Tag Archive | Council

To defend Southampton council jobs and services, Labour must refuse to implement cuts!

Southampton candidates standing for the Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition in the local elections on May 5th would like to reply to the questions asked by UNITE & UNISON in its Friday night advert in Southampton’s Daily Echo. (SEE BELOW)

“Our candidates state clearly and unequivocally our opposition to Conservative cuts to local government funding and its intention to abolish the Rate Support Grant by 2020. This represents a threat to the existence of elected local government councillors delivering public services to meet the needs of working class people and their communities.

We oppose the continued policies of cuts and privatisation of jobs and services in the city carried out by Labour since 2012, when the Tories were removed from control of the council, after the strike by council workers.

SCCDemo2

The only way to protect jobs and services and the terms and conditions of council workers is to build a city-wide mass campaign of the communities and our trade unions to demand the restoration of government funding.

To mobilise support for such a campaign Labour councillors must refuse to carry out further cuts and use its £40 million reserves and prudential borrowing powers to ensure jobs and services are protected. A legal balanced, no cuts budget was proposed to the council by anti-cuts councillors Keith Morrell and Don Thomas in 2013 showing what is possible. Click to read NO CUTS budget

pooldemo.jpg

The Tory government is divided and deeply unpopular for its tax hand-outs to big corporations and the super-rich. Enormous support exists for a fightback, seen in the overwhelming support for the Junior Doctors strike.

IMG_3649

Our candidates played a leading role in Southampton, in the historic anti-poll tax campaign that defeated Thatcher. Nationally over 17 million backed the mass non-payment campaign and the equivalent of £7 billion was restored to local councils.

We support the call made by UNITE National Industrial Sector Committee and the UNISON Local Government Service Group Executive for Labour councils to refuse to carry out further cuts and give our full and continued support to such a campaign.

Southampton council taking such a step would receive enormous support locally and nationally, which would block any attempt by this unpopular government to use un-elected commissioners to intervene.

On the basis of such a stand we are confident that government funding can be restored along with vital jobs and services that have been lost to the city, as a step towards a city council budget that can raise the living wage to £10 and include an urgent campaign to tackle the severe housing crisis with a programme of mass council house building.”

Yours fraternally,

Nick Chaffey, Secretary and Sue Atkins, Chair

On behalf of Southampton TUSC council candidates

 

Statement from UNITE/UNISON

‘Council cuts’ advert wake-up call for Southampton voters

21 April 2016

The 253,000 people served by Southampton city council will be dished up a menu of such unpalatable cuts that vital public services will be decimated, if the Tories take over after the local elections on 5 May.

As a wake-up call to residents in the run-up to the local council elections on Thursday 5 May, Unite, the country’s largest union  and public service union Unison have paid for a full page advert in the Southampton Echo tomorrow (Friday 22 April).

Unite regional officer Ian Woodland said: “What we fear is the Tories taking control of the city council after 5 May as their leader is ideological Brexit supporter Cllr Jeremy Moulton and committed to serving up an unpalatable menu of cuts that will salami slice public services.

“The unions that represent the 3,800-strong council workforce appreciate that the authority faces a £60 million funding gap by 2017/18, which has been made worse by the massive ‘austerity’ cuts to local government made by Whitehall since 2010.

“In the past few years we have worked exhaustively with the council leadership to safeguard services. There is a plan in place to do that in coming years, despite the large hit to the budget.

“Our concerns are two-fold that a change of administration could put all this at risk and voters need full disclosure because they are the service finders and users.

“We don’t feel that Tory councillors have been as open as they should be with the electorate as to what is on the cards in terms of cuts to council services, such as adult and children’s social care; and waste and recycling.

“We are writing to all political parties contesting seats on 5 May urging greater transparency and constructive dialogue with the staff side unions to show moves to outsource is not the answer to providing quality services to the Southampton community.

“That’s why we are asking four questions in the advertisement including asking councillors if the council intends to outsource services to a private company and seeking a commitment that there will be no more changes to the workforce’s pay, terms and conditions and job security.”

Advertisements

Are you anti-austerity? Vote for anti-austerity candidates in Southampton on May 5th!

“THE TORIES HAVE SLASHED FUNDING TO SOUTHAMPTON COUNCIL BUT LABOUR COUNCILLORS HAVE SIMPLY CARRIED OUT THE CUTS.

