24/11/2011 Dragon's Eye

A strike next week, proposals to change employment rights this week.

What does it all mean for working Good evening. Next week, millions

of public sector workers are expected to go on strike in protest

at plans to change their pensions. This week, the business Secretary

proposed measures that he says will make it easier for companies to

hire and fire employees. But some employment lawyer say it could be

discriminatory. -- lawyers. It is the time of industrial unrest,

unparalleled in decades. Public sector unions leave their members

out on strike in protest against the government's pension plans. The

government says it is about cutting bureaucracy and reducing the number

of cases going to employment tribunals, which have increased by

40% over the last three years. They denied they are eroding workers's

writes. They say it is not about creating a hire and fire culture.

Ministers say they want to make it simpler and quicker for businesses

to get rid of staff. We want to make sure the system is fair to

everybody. There has to be a system that is fit for purpose. You can't

have a situation where you are afraid to take somebody on because

you are afraid that you might want to get rid of them, or they might

not work out. It needs to be fair, flexible and just. There was a

survey conducted by the Department of Business and only 6% of small

and medium-sized employers responded to that survey and they

said that legislation regulations for a start was a barrier to

success. This man took his form or employers to court and won his case.

He is now an Assembly member. taking right away from workers

which is the main thing. If they have been treated unfairly, they

should be compensated. The other main thing is to save employees

going to a tribunal. It is expensive. My union paid up to

�40,000. Other part of the proposals could cause problems,

like employees having the right to have protected conversations with

their employees. - - employers. of the issues his retirement and

that is ultimately about age discrimination. The Citizens Advice

Bureau or are concerned that people will have to pay upfront for

tribunal access. The Ministry of Justice is also going to introduce

application and hearing fees for tribunal cases, which will make a

substantial barrier to justice for low paid workers. There is talk

that the application fee will be �250 and the hearing fee will be

�1,000. From April, workers will also have to be employed for two

years rather than one before they can claim unfair dismissal. The law

changed just over a decade ago when the Labour government reduce the

period when unfair dismissal could be claimed. It could be challenged

legally at the European level because it may discriminate against

women. I can see it happening, and challenge against the validity of

this law. Since 1972, we have been members of the European Community.

Decisions at the European Court of Justice are paramount in our legal

system. It is not the first time that the coalition's policies have

been criticised for being disproportionately hard on women,

and that would hurt them in the court of public opinion, especially

with female voters. It is going to be hard work, constant hard work to

ensure a level playing field for women workers and men workers. Look

at the differentials with pay, for example. Higher executive pay. But

looking at direct and indirect sex discrimination, we have had to

fight long and hard over many years to get some degree of equality. It

does not come easy, and I see this as a backward step by this

Conservative-led government. Economic gloom and industrial

strife do not go hand in hand, but as the government tries to balance

Business demand and employment -- employment rights in law, they

could find it difficult to satisfy either side.

Brian Meechan reporting, and thanks to Cardiff University Law School

for use of their facilities. Joining me from our Milbank studio

is the Liberal Democrat peer Lord German and here with me in the

studio is the Labour Assembly member Mick Antoniw. Gentlemen,

welcome to the programme. Do you support these proposals? Yes. It is

a proportional change the government is making to make it

easier for people to be taken on, particularly by small companies,

and to make it easier for workers to get their compensation in a

swifter and less confrontational way than having to go straight to

court. What is missing from your piece is that there are a raft of

proposals that will give people a chance to get their matter resolved

using the reconciliation service rather than having to go to court.

I think Mike should hand -- hang his head in shame. You know and I

know that these proposals will not create any jobs. It is not about

growth, it is about pandering to a Conservative right-wing agenda.

They came close to losing a vote in the House of Commons and this is

about keeping the right wing of the Tory party happy. There is no

evidence this will create a single job. I had been doing this for 31

years and quite frankly, it will make no difference whatsoever other

than to discern how workers from having any protection and security

in the workplace. Part of the problem is that we are tried to

keep the lawyers out of it. We have tried to give people the

opportunity to get them matters resolved quickly without having to

resort to expensive court cases, which as one of the contributors in

your package say it, will cost thousands of pounds. Surely it is

better to have a straight forward the conciliation service which is

of low cost to everyone, can be dealt with swiftly and can result

in people thinking they can get their retribution more quickly and

at the same time taking some of the fear out that employers have

overtaking someone on. there is a better way of doing this and we

need to meet current demands. There will be employers who are therefore

now, particularly small employers, there will have taking people on.

