Opinion: The Queen’s (Tone-deaf) Speech and the absence of an Employment Bil
The Queen addressed the nation on the 11th of May, highlighting the priorities of the Government during the annual State Opening, and signifying a new Parliamentary year. Whilst there are serious concerns to be found littered throughout the Tory script ascribed to the Queen, I will discuss an issue which has been commonly thrown to the sidelines before, during, and now supposedly after the pandemic: employment law and the neglect of workers rights.
Image: Parliamentary copyright/Roger Harris
Alongside the hastened readings of the Police, Crime and Sentencing Bill (#KillTheBill) through both Houses and a new discriminatory requirement to show ID at the polls (after a grand total of 6 fraud convictions), there is also an emphasis on heightened refusal of asylum seekers and mass deportation. If there is one thing the pandemic has exposed, it is the institutional cronyism and bourgeois ignorance from the top, resulting in policy that targets minorities throughout Britain. It is this same social naivete that is symbolised through a lack of statutory framework that advocates for workers rights and protections.
This comes as a shock to many, as ‘fire and rehire’ was at the height of discussion throughout 2020, with Johnson himself declaring the practice as ‘unethical’ and pledging to mention it during the speech just gone. British Airways, Centrica, ESS and Wetherspoons are just a few companies that dismissed workers to avoid paying wages, despite workers being unable to trade their labour elsewhere and maintain an income. As Labour’s Dr Whitehead MP expressed in a Parliamentary debate over the issue, “fire and rehire tactics are not part of a negotiating tactic: they are a gun to the head of every worker in the organisation”.
British Gas is a household name, making profits of over £80m during the year of the pandemic. Despite this, the company tried to impose new contractual terms which increased working hours without increasing pay; most repair workers reluctantly signed these new terms, and any rejection of the contract resulted in job loss.
Many loyal employees who had worked for British Gas for decades sadly left their posts, which mostly demonstrates the heartlessness stemming from maintaining profits in our current economy. British Gas also lost over 150,000 customers in 2020 due to a hike in prices and a decrease in on-call staff to conduct repairs; quite a shot to one's own foot.
A similar issue has arisen from Amazon’s ‘Flex’ drivers contracts, where a recent study conducted by Organise has signified that 82% of 700 UK drivers felt ‘forced’ to drive dangerously under restrictive terms, and 92% say they are never able to take a break while on the road. This highlights the immense pressure that comes with working in the gig economy, observed during the recent strikes of Deliveroo drivers due to inhumane pay (£2 per hour) and current mounting pressure from social workers due to no stable timetable or action plan at the forefront.
The biggest disappointment above all else is the empty promises delivered in the Queen’s Speech from2019. There were hopes that the pressure on establishing a statutory framework to support vulnerable workers would be maintained, especially during the employment crisis experienced throughout the past year. Alas, many prospective aims have been cast aside in favour of the Brexit agenda and the reining-in of the freedom to protest. The 2019 State Opening speech promised predictable and safe contracts, redundancy protections for pregnant families and neonatal carers, and flexible work as the default for workers who need it. Yet, only two years later, with little implementation, The Queen and her government deem these issues to be unimportant.
It appears as though legal claims on the matter will now go through the judicial process resulting in hefty legal fees, unsurmounted time commitments, and psychological pressure for unemployed or vulnerable workers. The recent Supreme Court finding of Uber v Aslam [2021] demonstrates the unrelenting force of large corporations with strong legal teams; Uber appealed against the original tribunal judgement three times, all to argue against paying Uber drivers a living wage. Corporations function on the sole basis of capitalist gain, and therefore, substantive policy and legislation is required to keep them in check. It is the neglect of the Conservative government, solely interested in lining their own pockets, that has consigned the working classes to the backbench on policy concerns, yet again. In a time of questionable Labour leadership, it is now the responsibility of workers to take strike action alongside their trade unions, like GMB and SWU, and it is the job of Andy McDonald MP and Imran Hussain MP (shadow employment ministers) to stand in solidarity with the cause. Healthy opposition comes about from the public activist cause as well as governmental concern, and as Starmer is still in the learning stage of his leadership, we ought to show him and his fresh-faced cabinet what we’re talking about.