Binmen in strike row
“Your cabinet agreed to pursue a legal injunction and cited advice that payments were unlawful – now we learn you were willing to offer a payment to Unite,” he said. “How are your actions different to those of [former city council leader] Councillor John Clancy, who had to resign for taking similar actions? You are being played by Unite – why did you not just press on with legal action?”
In response, Cllr Ward said it was perfectly legitimate to seek a resolution without recourse to courts if that could be achieved.
“We are not being played by our colleagues in the wider Labour movement,” he added.
He also dashed any hopes of a council tax rebate for frustrated residents worst hit by the ongoing dispute. There was ‘no intention’ to refund householders for the lost collections during the industrial dispute since it began at the start of the new year, he said.
“Council tax pays for not just bins,” he added.
“I regret that the waste service is not what it should be. The people of this city are entitled to a very, very good waste service and they are not getting that at the moment.”
all
services, The council now has to consider whether to press on with legal action – or do more to meet union demands. Any option is fraught with risks, reveals a report to the Cabinet, meeting next Tuesday (February 12). They include:
Do nothing until the city faces related employment tribunal claims from bin workers – but those hearings are not scheduled to take place until February 2020, a year from now.
In the face of escalating strike action, it’s an option that would cost anywhere from £13.5 million up to £28.2 million. The city will also see a rising tide of waste, reduced recycling and an adverse impact on trade waste collection. Absence rates among bin workers are also rising, with many citing ‘stress and anxiety’; this would likely continue to pose problems.
Make a payment settling the employment tribunals claim brought by Unite members as long as the union agreed to end the dispute.
This would make ‘commercial sense’ because of the significant impact of the strike action and likely costs of contingency measures. However, it would also set a precedent for further claims from other workers in the council, particularly female workers under equality legislation, and could trigger industrial unrest.
The report adds: “(Legal) Counsel has been extensively consulted based on any litigation risk for the council and the commercial reasons for settling these claims and advised that a reasonable, well evaluated figure for members of Unite the Union would be in the region of £2,000 to £3,000. The council has already made a reasonable offer which has been rejected by Unite the Union.”
Make a one off payment – figure not disclosed – to end the dispute.
Seek an immediate legal injunction on the grounds the industrial action is unlawful. This would likely cost up to £1.5 million. Unite the union has previously indicated it would carry on industrial action regardless of any injunction.