Government to slash protection for vulnerable workers

[TrueBlueTerrier]

http://www.cwu.org/news/archive/governm ... rkers.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;?

The Communication Workers Union is alarmed that proposed government changes to employment protections will lead to more industrial disputes and bring uncertainty for both employers and workers.

The proposals published today (Thursday) relate to TUPE (Transfer of Undertakings Protection of Employment) regulations which apply when a workforce is taken over by another employer. TUPE regulations provide some protections for staff - such as adequate consultation and protection for their pay and certain terms and conditions - but these would be drastically watered down under the government proposals. CWU fears that call centre staff, who are often the subject of takeovers and transfers, would be particularly adversely affected, along with low-paid workers such as cleaners and security staff.

Billy Hayes, CWU general secretary, said: "These latest proposals are another clear attack on working people in the misguided belief that cutting laws and protections will always benefit business. These proposals are likely to have the opposite effect to what the government intends as watering down these protections will lead to more workers and unions opposing transfers because of the lack of protections.

"The government proposals are a legal quagmire in terms of Service Provision Changes as 65% will still be subject to TUPE but there will now be confusion over which do and do not apply. The proposals cut the consultation period which is bad for both responsible employers and for workers, and they potentially remove protections after one year. They also undermine collectively agreed terms and conditions - instead of being able to deal with employees 'en bloc', each individual contract could now have to be changed which would be cumbersome for business.

"There's nothing positive in here for workers. These regulations are meant to be there at the very time when workers most need protection and employers need predictability. It a rug being pulled from the feet of both groups."

CWU recently averted a national strike in Telefonica O2 call centres in part because of protections guaranteed under TUPE which helped to assure staff that their jobs, pay and terms and conditions would be protected when they moved to outsource giant Capita.

In more detail:

The repeal of service provision changes (SPCs) from the 2006 TUPE regulations will make the position of workers more precarious. The move is intended to reduce the scope of their application, meaning fewer workers will be protected and more will face redundancy or the prospect of being hired to undertake the same work for a different employer on inferior terms and conditions. This is clearly bad for workers.

66 respondents to the government consultation favoured retaining SPCs, 47 wanted them repealed, and 61 expressed no view. The government has ignored the majority view.

Many workers affected by SPCs are employed in low paying sectors, such as cleaning, security and in the case of many CWU members, call centres. The government's proposals will make it easier for employers to depress terms and conditions in outsourced services, exacerbating the problem of low pay. This is not a positive outcome.

The government's proposals are bad for business and will lead to greater uncertainty. Around 65% of SPCs will still be subject to TUPE, but the government's changes will make it confusing and less clear which ones apply and which ones don't.

By watering down TUPE protections, the government could be responsible for a rise in industrial unrest as unions and workers are likely to oppose new job transfers because of the lack of protections.

Changes to regulation 4 appear to be with the intention to lower pay, terms and conditions of staff who are the subject of a transfer, rather than to raise standards of lower-paid staff.

For more information read the CWU submission to BIS consultation: TUPE regulations 2006: Consultation on proposed changes to the regulations http://www.cwu.org/assets/_files/docume ... nsulta.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;