Pat Harrington – Solidarity Trade Union

Britain’s Work‑Related Stress Crisis: What the New TUC Survey Tells Us — and Why It Matters

Advertisements

A new TUC survey has laid bare what many of us in the movement have been warning about for years: Britain is now in the grip of a work‑related stress crisis. The findings, released this week, confirm that stress is not a marginal issue or a personal failing — it is the single biggest health and safety hazard facing working people today, and it is being fuelled by employer inaction, excessive workloads, and a failure to meet even the most basic legal duties.

The TUC’s 15th biennial survey of union safety reps — more than 2,700 reps from across 36 affiliated unions — paints a stark picture of a workforce under strain and a regulatory system stretched to breaking point.

Stress: The Leading Workplace Hazard Across Britain

Almost eight in ten safety reps (79%) now cite stress as a major hazard in their workplace. This is the highest level ever recorded in the survey’s history, and it outstrips every other hazard by a significant margin.

What is particularly striking is the consistency of the problem:

Every region of Britain reports stress as the top concern.
Almost every sector shows the same pattern, with especially acute levels in:
- Central government (80%)
- Local government (66%)
- Health (68%)
- Education (74%)
- The voluntary sector (71%)

These are sectors where staffing levels have been cut to the bone, where demand has risen relentlessly, and where workers are routinely expected to “do more with less”. The result is predictable: burnout, anxiety, and a workforce pushed beyond sustainable limits.

Workload Pressures Driving the Crisis

Behind the stress statistics lies a familiar culprit: excessive workload. Sixty per cent of reps identified workload as a major hazard, and many reported that rising demands are pushing stress to unprecedented levels.

This is not simply about “busy periods” or “challenging roles”. It is about structural understaffing, unrealistic targets, and a culture in which workers are expected to absorb the consequences of managerial decisions without consultation or support.

A Systemic Failure to Assess and Prevent Stress

Perhaps the most damning finding is the widespread failure of employers to meet their legal obligations.

Two‑thirds of safety reps say they are unaware of any assessment of stress risks in their workplace.
Nearly half (43%) say they were not consulted at all on their employer’s risk assessment process — a direct breach of safety regulations.

Stress is not an optional extra in risk management. It is a recognised hazard, and employers are legally required to assess and prevent it. Yet the survey shows that many simply do not bother.

HSE Data Confirms the Scale of the Problem

The TUC’s findings are reinforced by the Health and Safety Executive’s latest statistics for 2024/25, which show:

Workers reporting work‑related stress, depression, or anxiety rose from 776,000 in 2023 to 964,000 in 2024 — an extraordinary increase in just one year.
22 million working days were lost due to work‑related stress in 2024/25.

These are not abstract numbers. They represent exhausted nurses, overstretched teachers, burned‑out civil servants, and millions of workers across the economy whose health is being sacrificed to poor management and chronic under‑resourcing.

The economic cost is vast, but the human cost is greater still.

What the TUC Is Calling For

The TUC is urging government and employers to take immediate action, including:

Enforcing existing laws requiring employers to assess and prevent stress.
Strengthening the HSE with the funding needed to investigate hazards and inspect workplaces.
Reducing excessive workloads and ensuring safe staffing levels.
Giving safety reps the rights and time they need to carry out their roles effectively.
Treating harassment and violence as core health and safety risks, given their strong links to stress.

These are not radical demands. They are the minimum steps required to protect workers’ health and uphold the law.

A National Crisis That Demands a National Response

TUC General Secretary Paul Nowak describes the findings as exposing “a growing national crisis”. He is right. Stress is no longer a background issue — it is entrenched, escalating, and affecting workers across every corner of the economy.

“No worker should find themselves lying awake at night from stress,” he says. Yet too many are doing exactly that, while employers ignore the law and pile impossible workloads onto staff.

Solidarity’s Response

Solidarity General Secretary Pat Harrington added his voice to the warning, emphasising that the crisis is not only widespread but avoidable:

“These figures confirm what our members have been telling us for years: stress is not a personal weakness, it is a workplace hazard created by employer decisions. When staffing is cut, when workloads spiral, when consultation is ignored, workers pay with their health. Solidarity will continue to challenge employers who break the law and support every member facing stress at work. No one should suffer in silence.”

His words reflect what many of us see daily: stress is not an individual problem but a structural one — and it demands a collective, organised response.

What This Means for Solidarity Members

For Solidarity, these findings reinforce what our own members have been telling us: stress is not a private burden but a workplace hazard that demands collective action. Safety reps need time, training, and authority. Workers need safe staffing levels and realistic workloads. And employers need to be held to account when they fail to meet their obligations.

We will continue to support members facing stress at work, challenge employers who ignore the law, and push for a national approach that treats mental health with the seriousness it deserves.

This crisis is not inevitable. It is the result of choices — and it can be changed by collective action, strong unions, and a renewed commitment to dignity at work.

Full TUC Survey Report:
https://www.tuc.org.uk/sites/default/files/2025-12/SafetyRepsSurvey20242025.pdf

By Maria Camara

🎄 Christmas Message from Pat Harrington, General Secretary of Solidarity

Advertisements

Dear friends and comrades,

As we gather at the close of another year, I am reminded of John Donne’s timeless words: “No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main.” His call to sympathy—to feel the struggles and joys of others as our own—resonates deeply with the mission of our union.

In our workplaces and communities, we embody this principle every day. When one member faces injustice, we all feel it. When one voice is silenced, we raise a chorus together. This is our symphony—a harmony of diverse voices, united in purpose, creating strength far greater than any single note could achieve.