WE NEED COUNCILLORS LIKE ANTI-CUTS COUNCILLORS KEITH MORRELL, DON THOMAS & ANDREW POPE WHO VOTED AGAINST BUDGET CUTS IN FEBRUARY.

JOIN THE CAMPAIGN TO RESTORE COUNCIL JOBS & SERVICES.

A UNITED CAMPAIGN OF SOUTHAMPTON ANTI-CUTS COUNCILLORS, TRADE UNIONS AND THE COMMUNITY CAN FORCE THE RETURN OF FUNDING STOLEN SINCE 2010.” Sue Atkins, Southampton TUSC

GrahamHenry2

SOUTHAMPTON TUSC COUNCIL CANDIDATES: 100% ANTI-CUTS!

Screen Shot 2016-04-07 at 14.17.34

BASSETT: DAVID RAWLINSON

BEVOIS: ANDREW HOWE

BITTERNE: DEE STRUTT

BITTERNE PARK: LINDA BOULTON

HAREFIELD: GRAHAM O’REILLY

HAREFIELD: BO FLETCHER

MILLBROOK: PETE WYATT

PEARTREE: MIKE MARX

PORTSWOOD: NICK CHAFFEY

SHOLING: DECLAN CLUNE

SWAYTHLING: KEV HAYES

WOOLSTON: SUE ATKINS

WOOLSTON: GRAHAM HENRY

Screen Shot 2016-04-07 at 14.38.15

SOUTHAMPTON TUSC SUPPORTS ANTI-CUTS CANDIDATES:

BARGATE: JOHN EASTON

COXFORD: TAMMY THOMAS

REDBRIDGE: DENISE WYATT

SHIRLEY: DAVE FLETCHER

SOUTHAMPTON TUSC WORKS ALONGSIDE ANTI-CUTS COUNCILLORS: KEITH MORRELL, DON THOMAS & ANDREW POPE

If Southampton Labour councillors won’t stand up to the Tories… let’s elect ones who will!

Southampton TUSC Council Elections May 2016

We are standing in May’s council elections in Southampton to offer a 100% anti-cuts alternative to Conservative austerity and Labour councillors who say there is nothing they can do. We need more councillors like Keith Morrell, Don Thomas and Andrew Pope who have been prepared to vote against further cuts in the city.

Screen Shot 2016-03-16 at 10.59.23

All the Tory promises to return the country to economic growth and prosperity have turned to dust as cuts continue to the NHS, education and council services. Shamefully 24% of children in Southampton live in poverty and rely on food banks. No wonder that anger found a voice in the shock election victory of anti-austerity Jeremy Corbyn to leader of the Labour Party.

But all those hoping to see a change at Southampton Labour Council must be sorely disappointed as a further round of cuts were voted through.

Why are we being asked to pay in cuts  to our council services while the Tories hand out massive cuts to big business and the super-rich? Why is the fifth richest country in the world seeing library funding cut, Bitterne NHS Walk-In closed, elderly care at Woodside Lodge and Brownhill House closed and a housing crisis that sees 15 000 on the council waiting list?

IMG_3587.JPG

TUSC candidates are standing across the city alongside anti-cuts campaigners in Coxford, Redbridge, Shirley and Bargate to give a voice to those who want an end to austerity. We reject the argument of Simon Letts that there is nothing Southampton Council can do. Why not mobilise the anger in Southampton of council workers, their trade unions and the local community and demand the Tory government restores the £90 million funding to Southampton, cut since 2010?

To do this would mean calling a halt to further cuts and using the council’s £40 million reserves and borrowing powers to protect jobs and services.

The council found an extra £2 million to furnish the Arts Quarter with fancy door knobs, why not find the money for the Bitterne Walk-In or Brownhill House? Why not fund the libraries and youth services we need?

IMAG1302

Such a stand would receive an enthusiastic response and heap enormous pressure on a weak and divided government. The government has been forced to retreat on cuts to tax credits and PIP disability benefits. Why not on council cuts?

Election launch public meeting: NHS GP Crisis, re-open the Bitterne Walk-In

Saturday 26 March, 2pm Bitterne United Reform Church

Bitterne Precinct (Above Iceland), Southampton

For more information contact Nick Chaffey 07833 681910

Is it illegal for councils to use reserves and borrowing powers to defend jobs and services? No! To win, Labour councils must fight!

