BORIS Johnson’s grand plan to ease Britain’s lockdown is facing a trade union backlash as workers’ leaders raised “urgent concerns” about the UK Government’s thinking and demanded “absolute clarity” on safety otherwise they warned many people would simply not return to the workplace.
With the Prime Minister preparing to set out his road-map to recovery with a televised address to the nation due Sunday, Keir Starmer called for a “national consensus” on how the country could approach the post-peak phase of the outbreak.
The Labour leader, who is due to have talks about the Government plan with Mr Johnson later this week, called or a “national safety standard” for all businesses, schools and other public services to show they were safe for people to work in and use.
“We want to support the Government to get this right and that is why we need a national consensus on what happens next,” declared Sir Keir.
“Our priority is protecting the public’s health and saving lives. That is why we supported the lockdown and again support the restrictions staying in place at this time.
“However, we need to be honest with the public about the challenges ahead. We are in this for the long haul. It is imperative that the Government is properly planning for what happens next and properly supporting our NHS and social care services.”
At her daily news conference, Nicola Sturgeon said that while there had been "real and significant progress,” the R rate of reproduction of the virus remained too high to alleviate lockdown measures and said it was "likely" the lockdown measures would continue for a while yet.
The Government’s draft details began to emerge about how UK ministers were hoping to ease Britain back to work as it was revealed some 6.3 million workers were now taking part in the Government’s furlough scheme.
Among the easing measures being considered are: extensive floor markings to encourage social distancing; the taking of temperatures as workers enter the workplace; less hot-desking; widespread hand sanitisation; the closure of canteens and lifts; staggering shifts; maximise home-working and for all travellers who use public transport to wear face coverings.
But the TUC insisted there was no commitment from UK ministers to increase enforcement to stop companies flouting the law and putting staff in danger.
It pointed out the draft proposals did not include a binding requirement on employers to ensure safe working conditions with the guidance merely suggesting "employers should consider" actions such as enabling social distancing or providing handwashing facilities but also pointing to how individual employers could decide to ignore the suggestions.
Frances O'Grady, the TUC General Secretary, said: "Throughout this crisis the TUC has sought to engage constructively with ministers but we cannot support the Government's back-to-work plans as they stand.
"We want new binding rules for employers to publish their risk assessment and action plan. We want clear guidance to set out the minimum standards that employers must meet in order to protect public safety. And we want ministers to outline a new tough approach to enforcement.
"Unless the Government significantly strengthens its plans, safe working will not be guaranteed. The current proposals fail to provide clear direction to those employers who want to act responsibly. And they are an open goal for rogue employers, who will cut corners and put their workers - and the wider community - at risk.”
She added: "We urge ministers to work with the TUC and unions to ensure people can make a safe return to work."
Mike Clancy, General Secretary of the Prospect union, said: “The Government must provide absolute clarity on how workplaces can operate safely and it must set out the evidence for its advice.
"We all want to get back to work but there is no point in easing the lockdown if the guidelines put people at risk, potentially causing a spike in cases and another full-scale lockdown."
John Phillips, acting general secretary of the GMB Union, suggested the Government’s guidance was “thrown together in a hurry and it shows”.
He complained: "Giving unions and employers just 12 hours to respond is not good enough and means crucial changes will not be made. We cannot endorse crucial guidance if it is incomplete.”
Mr Phillips added: “As it stands, there is nothing on Personal Protective Equipment, nothing on enforcement to ensure workplaces are safe and nothing giving workers the assurances they need to get back to their jobs…
"If a second wave of this pandemic is to be avoided, then at every stage of this phased return we need full risk assessments agreed with the workforce, adequate PPE for everyone who needs it and equality impact assessments to ensure that all workers are fully protected."
At the daily Downing St briefing, Matt Hancock, the UK Health Secretary, acknowledged that businesses seeking to reopen as the lockdown eased could compete for PPE with the NHS and care homes.
But he insisted: “The first call on PPE must go to the NHS and social care and those other essential services who need it to keep the people delivering those services safe…
"So, we do need to take that into consideration before making changes."
In other developments:
*the UK recorded its lowest number of daily deaths since March 29 at 288, bringing the total to 28,734;
*the list of the UK Government’s SAGE experts was published and includes Professors Andrew Morris, Andrew Rambaut and Mark Woolhouse from Edinburgh University and Prof Ian Boyd from St Andrews University;
*there have been 1.8m new claims for Universal Credit;
*No 10 said there were questions to be answered about the "origin" of the pandemic, following claims by the US that a laboratory in Wuhan was the source;
*the London Nightingale Hospital has effectively been mothballed with no new patients planned as Downing St said it would, nonetheless, remain on stand-by;
*the House of Lords Commission recommended halving the daily attendance allowance for peers to £162 and
*demonstrators blocked access to building sites for the HS2 rail link in London and Warwickshire in protest at construction work continuing during the pandemic.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel