Strikes were rarely out of the UK headlines throughout 2002. Disputes have been prominent because of their scale and concentration in important, usually public, services. Yet the overall incidence of strikes remains low, particularly in private manufacturing.
The number of strikes in the UK has been stable for the past 10 years, and is very low by historical standards (UK0110109F and UK9907215F). From 1981 to 1989, the average annual figure for recorded stoppages was 1,155. In contrast there were 205 strikes in 1999, 212 in 2000 and 194 in 2001. The latest figures from National Statistics, for the first 10 months of 2002, record 173 strikes. Nevertheless, strikes were rarely out of the headlines in 2002. This is for two reasons:
- when strikes occur they increasingly involve more workers. The number of workers involved in strikes rose from 93,000 in 1998, to 141,000 in 1999, 183,000 in 2000 and 180,000 in 2001. The figures for 2002 are dramatically higher. In July alone a national dispute in local government (UK0208102N) meant that 622,000 workers were involved in a strike. As a result, the total number of working days lost through industrial action has been steadily rising, from 242,000 in 1999 to 499,000 in 2000 and 525,000 in 2001. This figure was easily surpassed in the first 10 months of 2002, when 935,000 working days were lost; and
- most of the big disputes in 2002 were concentrated in public sector services such as local government, the fire service, education and health, or in the privatised rail transport sector. With the public as end-user and financial backer through taxation and subsidies, such disputes are highly visible, well publicised and often highly politically charged.
Prominent disputes
The major disputes in 2002 involved a series of nationwide strikes in:
- the rail sector in January over pay levels and differentials (UK0201169F);
- local government in July in pursuit of a 6% pay claim (UK0208102N); and
- the fire service beginning in November in support of a 40% pay claim (UK0211107F and UK0211107F).
Other notable strikes involved:
- London schoolteachers over regional allowances (March);
- London Underground workers over safety concerns relating to prospective private-sector involvement (February, March and July) and over pay (September);
- up to 50,000 post office workers in unofficial action over the imposition of flexible working (May); and
- college lecturers in a nationwide strike for higher pay (November).
The public-private split
Though each of the public sector disputes during 2002 had its own particular causes, there were a number of common themes. One is the long-term falling behind of public sector pay relative to workers in the private sector. This has occurred since the 1980s, but was reinforced when the incoming Labour Party government of 1997 committed itself to the expenditure limits of its Conservative Party predecessor for its first three years in office. At the same time, mounting recruitment and retention difficulties resulted in serious understaffing in large parts of the health and education services in particular, adding to the pressures on staff introduced by targets and performance management regimes. Workers’ expectations rose with the re-election of the Labour government for a second term in 2001, but have been partly frustrated by ministers’ insistence on linking significant pay awards to substantial 'modernisation' of working practices.
In sharp contrast, there were only 24 recorded strikes in the whole of the manufacturing sector in the 12 months to August 2002, down from 35 for the preceding 12-month period. These involved 9,000 workers at a loss of 22,100 working days. The low number of strikes reflects several possible factors, including the long-term decline of trade union density in the private sector and intense commercial pressures which arguably discipline both sides to discourage damaging disputes. Competitive pressures have encouraged some companies to pursue the 'partnership' route in taking the unions on board in managing change (UK0205103F).
Other employers have become increasingly ready to use the law to prevent strikes taking place. For example, in January 2002 the cross-Channel rail company Eurostar successfully argued that the refusal of members of the train drivers’ union, the Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen (ASLEF), to cross picket lines constituted unlawful secondary industrial action. Labour Research (February 2002) reports that the threat of litigation by employers is significantly on the increase, extending to parts of the public sector. This is partly linked to the increase in ballots for industrial action. Unions are regularly deploying ballots as a bargaining tool as ballot results strongly in favour of strikes are often sufficient to encourage a settlement. However they are governed by a series of tight statutory requirements which can serve as a basis for legal challenges by employers.
Longer-term agreements
Another key development in the private sector has been the rise of long-term agreements of two years or more, reducing the pressures of an annual pay round. This development, which introduces more certainty for staff and employers alike, usually takes the form of an 'inflation-plus' settlement, and its rise is linked to consistently low rates of inflation. There were around 60 long-term deals at the beginning of the 1990s, 160 in 1998 and nearly 200 in 2002 (Labour Research Department, Bargaining Report, September 2002). Today around two-thirds of agreements in construction are long-term, as are around half in the energy and water, engineering, transport and communications sectors, a third in chemicals, and a quarter in 'other manufacturing'. The agreements are also becoming longer, with 27% running for three years or more.
The incidence of long-term agreements is currently much lower in the public sector, at around one in six, though they are being encouraged by the Treasury to provide a 'more constructive and partnership based approach between management and unions on pay, focused on reform and modernisation rather than annual pay bargaining'. The idea is that a longer time-scale allows higher wage increases to be conceded over several years in return for significant changes to working practices. Three-year deals have already been signed in Scotland providing a total pay rise of 23% for teachers, 20.3% for prison service workers and an 18.3% average rise for Scottish Executive civil servants. Staff at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs have been offered a deal worth 25.5% over four years, and Inland Revenue staff are receiving a 15.1% pay increase spread over three years. In the Ministry of Defence, 50,000 non-industrial staff have won a 20% rise over four years. The research organisation Incomes Data Services reports that two-thirds of public sector workers will be tied to long-term deals in 2004 if nurses and other health workers sign up to the government’s National Health Service reforms and teachers in England and Wales agree to restructure their working practices (IDS Report 871, December 2002).
Commentary
Apart from the rail sector, which has peculiar problems due to the fragmentation and labour shortages resulting from privatisation, strikes are presently mainly a public sector phenomenon. The causes of disputes in the public sector are structural and long-term, linked to falling relative pay at the same time as the demands of jobs have been rising. However, long-term agreements provide a means to rebalance managerial concerns about staffing and efficiency with workers’ very real concerns over pay inequities. As Neil Cleevely, policy officer at the Trades Union Congress, says: 'Public sector pay has lagged behind for 10 years, but things are getting better now. Many of these long-term deals allow staff to make up lost ground and also significantly raise the income of the lowest paid' (quoted in the Guardian on 7 December 2002). After a series of sex discrimination cases against public sector organisations, longer-term pay deals also facilitate the reform of grading structures to introduce greater transparency and fairness.
Of course, longer-term agreements do not eliminate the possibility of strikes in themselves. With inflation forecasts rising, there may have to be an indexation mechanism, as is customary in the private sector, though this could significantly add to costs. Much therefore depends on the government’s commitment to invest in public services and their staff, and what is required by way of 'modernisation' in return. (J Arrowsmith, IRRU)