news for the services. I welcome the decision and look forward to welcoming back all the services back into Barnet Council where they all belong”.
    He pointed out that after a decade of campaigning, and a start to bringing services in-house: “there are still many issues to address for our members who are being TUPE’d”.
    “These include workplace inequalities such as staff being paid differently for the same role. Barnet UNISON is already seeking discussions with the council about harmonisation of the terms and conditions of the TUPE’d workforce”.
    Another strike involving outsourced workers is taking place in the north-west London borough of Hounslow whose most lovable of workers, Parking Enforcement Officers, started a strike which could last until 5 March.
    Employed by giant outsourcer Serco who last declared profits of £309.9 million, they are fighting for decent pay.
    Neighbouring boroughs Ealing and Brent councils recently conceded a pay rise after strike action. Civil enforcement officers and CCTV operators in Ealing received a 9 per cent rise pay increase back dated to April 2022 with low paid new starters getting 11.94 per cent, with another eight per cent from next April, and extra annual leave entitlement. In comparison, in Brent, workers are getting a total increase of pay rise of 10.7 per cent from last April with nine per cent to come in April.
    Unite’s general secretary, Sharon Graham said: “Serco and Hounslow council’s refusal to address the scourge of low pay is shameful. The truth is that the London Living Wage is not enough to live on. Serco is hugely wealthy. The Council and its outsourcer have the ability to pay workers more.
    “The strike will inevitably mean that parking restrictions across the borough will fall apart. Bosses need to realise the workers have Unite’s total support.”

Charity Begins at Home…

by New Worker correspondent

But not for some working in the burgeoning charity sector like the staff at Shelter which was founded way back in December 1966. It emerged from the efforts of Bruce Kenrick, the Church of Scotland Minister who was doing missionary work in west London’s Notting Hill, then the stamping ground of notorious slum landlord Peter Rachman who had a violent way of dealing with those behind with the rent for one of his empire of grotty overcrowded properties. The Notting Hill Housing Trust, also founded by Kendrick in 1963, continues today as a major housing association owning thousands of properties.
    Shelter had the good fortune to be launched ten days after the BBC first broadcast Cathy Come Home by Jeremy Sandford and Ken Loach which exposed effects of homelessness in Britain.
    It soon became the leading body for advice with housing problems, and it campaigns for tenant rights spending much time lobbying local and central governments.
    It spends about 21 per cent of its revenue on fund raising, a figure which might raise a few eyebrows, but the charity world is a cut-throat business. Shelter faces brutal competition from children in need and fluffy polar bears seeking the nation’s conscience money. In comparison bedraggled homeless people and people sitting in mouldy rooms do not look very cute.
    Its latest Annual Report shows Shelter has an overall income of £59,699,000, of which £41 million came from donations and legacies, with £10 million from grants and contracts and £7 million from its shops. Its expenditure was £59,720,000 which suggests they are doing their job, spending rather than saving, It has assets worth £31 million which is not unreasonable giving that it needs a London base and a network of offices to do its job.
    The highest paid member of staff was the CEO, on £132,625. Shelter claim it is very ethical as its median salary was £28,104, a ratio against the highest salary of 4.72:1. However salaries for van drivers and assistants in their shops start at £19,000.
    Shelter had 1,335 employees, 118 on fund raising, with about 800 giving direct support, both in person and remotely. The CEO get £99.34 for each staff member, chicken-feed to bankers.
    Such is the institutional background of the current strike which starts on Monday until the Sunday before Christmas. The issue, unsurprisingly, is pay. In early November 85 per cent of the charity’s Unite branch voted to reject a three per cent pay offer, which Unite describes as a huge real terms pay cut.
    At the time of the vote, General Secretary Sharon Graham said that “Rather than sit on ever expanding reserves, Shelter should be paying its workers a fair pay rise”.
    She has a point, its last reported reserves were £14.5 million, comfortably above their target of £8.9 million.
    One of the strikers added that: “The work we undertake, particularly in frontline services, is so valuable and clients depend on our teams. But that shouldn’t mean they have to sacrifice a decent and dignified living because the work they are drawn to is in this sector. At the very base level, absolute bare minimum, those working for a housing charity shouldn't be experiencing housing insecurity as a result of being unable to pay rent.”
    Regional Officer Peter Storey warned that: “Strike action will inevitably cause substantial disruption to the services that Shelter provides. However, the organisation has created this dispute through the arrogant and high-handed manner in which it has treated its loyal workers.”
    This is not the first time Shelter workers have been involved in a pay battle in which strike action was at least threatened. In 2008 strike action took place while in both 2014 and 2018 industrial action was called off at the very last minute. In the latter case a four per cent deal composed of 2.25 per cent consolidated, plus 1.75 per cent unconsolidated paid at a flat rate, worth about £500 for each was secured after management offered a paltry one per cent. That dispute also saw 100 Shelter workers join Unite.
    This time round, in March, Shelter made a three per cent offer alongside a one-off £250 payment. Since then the one–off payment was increased to £1,500. This was still rejected, partly because it would actually make things worse for some workers. This came about because it would push the lowest paid over thresholds which would prevent them claiming working tax credits and Universal Credit to top up their low earnings.
    The wishy-washy left magazine Tribune recently interviewed three Shelter workers about the dispute. One Mark, who was formerly homeless himself, reported he relies on a foodbank twice a month, and his general quality of life has rapidly deteriorated in the past year.
    He also noted that when Shelter workers suggested flat rate consolidated increases to benefit the lowest paid, Management, responded that this would weaken the pay structure within Shelter, meaning the pay rise of those promoted wouldn’t be worth as much.
    Another staff member, Sarah, herself a twenty year veteran told Tribune that in the 2008 dispute: “They tried to impose contractual changes on us. Historically, there’s been disputes around Shelter actively going after our pay and pension contributions”, and “I’ve never had an inflation-based increase in pay in the twenty years I’ve been here.”
    The result of this pattern is a charity set up to tackle issues like housing insecurity now exacerbating housing insecurity among its own staff. “A lot of our staff are young private renters based in London,” says Sarah. “They’re caught up in the very housing emergency that they themselves are campaigning on.”
    She concluded by pointing out that Shelter workers urgently need a consolidated increase instead to get them through the coming winter months and beyond. Unless this is done condition will worsen after next April when it comes harder to claim means-tested benefits.
    Lucy, a London based Shelter worker told Tribune that: “It’s commonplace for staff to have no money left at the end of the month. I have colleagues who have fallen into arrears with bills, are eating less to cut down on the cost of food, and we hear constant accounts of staff suffering with stress and anxiety.”
    All three complained that Shelter spends too on external contracts and consultants and that in common with many charities management take advantage of dedicated workers “where committed and passionate workers are made to feel that they should put up with attacks on pay and conditions out of misguided notion of philanthropic instinct”.
    The anonymous Sarah added that management: “Know that most people that come to work for Shelter are very committed to Shelter’s cause. And I think they play on it. They expect charity workers just to put up low pay really and not complain.” Winning this dispute, conclude would “to send a message to charity sector workers that they can organise for union recognition and fair pay”.

