The right to join a trade union and the right to collective bargaining are basic, human rights recognised by the UN International Labour Organisation.
Yet many well-known multi-national companies do NOT recognise trade unions, and do not negotiate with trade unions on pay and working conditions.
The International and European Trade Union Confederations (ITUC and ETUC) are joining forces for Human Rights Day (December 10) to name and shame two multi-national brands and household names that refuse to negotiate with trade unions.
The ITUC & ETUC today name and shame
Samsung - has a no-union policy in its factories and workplaces, and intervenes to prevent the formation of unions at its suppliers. Samsung accumulates billions in profits at the expense of its workers. It has a well‐documented history of labour abuses in its supply chain – from union busting, poverty wages, insecure and unsafe work, to forced overtime, informal work and modern slavery. Workers are working in such distressed circumstances that in some countries the company has had to remodel its dormitories to prevent employees from committing suicide. It is time for the Giant Tech to ‘End Corporate Greed’ and guarantee a fair living wage and trade union participation and representation for its workers.
McDonald’s – the fast food giant does not bargain with a trade union over working conditions for workers in the UK – but it does in Denmark, France and Germany. In Denmark and Germany the collective agreements cover franchised stores as well as well as McDonald’s own corporate stores.
With the European Commission, International Monetary Fund, and other institutions increasingly recognising the need for wage increases to drive economic growth, and tackle inequality, the right to collective bargain is vital not only for working people, but for the economy and social justice.
“There should be no place in a modern economy for companies that do not negotiate with trade unions” said Luca Visentini, General Secretary of the ETUC. “Collective bargaining between employers and trade unions is the best way to get sensible pay rises that benefit workers, company productivity and the economy as a whole.”
“Samsung and McDonald’s like to promote themselves as modern, family-friendly brands, but their attitude to trade unions is strictly 19th century” said Sharan Burrow, General Secretary of the ITUC. “We will not rest until workers get a fair deal in these companies.”
Unite the Resistance presents a 'Solidarity Social with Strikers' on Tuesday 12 December, 6.30 to 9.30pm at The King's Arms, 11 Bloom St, Salford M3 6AN.
Join strikers, Trade Unionists and activists for an evening of solidarity. Hear the latest from the strikes at Mears Housing, First Buses, NW Arriva Buses, the DVSA & more. Entry £5-£15 (free entry for strikers).
Across the world, the rumblings of rebellion against corrupt global corporations has begun, and it’s being lead primarily by young and angry fast-food workers. The 4th of September 2017 will be remembered as the day British McDonald’s workers joined this rebellion, as members at two stores took strike action for the first time in British history. The UK based strike was a part of a larger international day of action, which saw demonstrations and strikes across nearly every continent in the world. Over thirty McDonald’s workers took part in the strike action from stores in Crayford, South East London, and Cambridge.
The strikers were making four demands; a real living wage of £10 per hour, an end to zero–hour contracts, an end to McDonald’s culture of fear and a union in the workplace. Erik Haiczinger, a migrant worker at the Cambridge store explained why he decided to join the Bakers, Food and Allied Workers union and go on strike:
"I’ve worked full time at McDonald’s for almost a year at £7.50 per hour. I rent one room in a house, and after paying rent for that room, I have hardly enough money left to buy food or other necessities. I had needed new shoes for over ten months before I was finally able to get a pair for myself. We can’t survive like this, as prices continue to rise in the UK and our pay stay slow.
McDonald's workers in the UK face low pay, especially between the ages of 17 to 24 when they earn between £2 to £3 less than their older colleagues. There are countless stories of abuse and bullying from managers, including sexual and physical assaults. They have no entitlements to basic rights like sick or maternity pay.
McDonald's is largest employer in the world. In the UK alone, the multibillion dollar company have over 100,000 employees. They are a company who consistently force labour conditions low and pay the bare minimum to workers. Fast food workers across the world are now rejecting these conditions, and recognize that to take on such a massive company, it’s essential that workers team up internationally to fight back. On the picket lines in Britain, strikers were joined by representatives from the American fight for 15, Unite New Zealand and Livs in Sweden. Jonathan Johansson, a Swedish trade unionist from the Livs union, travelled to the UK to play a part in the historic day. Reflecting on the day, Jonathan commented “It seems absurd to me that people in the fifth largest economy in the world are living in poverty, in a position where they cannot even afford the basics like shoes, rent or in some cases food. The very minimum needed to live.”