This year, we have stood shoulder to shoulder in campaigns for fair pay, defended vulnerable colleagues under the Equality Act, and pressed employers to honour their duty of care. We have challenged systemic failures, demanded transparency, and ensured that no member was left isolated. These actions are not just victories; they are proof of our collective music—our union symphony—resounding across industries and communities.

Christmas is a season of reflection and renewal. Let us carry forward Donne’s vision of shared humanity into the new year. Let us continue to weave sympathy into solidarity, and harmony into action. Together, we will face challenges with courage, and celebrate victories with joy.

On behalf of Solidarity, I wish you and your families peace, strength, and hope this Christmas. May our union’s song grow ever louder in the year ahead.

In unity,

Pat Harrington

General Secretary

Why Delaying Retirement Age Harms Workers

Advertisements

The proposal to push the state pension age beyond 68 feels like a betrayal. It undermines the deal we’ve earned through decades of work. As RMT General Secretary Eddie Dempsey warns, “Raising the pension age even further isn’t just cruel and unnecessary, it’s a slap in the face to the very people who keep this country running.” Pensions are deferred wages—every National Insurance pound was meant to fund our retirement, not vanish into general taxation.

Remember, National Insurance began in 1946 as a separate, ring-fenced pot to guarantee our pensions. Over time, governments folded NI into general taxation, breaking the direct link between what we paid and what we receive. That erosion of trust leaves us exposed every time ministers launch a “review” of retirement age.

Private pensions were supposed to fill the gap, yet only 44% of working-age adults hold one. Nearly 30% of people over 55 rely solely on the state pension. The average private pot is around £35,000. This amount is hardly enough to generate an income to live on. When savings or private pension income fall short, the state pension is all that stands between you and hardship.

Our bodies don’t keep pace with policy deadlines. By age 75, more than 70% of us have at least one chronic condition. By 85, that number climbs to nearly 90%. Almost half struggle with everyday tasks. “Asking people to labour an extra six, even eight years effectively steals the dignity of retirement,” says Pat Harrington of Solidarity union. Forcing us to wait until bones ache and energy fades robs every dream of travel, family time, or simply resting.

Worse still is the uncertainty. With regular reviews, whispers of ages 69, 70 or even 74, how can anyone plan? You don’t know when your last pay cheque arrives. So, you delay home-buying. You hesitate on pension contributions. You hoard cash instead of investing. That paralysis can cost you a lifetime of compound growth—and the financial freedom you thought you were building.

We’ve earned the right to step off the treadmill when our bodies demand it. Policymakers should restore NI’s ring-fencing. They should tax wealth fairly. Loopholes need to be closed. Policymakers must secure the retirement we’ve already paid for. Retirement isn’t a privilege to be delayed at will—it’s the promise of rest after a lifetime of work.

Recent Employment Appeal Tribunal Cases: Summaries & Lessons for Trade Unionists

Advertisements

629 words, 3 minutes read time.

Understanding recent appellate judgments helps unions guide members through pitfalls in whistleblowing, dismissal and harassment claims. Below are three case snapshots, each followed by practical take-aways for shop stewards, legal officers and member advocates.

Savva v Leather Inside Out (in liquidation) & Others [2025] EAT 96

Antony Savva worked for a charity now in liquidation and brought three successive claims alleging detrimental treatment and unfair dismissal for making protected disclosures. The Employment Tribunal struck out many complaints as out of time, imposed a deposit order on others, and ultimately found no qualifying disclosures. On appeal, the EAT:

Upheld the tribunal’s time-limit and strike-out decisions in large part, confirming the strict application of the 3-month deadline and the proper use of “series of similar acts” to bundle late allegations.
Quashed the deposit order for one group of complaints.
Found errors in the tribunal’s merits judgment by omitting one claim and misunderstanding whether certain disclosures and subsequent detriments had been established. Those merits issues were remitted to a fresh tribunal.

Lessons for trade unionists

Whistleblowing claims must be lodged promptly; the “series of similar acts” exception can only rescue genuinely linked events, not disconnected incidents.
Deposit orders can be challenged – they’re not an automatic barrier to redress.
Scrutinise tribunal decisions for omitted complaints or misapplied definitions of protected disclosure; timely appeals preserve members’ rights to a full merits hearing.

Marshall v McPherson Limited [2025] EAT 100

James Marshall, an HGV driver delivering spent grain to a bio-plant, resigned after a night-shift colleague was sent to “shadow” him without warning. He said changes to plant processes, constant pressure to refill hoppers and past safety incidents amounted to a fundamental breach of trust and confidence. The tribunal dismissed his constructive dismissal claim, applying the “last straw” test too narrowly. On appeal, Lady Haldane found that:

The tribunal misdirected itself by requiring the final incident itself to be repudiatory before it could revive earlier, accumulative breaches.
This legal misdirection went to the heart of the case and undermined confidence in the original decision.
The matter was therefore remitted for rehearing before a fresh tribunal.

Lessons for trade unionists

In constructive dismissal cases, emphasise the cumulative impact of managerial failings, not only the final act.
Ensure tribunal self-directions accurately reflect authorities like Omilaju and Kaur on “last straw.”
Where legal misdirection is apparent, push for appellate review and, if necessary, a fresh hearing to safeguard members’ claims.