We will pick up on that in the second. This point about going to

ACAS to resolve a dispute before automatically going to an

employment tribunal. That does make sense. Eight has already comes in

on many disputes. Disciplinary procedures already had conciliation

in it. This is reinventing the wheel. It already exists and will

make no difference. And, of course, there will be no tribunal cases at

all. Cannot be right that a person does not have any security and any

right not to be unfairly dismissed in the workplace? If that were true,

I would be opposing it, but the rights are still there for people

to go to court, although that is the last resort. It is not. Yes it

is. If you cannot go to a tribunal, if you do not have that right...

course you have the right to go to a tribunal. If you do not have it,

you are powerless. You have got it wrong. Firstly, you have to go to

reconciliation to ACAS. If you cannot resolve it, then you can go

to court. Let us move on to a different point. The extension of

the period in which an employee is not able to claim for unfair

dismissal - as a gesture of from one lawyer that that is potentially

discriminatory against women. Does that concern you? The department

and the government denied that. The issue here it is one that is going

back to a position we were in 10 years ago where that period of time

emerges. But I would hope that in our legislative processes that we

don't have to have such hard shoulder to the way we deal with

employee disputes. It is very important we make life more

flexible, but for the worker and the employer, in the way they can

be dealt with and the way they can deal with matters. The court should

be the last resort. Do you see any justification in the argument

underline the government's position which is that it employers feel

that they don't have employees are tied to them, they will be more

likely to hire them and that is what we need? There is no evidence

of that and Vince Cable's evidence does not make sense. There is no

justification for this at all and I challenge Mike, surely one piece of

evidence that actually establish is that employers would take people on

if their employees have the right? Whilst only 6% bought it as No. 1

at as a barrier to taking on new staff, others put it further down

the list. You can understand why. Secondly and thirdly, for many

employees is the issue... That is not evidence. Asked in an

employer... Gentlemen, I am grateful to you both for such a

passionate debate. Factory macro for joining us on Dragon's Eye. --

Thank you. It could be the biggest strike in a

generation. If planned industrial action by the some of the biggest

trade unions goes ahead next Wednesday, more than two million

public sector workers across the UK and tens of thousand in Wales could

be staying away from work. In Swansea, almost a third of the

workforce is employed in the public sector. So what impact could it

have on the city? Here's Bethan Lewis.

Some people would rather avoid it for a bit longer, but in Swansea,

the evidence is clear to see. There is only a month to go before

Christmas and before the festive season proper starts, thousands of

the city's workers will be joining talks and joining the biggest

strike for decades and possibly the biggest ever. Teachers, council

workers and NHS staff are among those due to strike on Wednesday.

The union say they have no alternative in view of UK

government plans to increase the amount employees pay into their

pension funds and making them work longer before they can collect the

money. I caught up with Ben Holland, who is a teacher on the outskirts

of Swansea. He went to work this morning, but next Wednesday he will

It is a threefold attack. It is an increase in the retirement major --

age, and an increase in our contributions. I cannot afford it.

And it is a move to a system which means that my pension will be with

15% less than without these changes. -- will be worth.

Across Wales, a quarter of the workforce is employed in the public

sector. In Swansea, it is close to one third. Not all of those 33,000

people will be on strike next week, but the effect could be felt more

keenly here than in most places. strike would be bad for the local

economy. Lot of disruption for individuals. In the case of schools,

we will find it very disruptive for schools and working parents. --

pupils and working parents. If you have made an appointment for his

use run by your local council, these are likely to be affected.

well as council jobs, the area has a high number of UK government

workers and those jobs are extremely valuable according to a

local MP. He Storrar, job that came to Swansea, like the DVLA and the

Land Registry, were brought here because we were communities that

needed jobs. -- historically. They were to replace the mechanised

industries we were losing, so public sector jobs are very

precious and we need to keep those jobs. The government insists the

reform is needed because of the rising cost of pensions. Elsewhere

in the city, this small business owner believes there is little

support for the action from people who work for private businesses.

