Agenda item

Three requests for deputation have been received in support of item 8(a) from Unite, GMB and UCATT respectively. These requests are not competent as Standing Order 10(1) states that applications must relate to substantive report on the agenda - therefore Standing Orders will require to be suspended if the Council want to hear the deputations.

(A)       The Council had before it the following requests for deputations relating to item 8(a) on the agenda (Article 18 of this minute refers), and was advised that none of them complied with Standing Order 10(1), which stated that applications must relate to a substantive report on the agenda.

(1)          Unite - Mr Tommy Campbell

(2)          GMB - Mr Kevin Masson

(3)          UCATT - Mr Steven Dillon

The Council resolved:-

(i)           to suspend Standing Order 10(1) to enable the deputations to be heard, and to hear them next; and

(ii)          to request officers to consider the issue of Standing Orders having to be suspended to hear deputations in relation to notices of motion without a substantive report as part of the governance review.

(B)       In terms of Standing Order 10(2), the Council received a deputation from Mr Steven Dillon of UCATT.

Mr Dillon emphasised that the threat from the Trade Union Bill was stark and likened it to a gagging bill, preventing the trade unions from having a political voice. He welcomed the stance taken by COSLA and public authorities throughout Scotland to oppose the removal of the check-off arrangement.

Mr Dillon underlined that all political parties, except for one, understood the role of trade unions and trade union representatives in the workplace, and that the Trade Union Bill had no place in a democratic society and would help to erode positive industrial relations across the country.

Mr Dillon called on the Council for its support and stated that they needed to stand shoulder to shoulder to defeat the proposals.

(C)       The Council then received a deputation from Mr Kevin Masson of GMB.

Mr Masson explained particular requirements that would be placed on the Council as a result of the Trade Union Bill, for example it would be required to publish the cost of time off for trade union representatives and a breakdown of what facility time was used for. He added that the Council would no longer be able to offer its staff the ability to pay for trade union membership directly from their salary.

Mr Masson advised that the Trade Union Bill would require a certification officer to be appointed who would be given powers to investigate trade unions even if there had not been any complaints. The certification officer would have the ability to fine trade unions up to £20,000, and the cost of the post would be charged to trade unions.

Mr Masson added that the Trade Union Bill proposed that trade union ballots would need to have a minimum turnout of 50%, and a minimum of 40% of the total membership needed to vote in favour of a course of action in order for it to be lawful. He advised that employers would be able to break strikes by bringing in agency workers, and 14 days notice would need to be given for industrial action, as opposed to the current requirement of 7 days. He emphasised that all of these proposals would reduce the impact of strike action.

Mr Masson stated that the proposals also placed huge restrictions on peaceful picketing and protests. A picket supervisor would need to be appointed, who would be required to carry a letter of authorisation which could be inspected by the police or other bodies - failure to comply could result in a court injunction being sought to stop the picket.

Mr Masson concluded that the new regulations were overly bureaucratic with a disproportionate level of scrutiny and monitoring, and would poison the relationship between employer and employee. Mr Masson sought the support of the Council to oppose the Bill.

(D)       The Council last received a deputation from Mr Tommy Campbell of Unite.

Mr Campbell advised that the origins of trade unionism in the UK could be traced to a group of six men known as the Tolpuddle Martyrs, who were imprisoned for seven years in 1834. He explained that George Loveless was the leader of the group, and read out a poem from Mr Loveless to his wife whilst he was imprisoned. He added that the government was forced to free the group from prison under a pardon.

Mr Campbell highlighted that EIS and Unison were also strongly opposed to the Trade Union Bill however they could not be in attendance today. He stated that the Bill was a vile and vindictive piece of legislation, however not everyone in government, or amongst employers, were in favour of it. He added that it was uncalled for and an unjustified attack on the basic right to represent workers, and had its roots in the family tree of dictatorship.

Mr Campbell anticipated that the Bill would criminalise trade unionism in the UK, and emphasised that it was an extension of the Thatcher government’s approach to trade unions. He referred to the impact on picketing, and the requirement for the picket supervisor to wear an armband, and questioned whether trade unionists would be required to wear an armband at all times, which he likened to Nazi Germany in the 1930s.

Mr Campbell emphasised that trade unions would defy the proposals if the Bill came to pass, and called on the Council to support the motion and stand against the Trade Union Bill.