Logo v Payone GmbH & Others [2025] EAT 95

Mr Logo, a Black British accounts manager, complained of three acts of race harassment: a colleague in blackface at a Christmas party (2016), a racist joke at a dinner (2019) and a “Pure Blonde” beer advert circulated on WhatsApp (2020). The tribunal accepted the first two as harassment by effect but refused time-extensions, and found no race-related link in the beer advert. Judge Tayler held that:

The tribunal had erred in refusing to extend time without properly weighing prejudice to the claimant and imposing an unrequired “convincing explanation” test.
The advert of a white-blonde utopia was obviously “related to” race, and the tribunal should have assessed its effect on the claimant’s dignity rather than focusing on the poster’s intent.
Those issues were remitted for redetermination.

Lessons for trade unionists

Advise members to lodge harassment claims promptly, but press tribunals to exercise their wide “just and equitable” discretion when delays occur.
Harassment “related to” a protected characteristic does not require bad intent – focus on the context and the complainant’s perception.
Preserve contemporaneous evidence (photos of blackface, screen-captures of messages, emails requesting extensions) to counter tribunal scepticism on credibility or prejudice.

By tracking how the EAT applies time limits, cumulative breach principles and harassment tests, union advocates can spot early warning signs, frame stronger claims and marshal the right authorities when representing members.

By Pat Harrington

Solidarity with British Industry: Why Buying British Is More Vital Than Ever by Pat Harrington

Advertisements

All political groups and unions must unite in a ‘Buy British campaign says Pat Harrington

1,235 words, 7 minutes read time.

The call to “Buy British” has never been a matter of nostalgia or jingoism. For trade unions like Solidarity and the wider Labour movement, it’s a practical, progressive tool to protect jobs, revive our manufacturing base, and build a more self-reliant, future-ready economy. Amid the upheavals of global supply chains, mounting geopolitical tensions, and the rise of protectionist policies from international powers like the United States, the case for using our collective spending power to support British industry has never been stronger.

Solidarity union has proudly led the charge, running several public campaigns urging consumers to choose British-made goods wherever possible. These campaigns are rooted in a simple yet powerful belief: when we buy British, we invest in British jobs, communities, and skills. It’s not just about waving the flag—it’s about economic justice, sustainability, and national resilience.

Historically, the Labour Party and trade unions have often championed “Buy British” initiatives during times of industrial crisis. In the 1970s and 1980s, as traditional industries faced collapse, union campaigns highlighted the importance of keeping jobs in Britain. The Transport & General Workers’ Union, for example, actively promoted British-made vehicles and products to protect domestic manufacturing. Labour governments of the past also embraced this approach. Harold Wilson praised grassroots initiatives such as the “I’m Backing Britain” campaign in the late 1960s, and the Labour manifesto of 1983 proposed import controls and prioritising British-made goods in public procurement. While these efforts were sometimes controversial, they were rooted in a shared commitment to national industrial renewal.

In more recent years, trade union federations like the TUC have published position papers advocating for a coherent industrial strategy. These documents emphasise the need for investment in high-value manufacturing, green energy, and infrastructure—areas where government procurement can and should favour domestic suppliers. Solidarity fully supports these calls and continues to argue that only with a long-term industrial plan can Britain secure its economic independence.

That said, not all political leaders have shown the same resolve. Some voices within the Labour Party have expressed hesitation. For instance, Chancellor Rachel Reeves recently stated that she would not back a consumer-focused “Buy British” campaign, arguing that such efforts risk encouraging economic nationalism. While Solidarity recognises the dangers of xenophobia or trade isolationism, we firmly disagree with this conclusion. We believe the British public should be encouraged and empowered to support local production—not out of hostility to others, but out of loyalty to the communities in which they live and work.

It is important to state clearly: Solidarity does not base its policy on a shallow anti-Americanism or target U.S. imports specifically. Our position is motivated by a sincere desire to see an independent and prosperous United Kingdom—capable of making and trading high-quality goods, resilient in the face of global shocks, and free to pursue its own economic strategy. Buying British, in our view, is not about closing ourselves off from the world; it’s about building a strong, confident nation that can compete globally from a position of strength.

This aspiration is only possible because of the freedoms we now possess outside the European Union. Many of the measures we advocate—strategic procurement, public investment in domestic industry, and local content rules—would have been difficult, if not impossible, under EU single market and state aid rules. Whatever one’s position on Brexit, it is clear that the UK is now uniquely positioned to chart its own industrial future. That opportunity must not be wasted.

We’ve seen firsthand how offshoring and deindustrialisation have hollowed out communities. Entire generations have been robbed of the skilled, secure work that once defined working-class life in Britain. Yet, instead of despair, we see opportunity: the chance to rebuild. Rebuilding the UK’s manufacturing base is not a backward-looking project. On the contrary, it’s the only credible path to long-term prosperity, especially in a world where supply lines can snap overnight and foreign governments act unilaterally to prioritise their own industries.

Take the example of the U.S. tariffs under the Trump administration—first on steel and aluminium, then on aircraft, and now the new blanket 10% tariffs and targeted car tariffs. These are not just abstract trade disputes; they’re direct threats to British workers. When tariffs shut out our exports, our factories suffer, our jobs disappear, and our communities pay the price. The only responsible response is to fight back—not with hollow slogans, but with investment, procurement, and a serious industrial strategy.

That’s why Solidarity supports the Labour Party’s calls for strategic procurement to favour UK suppliers. Labour’s proposals to rebuild manufacturing capacity, invest in green industry, and embed “Buy British” principles in public contracts are not just welcome—they are essential. The promise to make, buy, and sell more in Britain isn’t protectionism—it’s common sense. It’s about using the enormous power of public spending—over £270 billion a year—to secure good jobs, shorten supply chains, and reduce reliance on volatile global markets.

