Difficult decisions about reductions in staffing cannot be made without the involvement of local trade union branches, but their national leadership still acts as if we are in the 1970s, says Richard Stay

Last month’s TUC conference in Manchester left me wandering whether I’d somehow tripped into a time warp.

The calls for joint industrial action to oppose government cuts, coupled with the threat of co-ordinated civil disobedience was reminiscent of the mid-1970s rather than the 21st century.

The TUC agreed a motion which will see it launch intense lobbying of coalition MPs while reserving the right to take what its leadership refers to as ‘coordinated’ strike action, which could start once the cuts start to bite in the new year.

The first action from the TUC will be a Westminster rally on the eve of the Comprehensive Spending Review in October, followed by a national demonstration in March, and then industrial action after that.

While there was more than a touch of rhetoric in some of these statements, I did feel slightly depressed that we seemed to taking a huge step backwards in British politics, just when we thought we were really breaking new ground.

Here in Central Bedfordshire, we enjoy a good working relationship with our trade union colleagues who we regard as key stakeholders in the organisation. Our philosophy is based on a recognition that we can’t succeed as a council without the engagement of our staff and therefore, it follows naturally that their representative organisations should be perceived as partners rather than adversaries.

This sort of ‘grown up’ relationship has been critical to us as we’ve managed the process of transition to unitary government and all the associated HR challenges that this has thrown up. I believe we need a similarly respectful relationship at a national level.

As we collectively brace ourselves for the toughest round of budget decisions we’ve faced in decades, it seems to me vital that trade unions and local authority leadership teams establish a shared sense of realism about the situation. Service cuts, particularly for politicians who will have to explain the reasons to their constituents, are not always easy, but this is the situation that we find ourselves in, and something has to be done.

No trade unionist wants to accept that there is a need to cut jobs in the name of efficiency, but the case for doing so is abundantly clear to the majority of the public.

Birmingham City Council, the largest local authority in the UK, came under severe criticism recently when it wrote to its entire non-school staff with a new set of terms and conditions. The only alternative offered to colleagues who chose not to agree to these was redundancy.

The method in which the council went about this might not have been ‘text book’ but, given that the authority has to make a saving of £330m, it is perhaps understandable that its management went for a transparent and upfront approach.

We are not in the same boat as the Birmingham council, but we are having to consider savings targets which are proportionately in the same ball park as those challenging our West Midlands colleagues.

We have already axed 21% of all management posts within the council, but I cannot promise that more jobs won’t go. We took £10m out of our year one budget, and are in the process of delivering a further £12m this year.

These have been achieved largely through efficiency measures, but there have been consequences in terms of jobs.

Looking ahead, I only hope that our local unions don’t feel obligated to adopt the silly ‘not a penny or paperclip can go’ mentality of some of their national colleagues as we have to take further responsible action to balance our books.

The threat of action by the national unions is a cause of concern, not just for the local authority, but for those taxpayers who rely on the council and the services which are provided. I don’t think anyone would want to see a return to the ‘dark days’ of the ‘winter of discontent’ and the Government has clearly stated that it wants to work with unions to find a resolution.

I’ve seen a comparison by Brendan Barber from the TUC that the scheduled spending cuts will have a similar impact as the poll tax did in 1990. I have no doubt that while people’s feelings towards the cuts are just as strong as they were towards the poll tax, the need for delivering them is infinitely clearer.

The country has borrowed too much money. We are borrowing one pound in every four that we spend, and this cannot be allowed to continue.

People will believe that the spending cuts are unfair, but I think there is enough common sense in the country for people to realise that they are essential if we want the nation to get back on its feet.  

Cllr Richard Stay is deputy leader of Central Bedfordshire Council