The UK strike became known as ‘McStrike’, a name which spread quickly through British social media, at one point the hashtag trended at number two on Twitter. It was supported by the British left, including the leader of the Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn. McStrike was called the first Corbynite strike by British media, a title handed out after strikers openly declared their support for Corbyn and fought for the £10 per hour wage, which was a main point in the 2017 Labour manifesto.
But what really made McStrike Corbynite in nature was the hunger the strikers showed for real change, for all workers in the UK.
Union rights and workers' rights have been steadily attacked and dismantled in the UK since 1979, by both the Conservative and New Labour governments. Use of food banks has increased from 41,000 in 2010 to 1.2 million in 2016. In January 2017, the Red Cross warned that the National Health Service in the UK was facing a humanitarian crisis. As inflation rises, wages in the UK have remained the same for seven years, the number of homeless continues to rise and trade unions show record low membership. It was into this world that chants of “Oh Jeremy Corbyn” were born, and hope for workers in the UK was revived under the leadership of an MP who has spent his career fighting for the many, not the few. The hope inspired by Corbyn lit a fire in the bellies of workers who were previously told they were hopeless and impossible to organize.
Do not be mistaken; McStrike UK is not just a fight against a bad employer, it is a war being waged by workers who are angry that they never had the same rights as their parents, rights which were fought for by workers across the globe in the last century. Rights which you in Sweden may still hold on to today, but your grip on those rights is slipping, as your left-wing politics slowly moves to the centre, much like ours did in the UK under Blair. McStrike is our fight back, it is our fight to reclaim the rights and lives that were taken from us by the neoliberal agenda of our politicians. The people of the UK are angry, and we are rising. But we cannot fight alone. Our fight is your fight, as your fight is ours. Defend your rights here, but know it is not enough to just defend. We must always be ready to fight for something better, to leave a legacy in our wake which ensures that all workers who come after us have better lives, better jobs and the opportunity to flourish. Companies like McDonald’s cannot be allowed to continue their ill treatment and abuse of workers. Our governments cannot be allowed to let them continue, and it is our jobs as the workers to stand up together. We can rise, and create a better future, but only together.
Thanks to Shen Batmaz, Erik Haizcinger and Jonathan Johansson for their contributions to this piece.
In terms of money generated for the UK economy, the food and drink sector contributes nearly as much as the automotive and aerospace sectors put together and directly employs around 400,000 people! But for too long the sector, and more importantly the people that work within it, have not got the recognition they deserve. As a result, for the most part, food workers have been woefully underpaid and under-protected. Quite simply this situation is unacceptable and quite ridiculous when you think that without these workers there would be no food on our plates.
I’m therefore really happy to report back on a landmark new deal that we have helped secure for the people working at Warburtons. Warburtons, the largest bakery brand in the UK, has been around for over 140 years. But to ensure it is around for even longer, it recognised that it needed to modernise its terms and conditions - to make the business more flexible so that it was better able to meet the changing needs of its customers.
For our members, this represented a golden opportunity to demonstrate the value of food workers and to change the narrative of what it means to work in the UK food industry. It was also a brilliant example of working with a business that is prepared to not only listen to its people, but to also respond to their concerns.
After 3 years, the BFAWU, through the tireless work of our branch secretaries, has helped to secure a deal we can all be proud of – an increase in the base hourly rate, a simplification of how Warburtons’ people are paid and more stable shift patterns so that they can better plan their lives. The new terms and conditions will also give more variety to Warburtons’ workers as well as give them opportunities to learn new skills.
In fact, we thought the agreed deal was so good that we took the unprecedented decision to “very strongly recommend” it to our members before it went to the ballot. We were therefore delighted that, in November 2017, our members voted in favour of the proposals.
I’m so proud about what we’ve achieved, and would like to thank our branch secretaries for their hard work and our members for their patience throughout this process. I would also like to thank Warburtons’ management team for working with us to secure this historic deal. By putting its people at the heart of the business, Warburtons is leading the way and is showing the food and drinks industry how things should be done. We hope others follow Warburtons’ brilliant example.