Technology sovereignty is also at stake. The UK cannot afford to be dependent on others for semiconductors, energy components, or the tools of the future economy. If we want to lead in clean energy, digital infrastructure, or medical innovation, we need to make sure we can build the necessary parts here at home. Buying British isn’t just about steel and cars—it’s about making sure the next generation of industry is made in Britain, by British workers, under decent conditions.

Solidarity’s message is clear: every purchase is a political act. When we buy a car made in Sunderland, a steel beam forged in Port Talbot, or a jacket sewn in Leicester, we’re casting a vote for good jobs, fair pay, and national self-respect. That’s why we continue to campaign not only for better trade policy, but for better choices at the till.

We urge the government—and all political parties—to take up this cause without hesitation. We must match rhetoric with resources, and slogans with strategy. Britain needs a serious industrial policy, clear local content rules in procurement, and investment in the industries of the future. The Labour Party and trade unions are right to demand these things. Solidarity is proud to stand alongside them.

Buying British is not a luxury—it is a necessity. Let’s make it a national priority.

Footnotes

Trump administration imposed 25% tariffs on steel and 10% on aluminium in 2018, affecting UK exports.
UK exports of cars to the US exceed £8 billion annually; Trump threatened a 25% tariff on autos in 2019 and 2025.
Labour’s 2024 industrial strategy includes proposals for strategic procurement and rebuilding domestic supply chains.
Solidarity union campaigns have included local business spotlights, workplace posters, and social media campaigns to encourage consumers to buy British.
The TUC has long advocated for the revival of UK manufacturing and coordinated responses to trade shocks.
Labour and unions called for “Save Our Steel” procurement policies during the 2015-2016 crisis and after Trump-era tariffs.
The UK’s public procurement budget is approximately £270 billion per year, presenting a major opportunity to boost domestic industry.
Technology sovereignty has been cited by think tanks and unions as a key pillar of future industrial resilience.
The 1983 Labour manifesto proposed import controls and prioritisation of British-made goods.
Rachel Reeves, April 2025: “If every country decided to only buy things produced at home, that’s not a good way forward.”

Union News 5th of January 2025

Advertisements

Welcome to Union News, your guide to what’s happening in the UK trade union and labour movement. Reporting is by Pat Harrington and music is from Tim Bragg. In this edition:

Livv Housing Workers Fight Back Against Strike-Breaking,

Dundee Workers Stand Strong Against Pay Cuts,

Princes Food Workers Demand Fair Pay,

Birmingham Bin Workers Defend Pay and Safety,

Museum Security Guards Fight for Fair Pay

and finally, Film Screening: Censoring Palestine

You can donate to the museum security workers strike fund here

Livv Housing Workers Fight Back Against Strike-Breaking

Livv Housing workers, represented by Unison and Unite, are preparing for a significant strike on Monday, 6 January, in their ongoing battle for fair treatment. This action is a direct response to Livv Housing’s refusal to engage meaningfully with their concerns. Despite holding reserves exceeding £110 million, the company has chosen to undermine the strike by bringing in contractors, a move seen by workers as an attempt to weaken their collective power.

The workers are fighting for better pay, improved working conditions, and respect for their roles. Many have expressed frustration over Livv Housing’s apparent prioritisation of financial reserves over the welfare of its workforce. This strike highlights the growing tension between corporate decision-makers and the employees who keep their operations running. Workers are standing firm, determined to push back against what they see as exploitative practices.

Solidarity is at the heart of this action. Unison and Unite have called on members of the community to join the picket line at Livv Head Office, Kings Business Park, Prescot, from 7:30 am. The visible presence of supporters sends a powerful message that the workers are not alone in their fight.

Union leaders have criticised Livv Housing’s approach as indicative of a broader trend of corporate disregard for workers’ rights. By hiring contractors to break the strike, the company risks alienating not only its staff but also the wider public, who are increasingly aware of the importance of ethical employment practices.

Supporters can follow updates on Twitter via @KnowsleyUnison and are urged to amplify the workers’ message. This strike is not just about Livv Housing—it is about setting a precedent for how workers in similar roles across the country should be treated.

Dundee Workers Stand Strong Against Pay Cuts

Technicians at Safehouse Habitats in Dundee have entered a critical phase of their strike action. The three-month strike, which began on 11 November, reflects workers’ growing anger over pay cuts and deteriorating conditions. Members of Unite are protesting against the company’s refusal to grant a pay rise and its decision to slash sick pay entitlements from six months’ full pay to the legal minimum.

This strike comes after a history of sacrifice. Workers accepted a 3% pay reduction two years ago to access the sick pay scheme, demonstrating their willingness to compromise for fairness. However, Safehouse Habitats, which boasts assets of £5.3 million, is now reneging on these commitments. Workers feel betrayed by what they see as unjust changes imposed by a profitable company.

The strike has highlighted the growing frustration among the workforce. Many technicians have described feeling undervalued despite the crucial role they play in creating shelters for oil and gas facilities. Their determination to resist these changes underscores the importance of collective action in the face of corporate intransigence.

Unite has been vocal in its criticism of the company, pointing out the stark contrast between its healthy financial position and the treatment of its workers. The union has also warned that cutting sick pay to the legal minimum could set a dangerous precedent for other industries.

The strike will continue daily until 2 February unless an agreement is reached. For updates and further coverage, supporters are encouraged to read The Morning Star and show solidarity with the workers’ fight for dignity and fairness.

Princes Food Workers Demand Fair Pay

Workers at Princes Food factories across the UK are ramping up their efforts to secure fair pay. The strikes, organised by Unite, are a direct response to the new owners, Newlat S.P.A., offering a mere 3% pay rise. This falls far short of the promises made by previous management and is inadequate given the rising cost of living.

