Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there! Sign in to have your say on this topicNew here? Join for free to post

B174 - Employment Act 2009

This thread is sponsored by:
Announcements Posted on
Applying to Uni? Let Universities come to you. Click here to get your perfect place 20-10-2014
    • Thread Starter
    • 14 followers
    Offline

    Employment Act 2009, ConservativeEmployment Act 2009

    Dedicated to Bob Crow.

    BE IT ENACTED by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and
    consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament
    assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:—


    Freedom to negotiate pay
    1. All employees shall be free to negotiate their wage with their employer to any level they so wish
    1.1 No employer may arbitrarily change an employee's wage
    1.2 Any such negotiation must be openly declared within the workplace
    1.2.1 The declaration shall in any form, include the following;

    a) Hourly wage or salary originally (£xx)
    b) New hourly wage or salary negotiated
    c) Number of employees partaking in negotiations

    Employees' identity may not be included.
    1.3 Section 1 is only applicable to situations in which the employee initially approaches the employer.


    Optional expenses
    2. Employers may offer optional expenses which are counted towards take home wage/salary
    2.1 No employee should be discriminated against if they do not opt in to the expenses

    Trade unions

    3. No public sector employee may join, start or continue to be a member of a trade union.
    3.1 All public sector unions are hereby disbanded, any funds held by the union shall be distributed proportionately between members, taking into account length of membership.


    Short title, commencement and extent.
    (1) This Act may be cited as the Employment Act 2009
    (2) This Act shall commence immediately.
    • 14 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    So just because someone works in the public sector you want to remove the only bodies that attempt to safeguard the interests of the workers? Shocking.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    If the Tories are going to steal a Libertarian Bill to scrap the minimum wage at least have the balls to say so.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by daniel_williams)
    1.1 No employer may arbitrarily change an employee's wage
    What do you mean by 'arbitrarily' in practice? Like, why shouldn't an employer give their employees an 'arbitrary' pay rise?

    Trade unions

    3. No public sector employee may join, start or continue to be a member of a trade union.
    3.1 All public sector unions are hereby disbanded, any funds held by the union shall be distributed proportionately between members, taking into account length of membership.
    It seemed sane up until this bit - WTF?!?!
    • 26 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Awww, right up till 3 i liked it.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BruceTaylor)
    you want to remove the only bodies that attempt to safeguard the interests of the workers? Shocking.
    As a worker, I find it very patronising that you think I need a trade union to safeguard my interests, honestly, it's like I can't negotiate an employment contract...

    Public sector unions donating to political parties who then expand the public sector, giving far more generous pay packages and pensions than the private sector get? Hmmm... This sounds like it could be detrimental to society.

    That said, I think this Bill is partisan and childish. Effacious or not, Union membership should be a matter for an employee and them alone.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DayneD89)
    Awww, right up till 3 i liked it.
    oh dear, oh dear.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    LOL no way, you are just like Thatcher wanting to take away any trade unions.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by UniOfLife)
    If the Tories are going to steal a Libertarian Bill to scrap the minimum wage at least have the balls to say so.
    Its more than that though, yes this bill includes parts which could remove the minimum wage, however it also removes trade unions from the public sector something which we believe to be detrimental to government and democracy in general. It is wrong that a public body should be in anyway influenced by a political grouping. This bill has two sides.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    If it weren't for public sector trade unions I'd be getting paid significantly less than I get currently, which doesn't go far as it is!

    What would be the benefit of banning public sector unions? The only public sector workers who cant strike are police officers.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 01kij114)
    LOL no way, you are just like Thatcher wanting to take away any trade unions.
    Well considering we are TSR Thatcherite party, I dont find that particularly surprising :p:

    It is true that the Trade Union Laws passed in 1984/5 were reducing the powers of the unions however Thatcher, in my opinion based on the books ive read on her, did not want to remove them as institutions, but she wanted to remove them as sources of political power.

    I dont want this to turn into a broad debate on trade unionism because we are only considering public sector bodies, one would assume that if you worked for the state then working conditions would be assured because how can a government improve working conditions yet not let its own employees work under them. Pay is the only issue that we could think of in which a trade union may be useful, in order to work around this we have decided that employees are able to negotiate their own pay settlements. I also think clause 1.1 is important in this debate, not only can workers negotiate their own pay deals they can now not face arbitary pay cuts.

    All things considered, this bill offers public sector workers far more protection than membership to a trade union would.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by davireland)
    Its more than that though, yes this bill includes parts which could remove the minimum wage, however it also removes trade unions from the public sector something which we believe to be detrimental to government and democracy in general. It is wrong that a public body should be in anyway influenced by a political grouping. This bill has two sides.
    Yes, so why not two Bills? Or make explicit that you are copying a Libertarian Bill from a few weeks back to plonk into your own Bill?
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by fruit_n_veg)
    If it weren't for public sector trade unions I'd be getting paid significantly less than I get currently, which doesn't go far as it is!

    What would be the benefit of banning public sector unions? The only public sector workers who cant strike are police officers.
    We dont want any strikes in our public sector e.g ambulance crews, nurses, teachers. The best way to prevent this is to end trade unionism in the sector and legislate against salary decreases and give people the right to negotiate their own salaries.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by UniOfLife)
    Yes, so why not two Bills? Or make explicit that you are copying a Libertarian Bill from a few weeks back to plonk into your own Bill?
    We are not copying the NMW bill, for one that bill applied to all sectors we are only looking at the public sector. Also I think many people in the house would recognise that this isnt identical to the NMW bill, indeed some members such as Dayne drew an objection only when they reached the trade union clause and it was these members who opposed the NMW bill.
    • 14 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by davireland)
    We dont want any strikes in our public sector e.g ambulance crews, nurses, teachers. The best way to prevent this is to end trade unionism in the sector and legislate against salary decreases and give people the right to negotiate their own salaries.
    why not make strikes illegal

    and keep trade unions
    • 26 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    after all the talk that the PF would break down we get to see public bickering between the right wing coalition :p:
    • 10 followers
    Offline

    Presumably the Libertarians will oppose this bill?
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by davireland)
    We are not copying the NMW bill, for one that bill applied to all sectors we are only looking at the public sector. Also I think many people in the house would recognise that this isnt identical to the NMW bill, indeed some members such as Dayne drew an objection only when they reached the trade union clause and it was these members who opposed the NMW bill.
    Come off it Dave. The NMW bit in this Bill applies to all workers everywhere. It is exactly the same as our NWM bill just with different wording and joined in with another idea.

    The fact that Dayne supported the first says nothing for the Bill and a lot about him.
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I think this Bill fails to acknowledge all the uses of unions. While in theory they shouldn't be needed in public sectors, within the civil service there are top dogs who might abuse their power in order to discriminate against or unfairly dismiss an employee; unions provide the resources to give such victims appropriate legal representation at minimal cost.

    Besides, if you disbanded unions (especially Teachers' Unions which have so much influence on how children are taught) then separate organisations would spring up to replace them, and to prevent civil servants from joining these organisations would be verging on extreme authoritarianism. So you'd ultimately fail in depoliticising the civil service.
    • 10 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by robinson999)
    why not make strikes illegal

    and keep trade unions
    Because they'd strike anyway, on mass, and it'd become a whole lot worse. Something makes me think of the Tienanmen square incident in 1989.

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: June 30, 2009
New on TSR

Personal statement help

Use our clever tool to create a PS you're proud of.

Article updates
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.