Government-Union Clash In Britain

Press, Volume XCVI, Issue 28425, 4 November 1957, Page 11

Government-Union Clash In Britain

(N.Z. Press Association—Copyright)

(Rec. 11 p.m.) LONDON, November 2. British Labour leaders kept up their attack today on the Government’s veto of an agreed pay rise for health officers, a move seen by observers as the first shot in a wages war.

The Labour Party secretary, Mr Morgan Phillips, said at Nottingham that the Minister of Health’s rejection was “an open declaration of war on the unions.”

The National Executive of the Amalgamated Union of Foundry Workers called on the Trades Union Congress, the Labour Party and the Confederation of Engineering and Shipbuilding Unions to co-ordinate union resistance to the government’s “pay squeeze” policy.

This policy was expounded in Parliament this week when the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr Thorneycroft. said a general pay rise would be a disaster and called on wage tribunals to keep in mind (he general economic situation when considering wage claims. The Foundry Workers’ Union said the Minister’s veto of a 3 per cent, raise for health officers was a complete negation of democracy which destroyed the whole basis of collective bargaining.

Yesterday the British Employers’ Confederation estimated that a 40-hour week as proposed in British industry would add £lOOO million to the national wages bill. The federation warned that manufacturing costs would go up by more than 12 per cent. Britain would be priced out ol overseas markets to a substantial extent.

Leaders of 7,500.000 British workers are seeking higher wages and shorter working hours which have been estimated to cost £450 million annually. Minister’s Announcement The Minister of Health (Mr Derek Walker-Smith) announced the rejection of a proposed 3 per cent, rise for health officers earning up to £l2OO a year. The Whitley Council, a joint management and staff body agieed on th? rise last month, but the Minister said he had refused to accept it in view of the Government's determination to check the “inflationary spiral of wages and prices.”

The Ministry had earlier accepted a 5 per cent, rise for officers earning more than £l2OO a year.

Mr Walker-Smith explained the rejection of the lower-paid workers’ claim by saying they had received a 3 per cent, increase fairly recently. A spokesman for one of the unions involved, the National and Local Government Officers’ Association, said: “It will not be taken lying down. It is an incitement to the staffs to take direct action. "The Minister’s action is a direct interference with the established negotiating machinery. - ’ “Angels Would Strike” A spokesman for the National Union of Public Employees said: “In the face of this, angels would be incited to go on strike.” Later today, union chiefs presented a claim for an extra 25s a week for 35.000 London busmen. London Transport chiefs met the union leaders and agreed to consider the claim, which would cost an extra £4.000.000 a year. A summary of the claims lodged or pending and their estimated annual cost to employers is: Engineering and shipbuilding workers: A 40-hour week for 3,000.000 men (annual cost

£160.000.000). Distributive workers: Extra £1 a week for 1.750.000 workers £90.000.000) Building workers: Pay rise and 40-hour week for 1,000.000 men ( £90.000.000). Railwaymen: Wage increases and a 40-hour week for 650.009 men ( £40.000.000). Clothing workers: Shorter week and pay rise for 500,000 ( £30.000.000). Miners: A 35-hour underground and 40-hour surface week for 700.000 miners (£11.000.000).