Production at multiple facilities is expected to be disrupted throughout January as workers from locations such as Bradford, Wisbech, and Cardiff join the action. Unite has criticised Newlat for prioritising profits, with the company forecasting €188 million in annual profits while expecting its UK operations to generate 20% of its revenues.

The workers argue that their roles are physically demanding and essential to the production of household food products. They feel that the company’s current offer fails to recognise their contribution or the challenges they face in an increasingly expensive economy.

Union leaders have emphasised the need for collective action, encouraging communities to stand with the workers. The strikes are not just about a pay rise—they are about ensuring that promises made to the workforce are honoured and that workers are treated with the respect they deserve.

With strikes planned throughout January, Unite is calling on supporters to back the workers’ demands for justice and fair pay. These actions serve as a reminder of the power of collective resistance in the face of corporate indifference.

Birmingham Bin Workers Defend Pay and Safety

Birmingham bin workers are taking a stand to protect their pay and workplace safety. Over 350 Unite members are striking against Birmingham City Council’s decision to abolish the Waste Recycling and Collection Officer (WRCO) role. This move threatens to cut £8,000 a year from workers’ salaries and could significantly reduce their pensions.

The council’s decision has drawn widespread criticism for its potential to compromise safety standards in what is already a hazardous job. Workers argue that the removal of the WRCO role places undue strain on crews, increasing the risk of accidents while also impacting the quality of service delivery.

The strikes, which began in January, will continue intermittently through February and March. Alongside the walkouts, workers have implemented an overtime ban and strict work-to-rule practices, causing widespread disruption across the city. Unite has warned that the council’s actions could lead to longer-term consequences for the community.

Union leaders have called on the public to support the workers, stressing that their fight is not just about pay but about ensuring safe working conditions for all. They have also highlighted the broader implications of the council’s decision, which could set a dangerous precedent for other local authorities.

With multiple strike dates planned, workers are urging the council to reconsider its position. The public is encouraged to show solidarity and pressure the council into reversing these harmful changes.

Museum Security Guards Fight for Fair Pay

Security guards at three of the UK’s most prominent museums are striking for fair pay and better conditions. Represented by the United Voices of the World (UVW) union, the guards are demanding a wage increase to £16 an hour, improved sick pay, and an additional week of holiday to help cope with the cost-of-living crisis.

These workers, outsourced to Wilson James, have seen their wages stagnate, with only a 1.2% total increase between 2019 and 2021. Many feel their contributions to the museums’ operations are undervalued, especially given the rising costs of everyday living. UVW argues that the current pay structure fails to reflect the inflationary pressures on workers.

The strikes, planned from 17 to 21 January, will impact the Science Museum, Victoria and Albert Museum, and Natural History Museum. UVW has called on the public to support the workers by avoiding the museums during strike days and contributing to the strike fund.

The action has highlighted the exploitation often faced by outsourced workers, who are denied the benefits and protections afforded to directly employed staff. UVW has urged museums to reconsider their reliance on outsourcing and to bring these workers in-house.

Public support is vital to the success of this strike. By standing with the guards, supporters can help amplify their demands for fairness and contribute to a wider conversation about workers’ rights in cultural institutions.

and finally, Film Screening: Censoring Palestine

The powerful new film Censoring Palestine explores the silencing of Palestinian voices across media, entertainment, and education. Produced by Platform Films, it features Alexei Sayle and the mothers of imprisoned protesters.

The film premieres on Wednesday, 22 January, at Genesis Cinema in London, followed by a discussion with the filmmakers. Additional screenings are scheduled in Portsmouth on 23 and 26 January, with details available on the Platform Films Facebook page.

This is a vital opportunity to engage with the ongoing struggle for Palestinian justice and amplify silenced voices.

By Maria Camara

Firefighters Face Growing Mental Health Challenges: Action Needed Now

Advertisements

503 words, 3 minutes read time.

The fire and rescue sector is facing an escalating mental health crisis, and without immediate government intervention, the wellbeing of these critical workers—and the safety of the public they serve—will remain at grave risk, the Fire Brigades Union (FBU) warned today.

New data paints a troubling picture. Over the past three years, 458 staff members in Greater Manchester Fire Service have taken time off due to mental health struggles. Conditions such as work-related stress, depression, anxiety, and PTSD are driving these absences, according to figures obtained by Accident Claims Advice (ACA).

The situation is worsening. In 2021-22, 10 percent of staff who took mental health-related leave left the service entirely. By the following year, this figure more than doubled, with 22 percent departing. These numbers reflect not only the severe toll on individual firefighters but also the broader systemic issue of inadequate mental health support within the sector.

FBU General Secretary Matt Wrack did not mince words, stating, “The fire service is facing a mental health crisis.” He highlighted that mental health provision across the service remains inconsistent, leaving many workers to struggle alone. “After a decade of cuts to the fire and rescue service, firefighters are being pushed beyond limits to keep the public safe,” Wrack continued. “Responding to life-or-death situations without adequate resources is intensely stressful.”

This crisis cannot be separated from the broader austerity measures that have decimated the fire and rescue sector over the past decade. Years of funding cuts have stripped services to the bone, leaving crews overworked, under-resourced, and burdened with the emotional weight of their life-saving roles. Firefighters often find themselves responding to harrowing situations with little or no time for recovery or support.

Yet despite the clear evidence that workers are struggling, mental health support remains patchy and underfunded. The lack of consistent, accessible resources for fire and rescue staff compounds the issue, creating a cycle of burnout and attrition that undermines the very foundation of public safety.