This computer training firm has had to cut staff because of the tough

economic trading conditions. many small to medium-size

enterprises, they do not exist any pension schemes. A lot of companies,

with those under 20 workers, the main objectives are to stay alive.

The private sector will look at the public sector and say, "look, they

are earning as much as I am. They have better security than I have

these days, and they have a better pension. And I am paying for that

better pension, as a private employer, through my taxes".

everyone is sympathetic to the cause, but Ian, who is a litter

picker for the council, says the pension he is trying to protect is

far from a gold-plated benefits of which some believe is standard in

the public sector have. I will be in a pension scheme 28 years when I

retire and by pension will be less than �6,000 a year. So it is a bit

of a myth, I think. Maybe people further up the line get good

pensions but I don't think anybody would call that gold plated.

looks like Swansea's Winter Wonderland will be open as usual

next Wednesday, though it is council run. The staff of from a

private company. But as for key council services, there is likely

to be more disruption. The council say they will have a better idea of

the likely impact over the next couple of days. It is almost

certain public services in Swansea will take a hit next week, but

whether it helps train to the stance of the UK government will

not be clear for some time. -- change at the stance. Meanwhile,

the season of goodwill is on hold as the stand-off between ministers

and unions continues. Earlier, I spoke to Dominic

MacAskill from Unison. I asked why unions were proceeding with the

strike, when the deal they were being offered was still much better

than the average private sector pension. In terms of public sector

services, they cost money and we need to pay people appropriate

wages to attract them. Pensions are deferred wages, services, in effect,

a pay cut for public-sector workers. Private sector pensioners have

nothing to gain it from the race to the bottom by undermining public

sector pensions. It would be cheaper for them, wouldn't it?

would be cheaper, but do you get quality services if you undermine

the services you are provided by reducing people's pay and

conditions? This is not about making pensions more sustainable.

It is, in effect, a windfall tax on public sector workers, because the

previous reviews of the public sector pension schemes concluded

that, in 2008, and they made significant savings. A cross-party

parliamentary body has estimated upwards of �60 billion has already

been saved over the coming five decades from the scheme. Hutton's

own report indicated that public- sector pensions, as a percentage of

GDP, had peaked and was on its way down. So we don't see this as being

about pensions but about a windfall tax on public sector workers.

Hutton - not a Conservative or Liberal Democrat, in fact a former

Labour minister, has backed a case for reform and said the existing

system benefited the top end is in the public sector. That is another

question - the issue about whether to go for a career average scheme

or a final-salary scheme. Unison is fairly neutral on that, because we

see a lot of benefits for the vast majority of our members in the

career average scheme. But it is about the accrual rate. If you have

a poor up a crew will rate, it is a very poor scheme. -- a week -- a

crew will rate. What about public support? This strike has the

potential to inconvenience millions of people, up-and-down the country,

too, for the most part - and I returned to this point - will have

much poorer pensions than the ones you are on strike to defend.

Unison's campaign is about their pensions fall. By due a striking to

protect public sector pensions. This is where the attack is focused.

-- but you are striking. The private sector workers have nothing

to gain from reducing and undermining public sector pensions:

Because that will only encourage the private sector to further

undermine private sector pensions. The general public have recognised

that this is not just about their pensions. This is a wider cuts

agenda, a wider issue of paying off the decks of the bankers. But

government have expected to to have public opinion on their side. -- of

the debt of the bankers. Upwards of 3 million of our members will be

taking action on November 30th, and they have families, friends.

Public-sector workers are the general public. Finally, briefly,

how long will this fight go on, do you think? The government seems

solid in its position that it must have public-sector pension reform.

Well, I certainly believe 30th November will demonstrate to the

government that not only are public sector workers feeling strongly

about this, but that the feeling is widespread. So I hope that the

government will take notice of the 30th and take back -- comeback to

the negotiating table with real compromises, so there we can agree

to a settlement. But we have got no illusions that this government is a

friend of public-sector workers. We are preparing to battle on this

issue. Dominic MacAskill of Unison there. Joining me to discuss the

issues surrounding next week's strike is the Plaid Cymru MP Elfyn

Llwyd in London, under Conservative M -- AM Byron Davies.