Best thing since sliced bread? Perhaps not, but striking a deal that provides increased job security and improvements to people’s lives certainly comes close!
Ian Hodson (National President)
It's day three of our five-part series of blogs and statements from young BFAWU members in the food industry, in relation to Trade Unionism and what it means to them. Today, we have Callum Clapham, a twenty-year old who works for Greggs in Yorkshire. He says:
“We are often faced with the misconception that Unions are militant organisations, with an objective of corporate demise. This is may be true for some factions of the Trade Union Movement, but it's important to remember that it's a broad church, which covers millions of people in various industries and sectors. Trade unionism cannot be simply bottled up and labelled, in terms of explaining the essence of trade unionism. The Movement is dominated by issues of identity and ideology. I solve this issue myself by looking back at where the movement began.
The Industrial Revolution had decayed the artisanal economy and in its place, rose huge factories, followed closely by the expansion of trade and transport. These factories were inhabited by tens of thousands of workers, many of whom came from the country; forced from their farm-land homes, thanks to enclosure laws. These factories were ruled by unscrupulous bosses who failed to deliver safe working conditions and adequate rights for their workers. After years of exploitation, these workers grew restless and decided to organise and form Unions. These Unions would eventually fight employers to gain improved pay and working conditions.
Unions were forged out of desperation, with the purpose of bettering workers’ lives. Unions began as and are now still, the bastion of workers’ rights; the avengers of the working world. I joined a Trade Union to be a part of this. However, the Movement doesn’t just apply to the industrial revolution. I’ve been asked: “are Trade Unions still relevant?”, with the answer being "yes, they are". Though the movement hasn’t exactly succeeded insofar as fully capturing the youth, efforts are being made to rectify this. The McStrike Campaign that we’ve seen recently, has seen a small number of workers take on McDonald’s (a corporate heavyweight), and win concessions on zero-hours contracts. It highlights the power that workers have as a collective. Even if you’re a young worker or only working part-time, Unions are relevant to you. You don’t get paid to be abused at work and you don’t have to withstand it. This is the essence of why I became a Trade Union member; to help protect workers. It is often the case that workers don’t even know that they’re being mistreated in the workplace and it’s such an easy task to inform these workers of their rights, such as when they are legally entitled to a break, for example. Through being in a Union, I’ve helped employees tackle this issue, particularly with one employee who put forward a grievance with their employer, and had that grievance upheld.
So, if you’re someone who is being mistreated at work, know someone who is, or just wants to get involved in an international movement that seeks not just workplace justice, but justice in every aspect of society, then join a Union.”
In 21st Century Great Britain, exploitation and low pay is rife among young workers. Who is going to fight their corner other than Trade Unions? We must engage with young workers and not only make them aware that it doesn't have to be this way, but to ensure that Unions leave a legacy for future generations. The role of Trade Unions is just as important now, as it was in the 19th Century; not just in the workplace, but in society as a whole.
Continuing with our series of blogs and statements from young BFAWU members in the food industry in relation to Trade Unionism, we have Shannon Kerrigan, another young food worker from Scotland. This is what she has to say:
"Joining a Trade Union opens many doors, including training opportunities and the chance to see life from the perspective of others around you. Being a Trade Unionist is being someone who believes in fairness and equality, a better world and a happier working life for everyone. I've always had these values, but felt one person could not make a difference. Becoming a member of a Union simply gave me the tools to do something on both an individual and a collective level, which is where you really see results. It gave me the power to stand up for what I believe in and the confidence to go out into the community and try to help and learn from other people I never would have met otherwise. Since becoming a member, I have attended marches, demonstrations and Conferences. The words of the people who arrange and debate at these events has really stuck with me and has altered how I go about my daily life for the better."
Shannon is another example of how young workers in the food industry are starting to engage socially and politically, both inside and outside of the workplace, in order to make the case for a fairer, more equal society and how we can use our collective strength to achieve a positive change.
This week (commencing 13/11/17), the BFAWU are publishing a series of blogs and quotes from young workers in relation to being a BFAWU member and what modern day Trade Unionism means to them.