This is not just a workplace issue—it is a public safety concern. Firefighters and rescue workers are society’s first line of defense in emergencies. Their ability to perform their roles effectively hinges on their mental and physical wellbeing. When they suffer, the public suffers.

The government must act decisively. Investment in mental health support for firefighters and rescue workers should not be seen as optional but as a fundamental component of a functioning emergency response system. Rebuilding the fire and rescue service requires both the funding to restore staffing levels and the creation of robust, nationwide mental health provisions. Anything less is a disservice to the brave individuals who risk their lives daily—and to the communities they serve.

This crisis did not arise overnight, nor will it be resolved without sustained commitment and action. The time for excuses and piecemeal solutions is over. The government must prioritize the mental health and wellbeing of fire and rescue workers, recognizing that a strong, resilient workforce is the backbone of public safety.

Report from Pat Harrington

Xmas 2024 Message From Pat Harrington, General Secretary of Solidarity Union

Advertisements

2024 has been a pivotal year for employment law and trade union activity in the UK. The election of the new Labour government brought fresh hopes for workers’ rights. Their manifesto promised significant reforms to improve conditions for employees and empower trade unions. Here, we review the key developments, including the new Employment Act and its proposed amendments, and assess how far they have delivered on their commitments.

The New Labour Government

The Labour Party’s victory in the general election was hailed as a turning point for workers. The party ran on a platform of fairness, job security, and empowerment for employees. Early actions by the government focused on reversing some of the anti-union measures introduced by previous administrations. There were high expectations for transformative change.

The Employment Act 2024

One of the government’s flagship policies was the introduction of the Employment Act. This comprehensive legislation aimed to tackle issues like insecure work, low pay, and lack of workplace protections. Key provisions included:

A ban on zero-hours contracts, except in specific circumstances.
A requirement for all workers to have predictable contracts.
Increased statutory sick pay and holiday entitlements.
Strengthened rights for workers to join and organise in trade unions.

These measures were welcomed by unions and advocacy groups. However, employers raised concerns about the increased costs and administrative burdens.

Proposed Amendments

The Employment Act also introduced a framework for further reforms. Proposed amendments currently under consultation include:

Mandatory recognition of trade unions in workplaces with over 50 employees.
Greater protections for gig economy workers, building on recent court rulings.
Expanded parental leave provisions, including paid leave for carers.

While these proposals signal a strong commitment to workers’ rights, their implementation faces challenges. Some employers and political opponents argue that the changes could harm business competitiveness.

Delivering on Promises

The Labour government has made progress, but significant gaps remain. Trade unions welcomed the repeal of laws that restricted industrial action.

However, delays in implementing parts of the Employment Act have caused frustration.

Workers in the gig economy have seen incremental improvements. Recent court decisions, such as the Uber ruling, have set important precedents.

Yet, unions argue that legislative backing is needed to secure long-term change.

Trade Union Activity

2024 also witnessed increased union activity. The cost-of-living crisis and high inflation led to widespread industrial action.

Strikes were held in key sectors, including health, education, and transport. Unions played a critical role in negotiating improved pay deals and working conditions.

Solidarity supported the strikes, standing with workers in their fight for fair pay and conditions.

The union’s commitment to advocacy reinforced the importance of collective action in achieving tangible results for members.

The government’s pledge to strengthen collective bargaining has seen mixed results.

The new requirement for mandatory negotiations in large workplaces is a step forward.

But unions have called for more robust enforcement mechanisms.

Solidarity Union: Punching Above Its Weight

Solidarity, though a smaller union, has made a significant impact in campaigning for workers’ rights and providing representation at meetings for its members.

The union’s Technical Advantage Group has been utilising AI to expand into videos and assist with research this year.

This innovative approach has enhanced its ability to advocate for members effectively. AI will remain a key area of development in the coming year.

Solidarity has also built alliances with other groups to promote specific campaigns. Most recently, the union partnered with the Facebook group “Great UK Products You Can Buy” to promote its “Buy British at Xmas” campaign.

Strengthening such partnerships will be a priority in the next year, helping to amplify its message and achieve greater results for workers.

Solidarity was also pleased to see legislation on the fair allocation of tips, which it and other unions had campaigned for.

This important change ensures that workers in sectors like hospitality receive the tips they earn, promoting fairness and transparency.

Looking Ahead

The Labour government’s first year has laid important groundwork for change.

The Employment Act and related measures demonstrate a clear intent to prioritise workers’ rights.

However, the road ahead remains complex. Balancing the needs of businesses and workers will require careful navigation.

Unions and workers must remain vigilant. Continued advocacy is essential to ensure the government delivers on its promises.

The next year will be crucial in determining whether 2024 marks a true turning point for employment law and rights for workers in the UK.

Patrick Harrington
General Secretary
Solidarity Trade Union

More Holes Than Swiss Cheese: Unions Critical of Labour’s Employment Rights Bill

Advertisements

741 words, 4 minutes read time.

The new government has made headlines with its Employment Rights Bill, heralded as “the biggest upgrade to workers’ rights in a generation.” However, as the ink dries on the Bill, trade unions have voiced strong criticisms, claiming it has “more holes than Swiss cheese.” While the Bill introduces some significant reforms, unions argue it falls short in critical areas, leaving workers vulnerable to exploitation. In this “deep dive” we look at the pros and cons of the Bill and reactions to it.

Key Gains in the Bill

The Employment Rights Bill outlines several notable advancements for workers:

– Day One Rights: Key rights, including protection from unfair dismissal and access to sick pay and unpaid parental leave, will now be effective from the first day of employment.