On February 10, Southampton Labour Council is set to vote through another massive round of cuts to council jobs and services.

Is it true that councils have ‘no option’ but to pass on Tory cuts?

Below we reprint the legal, balanced, NO CUTS budget of Southampton anti-cuts councillors Keith Morrell and Don Thomas presented to the council budget meeting in February 2013.

This showed clearly that councils can use reserves and borrowing powers, to set legal, balanced, NO CUTS budgets as a means to build a fightback to restore government funding to provide the services Southampton urgently needs.

If Southampton Labour council were to take similar steps now, set a budget that met the needs of the city and demand the government funds the shortfall, they would receive enormous support for such a stand and set a fighting example for other councils to follow.

If you agree, come and hear more at the Southampton People’s Budget event this Saturday 9 January, 2pm in the Meon Suite, James Matthews Building, Guildhall Square, Above Bar Street, Southampton.

 

Southampton NO CUTS budget, February 2013

Clive Heemskirk, TUSC national agent

Working class people all over the country are facing vicious cuts in council services. Labour councils are generally responding by wringing their hands and making the cuts anyway.

pooldemo

But in Southampton two councillors, Don Thomas and Keith Morrell have refused to do this and have made an important stand against the cuts.

They have been expelled from the Labour Party as a result. On 13 February they put an alternative budget to the council, which the council tried to gag.

But as the reports below explain a protest before and lively interventions in the council meeting made sure the cuts budget was exposed and an alternative posed. The fight against the cuts goes on!

Is it true that councils really have ‘no option’ but to pass on the Con-Dems’ cuts? That’s the argument being made by Labour councillors as they meet to set their 2013-14 budgets.

A core policy of  TUSC is that when faced with government cuts to their funding, councils should refuse to implement them.

It argues that the best way for councils to mobilise the mass campaign that is necessary to roll back Con-Dem austerity would be for them to set budgets that meet the needs of their local community and demand that the government makes up the shortfall, like Liverpool council successfully did in 1984.

But to save jobs and services now while building such a campaign, TUSC would support councils using their reserves and prudential borrowing powers to avoid passing on the Con-Dem cuts.

But is even this ‘buying time’ strategy possible? What about local government legislation that commits councillors to setting a ‘balanced budget’? Wouldn’t council officers step in and set the budget themselves? All these questions have come up in the anti-cuts struggle in Southampton.

Winning support

When TUSC’s policy was first raised by Socialist Party members in official consultation meetings late last year Labour councillors baldly dismissed it as ‘not possible’.

But it began to win support from council workers and service users. And when the ‘rebel two’ councillors Keith Morrell and Don Thomas submitted a draft budget amendment to increase Southampton’s ‘unsupported borrowing’ by £22 million, council officers were forced to respond.

The rebel councillors’ proposals met the legal requirements of a balanced budget at least for the 2013-14 financial year – it was not a ‘deficit budget’.

But the council’s chief financial officer (CFO) would not endorse it as a ‘prudent budget capable of implementation’.

He argued, for example, that Southampton was not in a sufficiently ‘dire financial position’ to successfully apply for a ‘capitalisation direction’ (government supported borrowing to fund day-to-day ‘revenue spending’), one of the alternative budget proposals.

Consequently council officers advised the Mayor – an elected Labour councillor – to make a chair’s ruling that the amendment would not be debated at the council’s budget-making meeting and that’s what he did.

But it could have been debated. The myth of the all-powerful officers was shown to be just that – it was councillors who closed off the debate.

Even the legal guidance all the Southampton councillors received – and this is standard everywhere – made it clear they had the power to “determine whether they agree with the CFO’s statutory report issued under section 26 of the Local Government Act 2003”.

That means, of course, that if there are genuinely different assessments that could be made, councillors can make them.

Before the meeting Keith and Don wrote to every Labour councillor asking them to use the legal power they had to at least allow their amendment to be debated.

The officers were, inevitably, making a political assessment of their proposals. So “it’s worth asking”, they wrote, how many CFOs in November 1990, just before the fall of Thatcher, “began drawing up budget proposals for 1991-92 confidently predicting that, just four months later, the Community Charges (General Reduction) Act would have gone through parliament, cutting the last poll tax bills by £140 and increasing government support for local authorities by £4.3 billion (nearly £7 billion in today’s money)?”