Today we have Claire Galloway, a food worker in Scotland and BFAWU member who says:
"I joined a Trade Union after being treated badly in a workplace. I wanted to learn more about workers rights. I believe knowledge is key and its through education we can empower people to stand up against discrimination and fight for better working conditions. Community work is an important part of Trade Unionism as its a chance to work with the most isolated, most vulnerable and stand together against the oppressors. This is why I continue to be involved and part of a trade union."
Young workers in the UK have become disenfranchised over the years, which has led to them slowly becoming active, both politically and in the workplace.
The BFAWU welcomes this and believes that the energy and drive of young people will fuel the Trade Union Movement of tomorrow.
We have received the below update from Trish Alderson of the WASPI campaign:
Congratulations to women reaching their SPA today, 6 November 2017. We've had a long journey, but because of our date of birth we didn't always reach milestones together. We're now 64yrs & 2-3months old. We were born between 6 August and 5 September 1953, 2 or 3 months after the Queen's coronation.
Women born in 1953 have their pension ages spread over 3 and half years. But the way we've been grouped together for our pensions means we came from 2 different academic years. At school the September babies were put into the year below the August babies and did everything a year later.
In 1964 or 1965, when we were either 10 or 11, we sat our 11 plus exams. Depending on the result, we went on to grammar school or secondary modern. We were able to leave school at 15 in 1968 or 1969, or stay on to take GCE ‘O’ levels in 1969 or 1970. School leaving age wasn't raised to 16 till September 1972.
In 1970 the voting age was lowered from 21 to 18. We were able to vote in our very first General Election in February 1974, when we were still 20. There was a Labor minority government so we had another trip to the ballot box in October 1974 when Wilson led Labor to a narrow victory. A month or so earlier we’d just got the ‘key of the door’ on our 21st Birthdays.
John Major was the PM in the year of the 1995 Pensions Act, when we turned 42. Those of us lucky enough to find out in 1995 that our pension age was going up had 18 years to accept that we'd not retire in 2013 on our 60th birthdays, but on 6 January 2017 when we'd be 63yrs & 4-5 months.
But, only 5 years before that, in January 2012, many of us received a DWP letter about the 2011 Act brought in by David Cameron’s government. It gave us another 10 months to wait and try to budget for. We were 58yrs & 4-5months. If we didn't know about the 1995 Act, that letter was only 19 or 20 months before our 60th birthday.
After it's been moved away from us twice, at last we're crossing the finishing line.
Thanks to Trish for the update and the BFAWU wishes the WASPI Campaign all the very best, in solidarity.
JENGbA (Joint Enterprise: Not Guilty by Association) is a grassroots campaign that was instrumental in helping The Supreme Court reach a landmark decision in February 2016 which acknowledged that Joint Enterprise had been misinterpreted by the courts for 32 years. This was a legal victory, vindication for all those who had campaigned that there was a serious problem with the law.
With this victory in mind we the now believe there are still serious issues that merit the full attention and support of Parliament. Hundreds of men, women and children are supported by JENGbA and we believe that rather than attempt to take each case independently to the Court of Appeal there should be an independent judicial inquiry. This is the only way to ensure that innocent people are not serving mandatory life sentences for crimes they did not commit. An inquiry of this sort would also uncover the magnitude of the flaws that JENGbA have been highlighting for many years and put balance and fairness back into the criminal justice system.
We intend to address a number of key issues in our relaunch in room 10 at the House of Commons on 15th November from 1pm-3pm.
Invitations have been sent to a cross party selection of MPs and members of the House of Lords and other interested parties. Many have already confirmed their attendance and interest in the topics of discussion that our panel will lead with.
Patrick Williams’s senior lecturer of criminology at Manchester Metropolitan University: Patrick will talk about the body of research on Joint Enterprise, racism and the gang narrative used by prosecutors.
Professor David Scott will discuss child lifers highlighting how we are one of the last remaining countries in Europe that has yet to outlaw life sentences for children. He will no doubt supply shocking statistics to the extent of this practice.
Matthew Stanbury Barrister at Garden Court Chambers Manchester- He will express the concerns that legal practitioner have in regard to the Court of Appeal and the difficulties faced by those appealing their convictions.
Lucy Powell MP will speak about her recent involvement with a case from Moss Side.
