Government’s New Strike Breakers Get to Work

The New Strike BreakersHow Firms Are Using the New Anti-Union Agency Laws

Some firms have ruled out using agency workers to break strikes – but others aren’t so discerning, Josiah Mortimer reports

Employers are testing the Government’s new law allowing agency workers to be brought in to break strikes. 

A string of reports have now emerged since then Business Secretary Grant Shapps changed the long-standing ban on the use of agency staff to cover striking workers last July. 

Eleven trade unions, coordinated by the TUC and represented by Thompsons Solicitors LLP, began legal proceedings in September against the move.

They argue the regulations are unlawful as Shapps failed to consult unions, as required by the Employment Agencies Act 1973, and that they violate “fundamental trade union rights” protected by Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights. 

The TUC has warned these new laws will worsen industrial disputes, undermine the fundamental right to strike and could endanger public safety if agency staff are required to fill safety critical roles but haven’t been fully trained. 

The change was heavily criticised by unions, agency employers, and parliamentarians, with the Recruitment and Employment Confederation (REC), which represents suppliers of agency workers, describing the proposals as “unworkable”.

But some employers have jumped at the chance to make use of the legal change. 

Fire chiefs in Hertfordshire, for instance, were accused of offering agency firefighters £1,000 per shift to break strikes as part of a ‘resilience fire cover’ scheme just last week. 

Following an 88% yes vote for strike action, the Fire Brigades Union has given the Government and employers until 9 February to make a “decent” pay offer.

The FBU says that if brigades have the money to pay huge sums to agency staff, they should give staff a pay rise.

FBU General Secretary Matt Wrack told the Mirror: “What is being reported about Hertfordshire is likely to be the tip of the iceberg. All over the country, fire and rescue services will be putting in place contingency arrangements – very often at great expense. This is an insult to firefighters who are struggling after more than a decade of falling pay. It also represents a terrible use of public money.”

It is one of several examples of firms appearing to splash out on expensive agency staff to avert calls for pay rises. 

University College London has faced a string of strikes from outsourced security guards. Before one strike last year, UCL reportedly brought in agency workers that the union members were then meant to train up to cover them when they walked out. 

One union source told Byline Times that it did not work: “It ended up being quite a sh*t show for UCL, with a skeleton crew of untrained agency workers unable to do basic things like turn off fire alarms or do building checks.” When approached by Byline Times ahead of the subsequent 1 February strike, UCL confirmed it would not be using agency security staff again to replace the strikers. 

Last November, door-staff firm Protective Security Group Ltd worker were, according to the Unite union, brought in to break a pay strike by Harrods’ security guards and CCTV operators. Unite chose to “name and shame” the firm – though the contractor said they did not know they had been brought in to break the strike over pay at the high-end shopping spot. Neither company broke the law, but Unite said Harrods had become “one of the first employers in the country to use” the new anti-union law. 

Unite said it understood that protective security workers brought into work at Harrods during the strikes were not told there was industrial action taking place and were uncomfortable crossing a picket line. 

And in December, GMB, the energy union, announced it was also preparing to name and shame companies who are providing “strike-breakers” in the midst of a dispute at Fawley oil refinery near Southampton.

The union was informed that agency workers have been retained on full pay until strike action recommenced, following a temporary suspension of action from GMB and sister union Unite.

Bryan Hulley, GMB regional organiser said at the time: “Having previously made overtures to us saying that they would meet us if we agreed to suspend the action, the response this time was that they would not meet us as ‘there is nothing to discuss.” It suggests the firm’s use of agency workers to break the streak had – in the eyes of the employer – removed the incentive or need to negotiate. 

Hulley added that agency workers were “retained on full pay even when they were sitting at home waiting for the strike to restart”. “It would appear that Exxon are throwing money at agencies to break the strike rather than give our members a single penny,” he said. 

Royal Mail has also been accused of using “every possible means” to try and defeat the Communications Workers’ Union strikes over pay and conditions. In December, Novara Media reported that Royal Mail was advertising strike-cover shifts, to be completed in Royal Mail vehicles, on Ryde, a “last-mile” delivery business backed by venture capitalists. “The in-app shift description on Ryde makes no mention of the fact that the available shifts are to break a strike by postal workers,” the site reported. 

However, Linda Taafe, secretary of the National Shop Stewards Network of union reps, said the use of agency workers to break strikes did not yet appear to be widespread.

“It’s like the [forthcoming] minimum service levels law – I can’t see employers like headteachers telling their teachers not to go on strike. Non-implementation might be the way forward,” she told Byline Times. 

Before the agency workers law had even changed, a London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine subcontractor was accused of making use of agency workers to cover shifts on strike days by porters, cleaners and security staff in the IWGB union last summer. At the time, it was in theory a criminal offence, under Regulation 7 of the Conduct of Employment Agencies and Employment Business Regulations 2003. 

The TUC has reported the UK Government to the UN workers’ rights watchdog, the International Labour Organisation, over the spate of anti-union and anti-worker legislation and proposals, including the government’s agency worker regulations, which it says are in breach of international law.  

TUC affiliated unions UNISON and NASUWT are also launching separate individual legal cases against the government’s agency worker regulations.