“Isn’t it for elected councillors to judge whether the crisis for public services in the city is ‘sufficiently dire’ for the steps we propose to be taken?” Keith and Don asked. Evidently not, as the Labour councillors backed the Labour Mayor’s ruling.

Nothing can hide this lesson of Southampton. Councillors have a choice. There are alternatives to implementing the cuts. And Labour councillors chose not to take them.

“Isn’t it for elected councillors to judge whether the crisis for public services in the city is ‘sufficiently dire’ for the steps we propose to be taken?” Keith and Don asked. Evidently not, as the Labour councillors backed the Labour Mayor’s ruling.

IMAG1030

In the local press. Extracts from Southampton’s Daily Echo, after the council meeting:

“[Keith Morrell said:] ‘The trade unions were instrumental in getting Labour elected and I think there’s a lot of disappointment among their members that Labour isn’t delivering.

‘Labour promised to protect jobs and to protect services and obviously they’re not.

‘There’re a lot of union members who are angry, frustrated and probably unsure where to go – they put their faith in Labour.

‘The trade unions should be doing more, if only to reflect what their members want from them.’

The pair are now working to form a local group so that they can field anti-cuts candidates across the city during the next election.”

Since this was written in 2013, Keith and Don have both been re-elected with large majorities in the Coxford ward in Southampton and continue to stand firm in their opposition to cuts.

donvictory

Motion for Southampton council budget meeting, February 2013

Amendment to the cabinet’s budget proposals

By councillors Keith Morrell and Don Thomas

This council agrees to amend the Executive’s General Fund Budget proposals as set out below:

  1. Additional spending proposal

To re-open Oaklands Pool by restoring the funding (£235K) discontinued at the July council meeting. In addition, to provision a capital outlay of £1.5m to ensure a 15-year lifespan for the restored facility.

  1. Savings Proposals

To reverse £15.31m of the service reductions and additional charges proposals in the Executive’s General Fund Revenue Budget for the 2013-14 financial year, as follows:

Adult Services: £3.997m

Children’s Services: £5.249m

Communities: £0.752m

Environment & Transport: £2.828m

Housing & Leisure Services: £1.722m

Leader’s Portfolio: £0.628m

Resources: £0.134m

  1. Council Tax

To reverse the proposal for a 2% increase in council tax for 2013-14 in favour of a council tax freeze, and to consequently accept the government’s Council Tax freeze grant (at a net negative cost to the General Fund for 2013-14 of £0.470m).

  1. Council Tax Discounts

To reverse the proposals to abolish the Older Persons council tax discount and the discount for Special Constables, at a cost to the General Fund for 2013-14 of £1m.

  1. General Fund borrowing

To prudentially increase General Fund Unsupported Borrowing during the 2013-14 financial year by £22m – following an officers review of all General Fund expenditure and assets which could be properly supported by the capital programme or a capitalisation direction applied for – with the revenue funding to support such borrowing to be drawn from the Organisational Development Reserve.

  1. 2013-14 and Future Years Revenue Budgets

To instruct the cabinet to bring forward proposals to develop the Stand Up For Southampton campaign, in collaboration with other local authorities, to persuade the government to reverse the cuts in central government funding for Southampton and other local councils and provide relief funding for those authorities that have had to deplete their reserves or adopt other temporary budget-balancing measures to maintain vital public services.

 

Letter to Labour Mayor and Labour councillors

To: Cllr Derek Burke, Mayor of Southampton

Members of the Labour Group

Dear Derek

We are writing to you about the forthcoming budget debate at the 13 February Council meeting.

As a minority group on Southampton council we properly submitted an amendment to the Executive’s proposed budget. While our amendment meets the requirements of a balanced budget for the 2013-14 financial year – it is not a ‘deficit budget’ – the Chief Financial Officer (CFO), under his budget monitoring authority, has not been able to endorse it as a ‘prudent budget capable of implementation’ if it were to be agreed by the full council.  In consequence we understand that the Director of Corporate Services, in his role of Monitoring Officer, has decided to recommend to you, the Mayor, to make a chair’s ruling that, while the amendment will be printed and distributed to members at the 13 February meeting, it should not be published on the council website or debated at the meeting.

We are not writing to ask you to support our budget amendment, although we believe that it reflects the election promises to protect council services made by Labour candidates.  But we are appealing to you – as democratically elected councillors with the ultimate say on what can and cannot be debated on 13 February – to at least allow our amendment to be discussed as part of the usual budget-making process.