Simon Natas ITN Solicitor and JENGbA legal advisor he will speak about the reasons for relaunching the JENGbA campaign. (Please read Simon’s attached comment).
Adeel Khan was aged 15 when charged and later convicted of joint enterprise murder. He was not the perpetrator yet he was forced to serve his minimum tariff life sentence. Adeel will talk about how over a decade in prison for a murder he did not commit was not only harrowing but a pointless waste of his young life.
Comment from JENGbA lawyer Simon Natas
JENGbA was launched in 2010 with two broad aims:
1. To campaign for reform of the law of joint enterprise
2. To campaign for wrongful joint enterprise convictions to be overturned.
In 2016, the Supreme Court abolished the principal of parasitic accessorial liability, confirming that it had arisen as a result of a legal “wrong turn”.
The change in the law raised the possibility that many historic joint enterprise convictions would be quashed, but the Court of Appeal’s decision in Johnson has established such a high threshold for potential appellants that very few appeals are expected to succeed.
Having achieved success in its campaign to reform the law, but faced, at least for now, with the obstacle of Johnson, JENGbA may wish to consider how it builds on past successes and the campaigning momentum it has built up.
It is notable that in the years that it has spent campaigning on the issue of joint enterprise, JENGbA has become involved in other campaigns surrounding criminal justice, including the rights of prisoners, discriminatory policing and the unfairness of the mandatory life sentence. This is no accident – the issue of joint enterprise touches upon them all.
Following Jogee, JENGbA has continued to campaign on a range of criminal justice issues. However, it may be that JENGbA’s effectiveness as a campaigning organisation would now be enhanced if it gave itself a broader mission statement, i.e. a specific remit to campaign on issues across the criminal justice system (CJS).
These may include the following:
1. Reform of the homicide laws
3 tier homicide
In 2004, the Law Commission described the law of homicide as a “mess.” A wide-ranging consultation was launched which resulted in its 2006 report “Murder, Manslaughter and Infanticide” which recommended a three-tier structure of homicide. In broad terms, the mandatory life sentence would be reserved for cases in which there was an intent to kill. In cases where there was intent to cause GBH, but not to kill, there would be no mandatory life sentence. Had this reform been enacted, it is likely that many defendants convicted of murder as secondary parties would not have received life sentences.
The Law Commission’s recommendations were not introduced but a future government might be persuaded to do so. They retain widespread support within the legal profession and academia.
Schedule 21 CJA
JENGbA has already campaigned for reform of this provision. Obviously, if the Law Commission’s reforms were introduced, Schedule 21 would have to be amended or abolished, but it could be reformed before any comprehensive change to the homicide laws.
Indeterminate sentences for children
The UK is now more or less the only European country which imposes life sentences on children (let alone mandatory life sentences), but there has been hardly any public debate about this state of affairs, let alone any campaign to reform the law. https://www.crin.org/en/home/campaigns/inhuman-sentencing/problem/life-imprisonment/life-imprisonment-children-europe
2. Rights of Appellants
Open Justice Initiative
The Centre for Criminal Appeals has proposed a number of reforms which JENGbA already supports: http://www.criminalappeals.org.uk/open-justice/
Reform to the Criminal Appeal Act
In 2015, the Justice Select Committee (JSC) recommended that the Law Commission should consider a statutory change which would allow the Court of Appeal to quash a conviction where it had serious doubts about the safety of the conviction even without fresh evidence or fresh legal argument. This could result in more unsafe convictions being quashed and more convictions being referred by the Criminal Cases Review Commision (CCRC) to the Court of Appeal.
3. Race Discrimination in the Criminal Justice System (CJS)
The Lammy Review has already reported on very serious disparities in sentencing outcomes for BME defendants in the CJS: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/lammy-review-emerging-findings-published
The Centre for Crime and Justice Studies report (https://www.crimeandjustice.org.uk/publications/dangerous-associations-joint-enterprise-gangs-and-racism) argues that “Young black and minority ethnic people are disproportionately at the receiving end of a series of criminal justice practices, starting with police gang databases and concluding with disproportionate joint enterprise convictions”.
There is much scope to campaign for a change to these practices.