– Sick Pay Revisions: Statutory Sick Pay (SSP) will begin on the first day of absence rather than the fourth, and those earning below the Lower Earnings Limit will also be eligible.

– Stronger Protections for Parents: Enhanced maternity protections will prevent dismissals of new mothers within six months of their return to work, and paternity rights have been expanded for fathers and eligible partners.

– Flexible Working Requests: The Bill aims to make flexible working the default, with refusals only permitted under “reasonable” circumstances.

– Ending Zero-Hours Contracts: Workers on zero-hours and low-hours contracts will have the right to move to a contract reflecting their regular hours.

– Industrial Relations Reforms: The repeal of minimum service levels and restrictions on strike actions are positive moves, alongside the establishment of a Fair Work Agency to enforce employment rights.

While these measures represent significant progress, unions are quick to highlight the gaps and limitations that still allow for employer exploitation.

What’s Missing?

Despite the promising reforms, key issues remain unaddressed:

– No Ban on Zero-Hours Contracts: The Bill does not outright ban zero-hours contracts or the practice of fire-and-rehire, which leaves workers vulnerable to job insecurity.

– Limited Flexible Working Rights Unions are concerned that the provisions for flexible working remain too easily circumvented by employers.

– Lack of Comprehensive Worker Classification The Bill postpones the creation of a single status of worker, which would ensure that all workers receive full employment rights.

– No Right to Disconnect The absence of a ‘right to switch off’ means employees may still face pressure to engage outside of working hours.

– Delayed Implementation: Many of the Bill’s provisions won’t take effect until 2026, raising concerns about the timeliness of these crucial reforms.

Union Reactions

Trade union leaders have not held back in their critiques. Unite’s General Secretary, Sharon Graham, characterized the Bill as a significant step forward but cautioned that it “still ties itself up in knots trying to avoid what was promised.” She pointed out that failure to ban fire-and-rehire practices and zero-hours contracts will allow employers to exploit the loopholes that remain.

Daniel Kebede, General Secretary of the National Education Union, lamented the limited grounds for refusing flexible working requests, warning that this could lead to increased disputes in workplaces.

Christina McAnea General Secretary of Unison, welcomed provisions for care workers but emphasized the need for immediate action to ensure fair pay for all workers in the sector.

Paul Nowak, TUC General Secretary, called for swift implementation of the reforms, urging that the focus should be on making work pay for all.

Mick Lynch, RMT General Secretary, noted the positive steps toward repealing anti-union laws, while Mick Whelan of Aslef labelled the Bill as a vital first step in advancing workers’ rights.

Adding to this chorus, Pat Harrington of the Solidarity Union echoed the sentiments of Lynch and Whelan, asserting that while the Bill has its shortcomings, it is part of a broader process that will gradually improve the position of working people. Harrington emphasized the importance of continued engagement with the Labour government to push for a progressive agenda, suggesting that union efforts could help steer future reforms toward greater worker protections.

Conclusion

While the Employment Rights Bill does introduce some long-awaited reforms, trade unions remain deeply concerned about its many gaps. As Sharon Graham succinctly put it, the Bill leaves “more holes than Swiss cheese” in protections for workers. The coming months will be crucial as unions continue to advocate for stronger rights and push for the necessary changes to ensure that all workers can truly benefit from the promised reforms. The challenge now lies in holding the government accountable to its commitments and ensuring that the legislation translates into real, tangible benefits for all workers.

By Maria Camara

Union News 9th of June 2024

Advertisements

Subscribe to the Union News YouTube channel here

1,272 words, 7 minutes read time.

In this week’s Union News, we celebrate a significant victory for Welsh hospital doctors as the British Medical Association (BMA) secures improved pay terms following strike action. Junior doctors, specialist doctors, and consultants will receive substantial pay increases, marking a crucial step towards pay restoration. Meanwhile, the Derby Silk Mill Festival commemorates Britain’s first organized industrial workers’ struggle from 1833-34, reminding us of the enduring legacy of union solidarity and resilience.

Additionally, the Public and Commercial Services (PCS) union demands urgent government action to address the UK’s prison overcrowding crisis and prevent staff burnout, highlighting the dire need for investment in the prison service. The National Education Union (NEU) has unveiled a bold manifesto ahead of the General Election, calling for major reforms in education funding, child poverty, exam systems, and teacher recruitment to prioritize children’s well-being and support educators.

Reporting is by Pat Harrington and music is by Tim Bragg.

BMA Secures Improved Pay Offer for Welsh Hospital Doctors After Strike Action

In a significant victory for medical professionals, the British Medical Association (BMA) has successfully negotiated improved pay terms for doctors working in secondary care across Wales. Following two months of intense negotiations and 10 days of strike action, the BMA has secured pay offers that benefit junior doctors, specialist doctors (SAS), and consultants.

Key Points:

Junior Doctors: A 12.4% backdated pay rise for the 2023-24 financial year, with the increase applicable from April 2023.
Consultants: A revised pay scale featuring better starting pay and an additional pay rise of up to 10.1%.
SAS Doctors: New contracts with pay increases ranging from 6.1% to 9.2%, along with an additional uplift for those on closed contracts.

The BMA’s Welsh Junior Doctors Committee co-chairs, Dr. Oba Babs Osibodu and Dr. Peter Fahey, expressed satisfaction with the offer, emphasizing that it sets the stage for pay restoration. Dr. Stephen Kelly, chair of BMA Cymru Wales’ Consultants committee, welcomed the improvements, recognizing the dedication of senior doctors.