Councils’ borrowing powers

The main point of controversy over our budget amendment is the proposal to increase General Fund Unsupported Borrowing during the 2013-14 financial year by £22m, following an officers’ review of all General Fund expenditure and assets which could be properly supported by the capital programme or a capitalisation direction applied for.  We see this measure – which would generate sufficient resources to avoid cuts and increased service charges for this year – as a means to ‘buy time’ for the campaign necessary to reverse the cuts in central government funding for Southampton and, indeed, for local government generally.

Our starting point when drafting our amendment was best summarised in the commentary on the Prudential Code – which guides council borrowing – by Richard Harbord, a member of the working group that compiled the Code, who greeted the new borrowing regime inaugurated by the 2003 Local Government Act as a “move to integrate the whole financial planning process” [Understanding the Prudential Code, Seamus Ward, ACCA, 2004].  “This is the first time capital programmes, revenue budgets and Treasury investment strategy has been integrated”, he argued, giving councils greater financial flexibility and freedom to borrow, and we believe that our proposal is in accord with that principle.

An officers’ review

It is true – and this is a point of contention – that our budget amendment does not specify the items of current and projected General Fund expenditure which involve a capital element which could be properly supported by the capital programme through prudential borrowing (without needing government permission).  Or alternatively, any other elements of General Fund expenditure for which a ‘capitalisation direction’ (government permission to capitalise revenue expenditure) could be sought over the next 12 months.

But that is why we are calling in our amendment for an officers’ review of General Fund expenditure, not being able, of course, as minority group councillors, to instigate the thorough examination needed except through such means.

Not a ‘prudent budget’?

The CFO, having cautioned members about “significant shortfalls in future years” even in his initial statutory statement on the Executive’s draft budget [paragraph 63, General Fund Revenue Budget, 20 November 2012], not unnaturally does not judge this course of action to be prudential or sustainable over the medium term.  In addition, while he has confirmed with the Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG) that there will be a Capitalisation Directions programme for 2013-14, he believes that Southampton is not in a sufficiently dire financial position for any applications it makes to be successful, at least in whole if not in part. Consequently he is arguing that, even if the council were to adopt our amendment, it would not be ‘capable of implementation’.

These judgements, of course, must be taken into account by councillors when they come to vote on budget-making decisions.  But they are nonetheless judgements and having regard to them in their budget deliberations is not the end of a councillor’s role.  They too must assess the arguments and make a judgement – and they can only do so in this case if the budget amendment is allowed to be presented to the full council.

Councillors’ role in budget-making

The final budget document that councillors received makes it clear how they should assess the CFO’s advice on budget decisions: “Members have a duty to determine whether they agree with the CFO’s statutory report issued under section 26 of the LGA 2003” [paragraph 130, General Fund Revenue Budget, 5 February 2013].  That means, of course, that if there are genuinely different assessments that could be made, councillors can make them.  So why shouldn’t they be able to subject our amendment to the same test as the Executive’s proposals?

The budget document guidance also stresses that the decisions councillors make are “effectively preliminary decisions”, “setting the framework” for the budget period but with “specific proposals” requiring “further implementation decisions” [paragraph 142]. It further notes that it will be “for Council to determine how to meet any budget gap that may arise as a result of such implementation decisions” [paragraph 144].  All budget proposals then, require an assessment as to whether they would be ‘capable of implementation’.  So why not ours?  But this can only be done, of course, if the amendment is presented in the usual way.

Judgements and political assessments

Lastly, there is the question to consider of judgements and political assessments. Any CFO’s assessment must inevitably include an element of political judgement.  That is only right but it is also right for councillors to make their own judgement.  We face a different situation to that facing councils, for example, in the early 1990s.  But it’s worth asking how many CFOs (then more usually known as borough treasurers) in November 1990 began drawing up budget proposals for 1991-92 confidently predicting that, just four months later, the Community Charges (General Reduction) Act would have gone through parliament, cutting the last poll tax bills by £140 and increasing government support for local authorities by £4.3 billion (nearly £7 billion in today’s money)?  Isn’t it for elected councillors to decide whether the crisis facing public services in the city is ‘sufficiently dire’ for the steps we propose to be taken?