4. Rights of Prisoners
There are too many issues here to mention, but those which may be most relevant to JENGbA’s work are:
i) Rights of life prisoners maintaining innocence (including re-categorisation and parole)
ii) Legislation to secure release of IPP prisoners
It follows from the above that JENGbA would cease to be a single issue campaign and would instead become a more broadly based grass-roots campaign for reform of the Criminal Justice System (albeit that many of the reforms set out above are rather modest and in some cases are merely calls for changes already recommended by the Law Commission or the Justice Select Committee to be introduced!).
However, as set out above, JENGbA already campaigns on many of these issues. This may therefore feel like a natural evolution which would allow the campaign to pursue a number of defined objectives, all of which have the potential to benefit defendants either prosecuted or convicted of joint enterprise offences, but should also have a much wider impact.
WASPI guide to stolen state pensions: did you know?
I will begin by showing my horror at a statement you made in the house regarding 50's women reaching 60 could always take up apprenticeships, this is distasteful and insulting, we women in our 60's have had a life of learning, not necessarily academia, passing exams, learning a trade, we have waded through everything that life has thrown at us, we've done our apprenticeship of life, what do we really need to learn, is it really necessary to begin learning a new trade at 60+? I will continue on the lines of learning, this idea that we women have to go on training courses, work experience in places like B & M working the same hours, doing the same job as paid workers, 'learning' what we already know, we have experience coming out of our ears, we could teach these youngsters who are in charge a thing or too, this is so degrading.
I am really concerned that women of the 50's are not being treated with the respect they so deserve, life was different when we were younger, we went straight into work, university was for the elite, the working class just got on with the shop jobs, low level office workers, factory workers (when this country actually manufactured goods) in the 70's we were strong enough to fight and achieve equal rights for semi-skilled women workers (still discrimination rears its ugly head 40 odd years later) When we married, we looked after the husband, we looked after the house and continued working until the children came along, we couldn't afford nannies, child care, we washed by hand until we could afford automatic washing machines. We took part-time jobs when the husband got home.
So, reading the above you can appreciate how difficult it would have been to enter into a workplace pension, we were not invited, we didn't earn enough. We didn't get promotion for the 'bosses jobs' they were for men, we knew our place. But that didn't matter because we'd paid our dues, we paid our contributions when we worked and our husbands paid their dues too to cover the time we were not earning enough to do so, this is what the National Insurance was about in those days, we paid in, we were policy holders, but it seems that now we reach our 60's the rug has been pulled from under our feet and we have a 6 YEAR delay before we can collect our pensions.
We are all in favor of equalization but you have to take it retrospectively, we weren't treated equally in our working life and we can't agree that to make things equal we have to suffer, in fact this is discrimination if one sector of the public is treated differently, we are being treated differently to the women who entered into pensionhood at the time it was agreed when we joined the scheme, we are being treated differently to men with an EXTRA 6 years to wait for our pension while they have and extra 1 year.
When we joined this compulsory scheme and became policy holders of this insurance, the rules were that we paid a percentage of our wages, our employers paid a percentage of our wages to government, and in return the contributions entitled us to a pension at 60 and other benefits.
The pension age was changed in the 1940's because government felt it was unfair on married men to wait until their spouse reached retirement age, especially as, in general, men married women several years their junior', still do, so nothing has changed on that score. Government also felt that women were, in general, more tired as they not only worked but also kept home, looked after the husband and the children. Men went to work, came home to a meal, the shopping, the washing, the ironing was all done, they could sit and read the newspaper while the wife either went off to work or continued their work in the home. Nothing had changed on this score, when we joined this insurance scheme, except the conservatives changed the rules and Ken Clarke refrained from making an announcement in 1993 because he felt “it would be unpopular with women” successive governments failed to communicate any changes with the policy holders, and policy holders were never given the chance to discuss the issue with the pension providers.
The Cridland report actually states that “What happened to 1950's women must never be repeated” Steve Webb a previous pensions minister realized the error and confronted David Cameron, to no avail, Ros Altmann another previous pensions minister said government had failed us 50's women, Richard Harrington another previous pensions minister said he “knows there is something wrong” there is a cross party committee who also think there is something wrong. Cridland and the Pensions Advisory Service both state that any changes to pension should be relayed to those affected and given 10 years notice for every year delay in paying pension. This wasn't the case when it comes to 50's women.
