We have argued all along on this website that the Tories’ coronavirus strategy is guided by political expediency and spin rather than “the Science” as Boris Johnson has alleged. Dominic Cummings, Johnson’s spin-doctor and professional liar, has had more say on government policy than any health expert or scientist.
This has been confirmed by the revelation in this morning’s Guardian that neither the Chief Medical Officer for England (CMO) nor the Chief Scientific Adviser (CSA) were consulted on dropping the “stay at home” message last Sunday evening. According to the Guardian, a government official defiantly added that “it is not the CMO or CSA’s role to approve government strategy or branding.” So there you have it.
12 hours notice of return to work
Another expert, Professor John Drury, a social psychologist at the University of Sussex, and a member of the pandemic influenza group on behaviours, which feeds into SAGE on issues including the best way to communicate government strategy, was another person extremely sceptical of the new, vague “stay alert” slogan. “Who is advising on the current messaging?” he asked, “Unfortunately, it’s not us.”
It is quite clear that the new turn in policy is designed to put the maximum pressure on workers to go back to work, whatever the dangers might be. Some workers were being contacted by their bosses literally within minutes of Johnson’s Sunday evening TV broadcast, urging them to go back to work. Dominic Raab’s qualification on Monday morning – that Johnson didn’t really mean going back to work 12 hours after the broadcast, but on Wednesday – changes nothing fundamental. The government are clearly targeting the lowest-paid and the least able to work from home, to satisfy the demand for profits.
Unscrupulous employers
Boris Johnson qualified his TV comments by saying “in saying that people who can’t work from home should now go to work, we are absolutely categorical their workplaces, your workplaces must be safe, must be Covid secure” (Guardian, May 12). This is a back-handed recognition of the opposition of trade unions to a rushed return to ‘normal’ work, but it cannot be taken at face value. There are too many unscrupulous employers out there who are not concerned at all with worker-safety but are desperate to start making money again and ‘guidelines’ on coronavirus just don’t cut it.
Then there is the vexed question of public transport. Many workers travel to work by car, but nevertheless, in normal circumstances, millions cannot do that and the ‘norm’ is for commuter trains, buses and the Underground to be pretty much rammed during peak periods. Staggering work times sounds all very well in theory, but in practice, it will still mean millions of workers being put unavoidably at risk. The whole policy smacks of “herd immunity” in everything but name.
Lip-service paid
Then there are some jobs where the risks of an early return to work are considerable. Where some countries have accepted that normal education will not resume until September, the Tories are determined to put teachers at risk by bringing back Years 1 and 6 by June 1st and the rest of primary school children by July. Although lip-service is being paid to appropriate Covid-19 safeguarding, as any primary teacher will tell you – try telling a 5-year old to keep 2 metres away from everyone else!
The idea that primary schools should have all their pupils back a month before the end of term is a nonsense. There will not be the staff to cope with it. Perhaps it is Johnson’s aim to deliberately blur the line between the agreed isolation of teachers at home – as most are now – and a direct refusal of teachers to come back when instructed.
Like the rest of this new strategy, it is a means of shifting the responsibility and any ‘blame’, in this case for the closure of schools, onto teachers. Any worker has the right, under section 44 of the Employment Rights Act, to refuse to work in conditions deemed unsafe. But that will be ignored by many heads, academies and academy chains who will deem a no-show as a strike.
Government not engaged with education unions
The leadership of the National Education Union has so far responded quickly to every twist and turn the government has made. In its latest circular to members and reps it has pointed out that “the Government has not engaged with us to discuss any further advice on social distancing, testing in schools, PPE or about those who are vulnerable, including BME staff…” which is an indication, yet again, that the government is making up policy in Ten Downing Street, without expert advice. So long as children are back at school – and therefore parents are ‘free’ to go back to work – they are happy. The NEU have made it clear that in their opinion, schools should not have staff back on site “for many months” and not until “testing and tracing is fully up and running…Our strong advice for all educators”.
The NEU has added advice to its members, “that…you should currently not engage with any planning based on a wider reopening of schools. If you’re asked if you will be available for wider working after 1 June, we urge you to reply that you are awaiting further advice from your union”. We would hope that where financial pressures are put on teachers to go back into schools – and many academies and academy chains would do that – that the NEU will back the teachers financially and through formal industrial action where necessary.
Workers and their trade unions are right to be suspicious of the Tories’ motives in rushing people back to work. The latest statistics from the Office of National Statistics shows that it is by and large the lowest paid who have suffered most from the pandemic.
“horrific” ONS statistics
“People in low-paid, manual jobs face a much greater risk of dying from coronavirus than higher-paid, white collar workers…men in low-skilled jobs are four times more likely to die from the virus than men in professional occupations, while women working as carers are twice as likely to die as those in professional and technical roles.” (Guardian, May 12)
Not surprisingly, the trade unions have reacted with outrage at these figures, the acting general secretary of the GMB describing them as “horrific”. As well he might, because it is many of those in occupations like security guards (45.7 deaths per 100,000), taxi drivers (36.4), chefs (35.9), plant and machinery operatives (37.7) and construction workers (25.9) who are his union members.
The TUC leadership and the leadership of individual unions are making noises in opposition to the Johnson/Cummings strategy. Francis O’Grady, TUC general secretary, has demanded that “all employers must now carry out and publish risk assessments in consultation with unions and their workforces.” So far so good. But the union leaders must step up to the plate and raise the ante a little bit.
Time for a tank on the lawn
They should instruct their members in any area of employment not to work if conditions are unsafe and, if necessary, to walk out if that is the case. The trade union movement has an elementary duty to defend the conditions of its members, their health and safety above all. It is not a time for polite requests and press releases, but for mobilising and organising members to assert their rights and demand safe conditions in the workplace. Moreover, it is a demand that should be made collectively by the trade union movement. It is about time the TUC parked a tank on Dominic Cumming’s lawn.
May 12, 2020
