That is not a matter that can be proved. Clearly, those of us who know about employer relations in the industry knew that Bob Crow was a widely respected, sensible and realistic trade union negotiator. The problem was that he was very tough—he drove a tough bargain on behalf of this members. Let us not forget, when we debate manifesto commitments and ballot thresholds, that the balance of power at the workplace, setting aside London and the RMT, is massively loaded in favour of the employer. Trade unions throughout their history have needed to work very hard and make big sacrifices to prosecute their case and get any benefits from taking industrial action. That is the kind of point that the noble Lord, Lord Monks, made—it is about getting some kind of balance. I understand the manifesto commitment and I understand where the Government are coming from, but it is balance that we are looking for in this debate. It is a question of what seems to be fair and reasonable, and the two clauses, both the 50% and 40%, seem a bridge too far.
Trade Union Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Sawyer
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 8 February 2016.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Trade Union Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
768 c2072 Session
2015-16Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2016-02-10 16:58:07 +0000
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2016-02-08/16020824000148
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2016-02-08/16020824000148
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2016-02-08/16020824000148