Being accused of 'breezing through like' by Stephen Crabb another previous pensions minister is yet another insult and when he continues to say we “should have checked our pension age” I ask, Why should we, the women's pension age of 60 was an ongoing law from the 1940's, the age women could retire when we joined the system was 60, why should we even question this? If we join computer insurance, we pay in and we expect to be paid out if there is an issue under the terms and conditions, what is different with the pension scheme we paid into?
Instead of insulting us by telling us there is a generous welfare system we can apply for if we don't have work, under the sanctioning rule of JSA/ESA/UC, hour upon hour of job search for jobs that we can't do as our bodies are giving up, jobs where we're unwanted because we've passed our sell by dates, or expecting us to take apprenticeships. Give us our pensions at the age agreed when we joined the scheme, we did our bit, our employers did their bit, now it’s time to honour your side of the agreement as we have done for 45 years and continue to do so for those of us lucky enough to still be employment. Some women have given 51 years of contributions to the system that they believed would provide them with a pension at the time agreed when they began paying. We're not asking for a handout, we are claiming what we have paid in, our right to a pension at the agreed age when we began paying.
It's strange because we hear varying stories of why we can't have our pension at 60, the European law for one, the UK had to equalize pension age, well this isn't true is it, because Poland have recently reduced women's pension age back to 60, we are free to choose our pension laws, affordably is another reason, yet we have already paid, our employers have already paid, and money can be found from the 'magic money tree' when it suits the government as has been demonstrated recently with money for HS2, Trident, DUP to name just three, oh and then we mustn't forget the conservatives fear of the 'sudden rise in life expectancy', which actually isn't happening at all, it is in decline. So there really are no reasons to deny us our pension at the agreed age of 60 when we joined the scheme.
I think you might also be forgetting the fact that women who married in the 70's were given, by their employers, the leaflet NI1 to read, it makes interesting reading as it explains that we had a choice of continuing to pay the standard rate which entitles us to pension at 60 in our right, or pay a significantly smaller amount and give up this right and wait until our husbands reached pension age before we could collect.
You may also be forgetting that these same women had to sign a contract to the effect of the above; I signed my CF9 to the affect that I would continue to pay the standard rate purely because of the pension issue. I kept my side of the contract; government is in breach of contract by delaying my pension 6 years.
Not only are government in breach of contract in respect of the above, but they are also in breach of contract and stand accused of mal-administration as they failed to notify those affected, although I receive my self-assessment in every location I have lived and national insurance demands too.
I NEVER received any notification of any changes, and although government would like us believe that the change of pension age was announced in newspapers, I think they might be forgetting where these announcements were, they were buried in the financial pages of the broad sheet newspapers, tell me where these announcements were in the tabloids? We certainly never saw them, if we had, you can guarantee that we would have been hitting the streets in protest then, why do you think we have suddenly taken this issue to the streets?
We were NEVER informed of any change, that's why. I know government would also like us to believe that they have made transitional changes, and they like to repeat the mantra that we only have an extra 18 months to wait for our pensions, this is certainly not true. This simply refers to the 2011 pension act, again no-one was informed of this either.
Bang to rights, the government has failed us women of the 50's. We are seeing such hardship in over 60's, women are going to foodbanks for crying out loud, these women have done the right thing, they've looked after their families, they've worked, they've paid their dues, is this really the right way to treat us? Women have become homeless, one woman living in a tent in her bedroom trying to keep warm last winter unable to afford any heating, fears for this coming winter.
We women of the 50's are hard workers, are reliable, volunteer, look after our own grandchildren, we're accused of job-blocking, as those of us who can, continue to work, while the youngsters cannot find work to feed their own families. Tell me is this right? We've paid our dues, let the youngsters stand on their own two feet, gain some self-respect from working to feed their families, to contribute to the health service, to their time of retirement or sickness.
We're not the baby boomers portrayed by government and the media, we've worked hard, we still do, in and out of the home, we care for our elderly parents, our siblings, our partners, we're not the scroungers we're portrayed to be, we've paid, you pay out.
Article by Trish Alderson