Shapps clashes with unions over ambulance strike ‘slur’
Business secretary Grant Shapps was accused of an “outrageous” attack on unions representing NHS ambulance staff after he claimed that their approach to strikes was “putting lives at risk”.
The cabinet minister clashed with trade unions once again as he set out new laws requiring minimum levels of service from NHS
staff, firefighters and railway workers during any industrial action.
The proposals were condemned as “dangerous gimmick” by unions chiefs, who warned of the legislation would “poison industrial relations”, lead to legal action and see more frequent walkouts.
The TUC announced it will hold a national “protect the right to strike” day on 1 February, encouraging members of the public to show support for workers taking action to defend pay and conditions.
Mr Shapps said the plans to enforce new minimum levels of cover during strikes in six key sectors are in line with laws in other European countries and would “protect the lives and the livelihoods of the British people”.
But he did not share details of the precise minimum service levels expected during strikes. The business secretary said the government would consult first on what an “adequate level of coverage” would be in fire, ambulance and rail services.
He told the Commons: “The British people need to know that when they have a heart attack, a stroke or a serious injury, that an ambulance will turn up and that if they need hospital care they have access to it.”
The business secretary told MPs that today’s ambulance strike involving tens of thousands of staff across England and Wales underlines the need for the legislation.
He said that while the Royal College of Nursing (RCN) agreed national coverage during nurses’ strikes, paramedics and ambulance drivers have not done so – meaning that “health officials were left guessing at the likely minimum coverage”, putting “lives at risk”.
With around 25,000 ambulance workers due to go on strike again today, Mr Shapps told MPs there will be “patchy emergency care” as a result, adding: “This cannot continue.”
The GMB union, which represents some of the ambulance workers taking action, said it was an “outrageous slur” and
“extraordinary attack” by Mr Shapps.
“He surely knows that across NHS trusts, GMB members, who care for the public every single day, work closely with employers to provide appropriate cover on strike days and have left picket lines to help out on urgent calls,” a union spokesman said.
The union added: “The public know who is to blame for the crisis in our NHS – this government. And people will be disgusted that, in a matter of months, they have gone from clapping health workers to legislating to sack them.”
Mr Shapps did not deny workers could be sacked, but played down the prospect of key workers being fired for refusing to work in line with the new law.
“This sort of talk that somebody would be sacked is no more true than it would be under any employment contract,” he told Times Radio earlier yesterday. “And it is always the case when people have to stick to the law.”
The Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Bill will also cover education, border security and nuclear decommissioning sectors – but Mr Shapps said he hopes that voluntary agreements can be reached with unions in those areas to avoid having to use the legislation’s powers.
The legislation is likely to face stiff opposition in the Commons and attempts to rewrite it in the Lords, as well as court action
led by the Trades Union Congress (TUC), meaning it may not have any impact during the current wave of industrial unrest.
Labour’s deputy leader Angela Rayner said it was “utterly stupid” for Mr Shapps to go from thanking nurses to proposing to sack them for striking.
Ms Rayner also contested the government’s claims it was following the example of existing laws in France and Spain. “Those countries with those laws ... lose vastly more strike days than Britain. Has he taken any time at all to speak to their governments or trade unions to learn any real lessons from them?”
TUC general secretary Paul Nowak warned that the minimum service legislation would risk more frequent strikes and “poison” Britain’s industrial relations.
“This legislation would mean that, when workers democratically vote to strike, they can be forced to work and sacked if they don’t comply. That’s undemocratic, unworkable, and almost certainly illegal,” he said.
Unite general secretary Sharon Graham called the bill a “dangerous gimmick from a government that should be negotiating to resolve the current crisis”. And Fire Brigades Union chief Matt Wrack called for “a mass movement of resistance to this authoritarian attack”.
Mick Lynch, leader of the RMT transport union, added: “The only reason this draconian legislation is being introduced is because [the government] have lost the argument and want to punish workers for having the temerity to demand decent pay and working conditions.”
The introduction of the legislation comes a day after transport, health and education unions held a series of crisis meetings with ministers over pay and conditions.
Health secretary Steve Barclay said planned ambulance strikes today – with another strike on 23 January – were “not helpful” but insisted he was “working with” trade unions.
No blanket agreement has been reached on responding to category 2 calls – such as stroke, heart attack and sepsis – with unions and trusts agreeing locally which category 2 calls will receive a response during the strike.
Want your views to be included in The Independent Daily Edition letters page? Email us by tapping here letters@independent.co.uk. Please include your address
BACK TO TOP