However, the Royal College of Nursing Wales criticized the government’s handling of nursing staff salaries. Executive director Helen Whyley highlighted the frustration felt by nursing staff, who continue to wait for fair pay.

Welsh First Minister Vaughan Gething and Health Secretary Eluned Morgan acknowledged the constructive nature of the talks, thanking the BMA’s negotiating teams and NHS Employers.

The BMA remains committed to advocating for fair pay across the healthcare sector, urging ministers to address nursing staff salaries promptly.

“Remember the Past, Fight for Your Future”: Derby’s Historic Silk Mill Struggle Resonates Today

The Derby Silk Mill Festival was held on June 8 2024. This lively event commemorates Britain’s first organized struggle of industrial workers, which took place during 1833-34. The festival includes a march, rally, and a People’s Festival with trade union and community campaign stalls, live bands, and activities for kids.

The annual Festival serves as a poignant reminder of the year-long battle fought by silk mill workers in the Derwent Valley during 1833-34. These workers faced oppressive owners and managers who exploited their labour through spurious pay cuts and denied them trade union rights under the threat of instant dismissal.

The Struggle:

Lockout and Resistance: The silk mill lockout was a bitter and sustained conflict. Workers rallied against unfair treatment, and their struggle is commemorated not only through the festival but also by a mural on the Silk Mill pub, adjacent to the now-transformed Mill (Derby’s Museum of Making).
Union Solidarity: When Mr. Frost, a silk manufacturer, dismissed a worker for refusing a fine related to “shoddy work,” all union members walked out. The bosses responded with a lockout, attempting to break the trade union.
Regional General Strike: The dispute quickly spread to other mills in the Derwent Valley, becoming a Derby-centric general strike. Workers demanded fair treatment and the fruits of their own industry.
Repression and Resilience: Despite repression from ruling classes, including military, police, courts, and more, solidarity persisted. The struggle symbolized a fight for workplace strength.
Legacy: Although workers returned to their jobs in 1834 due to poverty and violence, this pivotal event led to the formation of the Grand National Consolidated Trade Union, shaping today’s trade union movement.

As we remember this historic struggle, let it inspire us to continue fighting for workers’ rights and justice in our own time.

Prison Crisis: PCS Union Demands Urgent Action to Alleviate Overcrowding and Staff Burnout

The Public and Commercial Services (PCS) union has issued a stark call to the new government, urging immediate investment in the UK’s prison service. The goal? To tackle overcrowding and prevent staff burnout.

Key Points:

Staff Pressure: PCS members in Offender Management Units (OMUs) within prisons face immense pressure to take on additional work, all in an effort to free up cell space. Reports indicate that staff are at breaking point, grappling with burnout, stress, and exhaustion.
Unsustainable Conditions: The union emphasizes that the strain on hardworking OMU members is unsustainable and could signal a failure in the HMPPS (Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service) duty of care.
Prison Population Crisis: The UK currently boasts the highest prison population per capita in Western Europe, with numbers projected to reach 106,300 by March 2027. Despite this, successive governments have failed to address the issue adequately.
Private Prisons and Under-Investment: While a multi-million-pound prison building program continues, profit-driven private companies manage it. Simultaneously, the existing public prison infrastructure suffers from sustained under-investment.
Police Cell Rentals: Operation Safeguard involves renting police cells due to overcrowding, and reports suggest that police in England and Wales are advised to make fewer arrests due to cell shortages.
PCS Stands Firm: The PCS supports senior HMPPS leaders who refuse to breach safe operational capacity levels. Overcrowded prisons pose risks to staff, prisoners, and the public.
Parliamentary Action Needed: The Sentencing Bill’s delay necessitates urgent parliamentary attention to sentencing policy, non-custodial alternatives, and broader investment in public services.

PCS General Secretary’s Stance: Fran Heathcote asserts that staff burnout, unsafe conditions, and the impact on work-life balance are unacceptable risks.

As the crisis persists, the PCS remains committed to advocating for change and opposing unsustainable practices in the prison system.

and finally, NEU Unveils Bold Education Manifesto Ahead of General Election

The National Education Union (NEU) has launched a powerful manifesto for education, demanding urgent action from the next government. With ten key policy areas in focus, the NEU aims to reshape the education landscape and prioritize children’s well-being.

Key Proposals:

Reverse Funding Cuts: Schools, colleges, and nurseries must receive increased funding, reaching five percent of GDP.
Tackle Child Poverty: Remove the two-child benefit cap and ensure free, nutritious school lunches for all pupils.
Inclusive Curriculum: Embed anti-racism and provide broad subject access, including arts and PE.
Exam Overhaul: Abandon primary school tests and transform 14-19 assessments to combat the exam factory culture.
Special Needs Support: Swift, bureaucracy-free assistance for students with special needs.
Teacher Recruitment: Competitive pay to fill soaring vacancies.
Ofsted Replacement: Replace Ofsted with a collaborative, supportive system focused on advice and feedback.
Workload Management: Keep educators in the profession by addressing unmanageable workloads.
Professional Development Time: Allocate non-teaching time for collaboration and planning, especially for early career teachers.
Social Media Regulation: Tighter controls to protect children online.

The NEU’s manifesto sets the stage for a critical General Election. The education system faces urgent challenges, from underfunding to child poverty. Teachers and parents understand the impact on learning, and the NEU refuses to accept anything less than serious commitments from major parties. Let education take centre stage!

Picture Credit
Silk Mill Strike PlaqueEamon Curry from Derby, England, CC BY 2.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0, via Wikimedia Commons