Elfyn Llwyd, do you support the strike? A yes, because I don't

believe a government have been fair - and I speak as the vice chair of

the parliamentary group, and I know intimately what has been going on.

Francis Maude has refused to meet them and refused to give

information. Moving away from the parliamentary committee, the

teachers' pot was last valued in 2004 and announced in 2006. It was

in surplus at that time but we don't know what it is like now.

There is an excuse that somehow there is a big, black hole. Unless

you are able to get the information, how can you judge whether the

government is telling the truth? I do not think the way in which

Francis Maude on the government ministers are handling this is

anything but goading the unions into a position where the only

thing they have left is to withdraw their labour. I know the efforts

that have been made to have any constructive dialogue a but they

have been thwarted. Is the UK government spoiling for a fight

with the unions? A I don't agree with Elfyn Llwyd when he says we

are goading the unions into a fight. The present government has taken a

very responsible attitude towards what is a difficult financial

situation, which was inherited. People are living longer and we

must realise that. We have got to be able to afford to pay pensions.

I knew accepting the allegation that Dominic MacAskill made in the

interview, that this is about pain of the deficit, not securing the

long-term security of public sector pensions? No, not at all. Who would

run the bank's? The bankers. Who was in charge at the time? The

Labour government. It was not public sector workers, but the

reality is we are where we are. We have to deal with it and we cannot

afford to pay the pensions we are at the moment. That sounds like it

is about deficit reduction. If you are saying it is about dealing with

the become a crisis, that is about debt reduction. There may be an

element of that. For people who are currently in the pension schemes,

there is a ten-year cushion, so it is not that bad. Take up that point,

Elfyn Llwyd, that the government has put forward a compromise offer

to soften the impact of these reforms for those who are

approaching retirement age. that small number, yes, that is

true. But I won't let Byron Davies get away with this. He says

pensions are not sustainable. There has a report said they were best --

sustainable and that as a percentage of GDP, they were coming

down, even now, at the National Audit Office reported that they

were sustainable. These are independent report, so I am not

prepared to listen to this nonsense about there being unsustainable. We

watched the bankers do as they wished and leave us in a huge hole.

The weaker people at the bottom end have to bail them out. That is not

any kind of wisdom or fairness to me. I see that the unions do not

want to strike just before Christmas, but they are left with

no other option and I don't blame them. Lord Hutton nevertheless

supported the case for reform. reform, but this is not reform - it

is savage cuts. Remember, if you will, that the public sector are

expected to accept a pay freeze for the next two years. That means a

real-terms cut in pay over the next two years of about 11%. On top of

that, they expect them to pay more towards a pension that will give

them less at the end of the day. It is grossly unfair. Thank you. Is

there any room for compromise, Byron Davies? Leads to us get this

right. We talk about fairness - what about the small companies that

are trying to make their way through the current situation? They

would be happy for some of their workers to have some of this public

service pension money. I just can't except what Elfyn Llwyd says.

is a specious argument. What has it got to do with the public sector? I

worked in the private sector and I employed 28 people, so I know a bit

about that. Looking across... have worked in the private sector

and I have worked in the public sector for 32 years. Looking across

with an envious eye is ridiculous. The it is not an envious eye, it is

realistic. Thank you fought joining us to discuss those issues. That

was fun! Let's go over to Betsan Powys.

Let's talk about the budget negotiations. A in the fast lane,

they are keeping it quiet. I spoke to pied come resources speaking

about Labour not putting up their efforts. -- applied Cumbria.

Government sources this evening are talking on speed text. They say

they are not running at eight Running commentary. The same with

the Lib Dem source I spoke to, but we have spoken to another Lib Dems

sauce. They said that Labour had been told to wake up and smell the

coffee. They said the coffee was on and could be smelt from the 5th

floor. Remind us what the opposition parties want in order to

give their support. Plied want emergency package measures and

emergency money spent quickly. They are talking about skills and

creating jobs. The Lib Dems are talking about something akin to a

pupil premium in England. Aitken would be the Blair bed because that

would tie the government into doing something over quite a few years. -

- the key word of there. The others have let themselves out. And the

timetable, briefly? They have to lay the Budget on the 29th, so all