On the High Seas

by New Worker correspondent

Once again workers who man the Woolwich Ferry which has been taking people across the lower Thames since the 14th century are taking strike action. Two years ago they went on strike seeking a pay rise and over safety concerns when the new operators cut staff numbers and set new shift patterns after acquiring new ships.
      Last year the workers won a good deal when they won 100 per cent furlough pay from then operator Briggs Marine Contractors. Now the enemy is Transport for London (TfL). The cause of the latest action is the victimisation of a union rep. The lower Thames ferry’s 57 Unite the union members voted by 97 per cent on favour of eight days of strike action on Fridays and Mondays, this month and next.
     The Union say that the latest episode has been dubbed a ‘Groundhog Day’ dispute as the same problems keep coming up. Apart from the victimisation matter, workers are angry at TfL’s failure to agree a new pay and reward scheme; the excessive use of agency staff; and the failure to provide adequate health and safety training to new employees.
     Unite regional officer Onay Kasab sorrowfully said: “It is a sad indictment of the TfL bosses that they seem to be following the same course as Briggs Marine Contractors which meted out some appalling employment practices to the workforce in the recent past.
    “Our members have returned an overwhelming mandate for strike action at the Woolwich Ferry in support of their victimised shop steward and over a myriad of other employment issues.
     “Hopefully, the ballot result will be a light bulb moment for TfL and the management can get employment relations back on an even keel before strike action begins. To that end, Unite’s door is open 24/7 for constructive talks to resolve all the outstanding issues”. He concluded by warning that “The strikes will cause disruption to car drivers and foot passengers as ferry traffic picks up with commuters returning to their workplaces in the capital following the easing of lockdown.”

...and on dry land

In nearby Greenwich teachers at the John Roan School have taken strike action in defence of Kirstie Paton, a psychology teacher and National Education Union (NEU) rep who faces the sack for mentioning alleged improper use of Covid tests. They walked out just before a disciplinary hearing last Friday and will be balloting for further strike action.
     Her crime was to publish, in December last year, on the NEU Inner London Facebook page complaints about the school being used for pilot testing of Lateral Flow Tests (LFTs) for Covid-19. These tests, which were being supported by the Department for Education (DfE) were to be carried out by school staff. These tests have now been discontinued as they gave too many false negatives. The school was initially keen on LFTs serial testing to replace self-isolation protocols in its schools, but now the DfE has instructed schools not to use LFTs.
     The John Roan School is now one of the United Learning academies, Paton’s opposition to it becoming an academy has obviously not gone unremembered.
     The NEU say that they have been “left with no choice” but to defend their rep. Tim Woodcock, the NEU rep for Greenwich, said they had no choice but to defend their rep for speaking out, or else leave every other rep vulnerable and scared to speak out.
    "UL want to victimise Kirstie so they can intimidate staff into silence and deprive our members of an effective and dedicated union rep”.