In conclusion, we are more than happy to further discuss the issues raised by our budget amendment beyond those dealt with here.  But we do appeal to you to use your power as an elected councillor to allow our amendment to be properly tabled, even if you cannot subsequently bring yourself to vote for it when a full and fair debate has been concluded.

Kind regards

Keith Morrell, Leader, Labour Councillors Against The Cuts Group

 

 

Re-elect anti-cuts councillor Don Thomas!

Don Thomas anti-cuts councillor set to defend seat

LindaProtest

This election campaign has shown the rising tide of anti-austerity anger at Westminster politicians and the cuts agenda.

In Southampton, protests against library cuts and benefit sanctions have had large turnouts. Our street stalls have met enthusiastic support for campaigns to save Woodside Lodge care home and the Bitterne NHS walk-in centre.

Hustings give a glimpse of the battles to come. Under the pressure of an angry electorate, Tory and Labour candidates give false promises to provide ‘milk and honey’ to the NHS. Meanwhile, they are preparing a £30 billion slaughterhouse cuts programme.

The electorate is way to the left of the austerity consensus. In Southampton, anti-cuts councillors Don Thomas and Keith Morrell have given a courageous lead: voting to oppose all cuts. By building a united campaign with council trade unions and the community, they fought successfully to save Oaklands swimming pool.

pooldemo

Keith was re-elected last year with 43% of the vote. This year, Don is standing for re-election on his record as an anti-cuts councillor. TUSC and Don support all those in the city who are fighting the cuts and maintaining a working class voice in the council chamber.

Save Woodside Lodge – stop the cuts!

Save Woodside Lodge: Southampton Test TUSC meeting

WoodsideProtest

Monday 27 April, 7.30pm

The Saints Pub, Kendal Avenue, Southampton, SO16 9LP

Speakers:

Linda Hayes, Save Woodside Lodge,

Keith Morrell, Southampton Councillors Against Cuts

Nick Chaffey, TUSC candidate, Southampton Test

The threatened closure Woodside Lodge epitomises the fate of the electorate, forced to pay in austerity for a crisis created by the Banks and their Tory, LibDem and Labour allies in parliament. Rather than fight the cuts, Southampton Labour Council, has faithfully carried out the Tories cuts. Elderly people, including a 92 year-old war veteran, are under threat of eviction into the private sector, where profits come before care.

IMAG1030

We reject all cuts to jobs and services. We give full support to care workers and their trade unions, residents and their families who wish to remain at Woodside Lodge and call on Labour councillors to postpone any decisions until after the elections on May 7th.

For more information contact Nick Chaffey 07833 681910

Join the 15 April global fast food worker protest in Southampton

Join the 15 April global fast food worker protest

Southampton TUSC candidates give their full support to the global Fast Food rights Day and the demand for £10/Hour minimum wage for all. Our candidates will be supporting tomorrows protests in Southampton and urge young people and fast food workers to join a union!

Protests on Wednesday 15 April, 11.30am at McDonalds, West Quay & McDonalds, Shirley

FFR

Statement from BFAWU bakers’ union:-

On 15 April 2015, thousands of fast food workers will lead a mass movement ofaround 60,000 low waged workers striking across the United States to raise theissue of poor wages and the lack of trade union rights within their industry. Atthe same time, fast food workers and activists in 33 other countries around theworld will also be taking action against low pay. Here in the UK, the Bakers’ Food and Allied Workers’ Union’s Fast Food Rights campaign, which works in conjunction with the US workers’ movement, is calling for an end to the use of zero hours contracts and demanding an increase in the minimum wage to £10 per

hour.

Protests have been organised across the country against employers who are wilfully exploiting their workforce in order to boost their already significant profits. Fast Food Rights actions will take place in London, Glasgow, Sheffield, Manchester, Darlington, Leeds, Birmingham, Leicester, Cardiff and Southampton (For details: fastfoodrights.wordpress.com)

One fast food worker on a zero hours contract said, “I’m joining the 15 April global day of action because zero hours contracts and low pay are no way to live. What the American fast food workers have done shows we can fight for better. It is great that the bakers’ union has taken up the fight for £10 an hour and union rights for fast food workers here, and that’s why me and my workmates have joined the union.”

Research recently carried out says that most employers have used the economic crisis to reduce pay and workers’ benefits, with profitable companies decimating the terms and conditions of their employees as a means to further boost profits. In the UK, we are witnessing a huge rise of in work poverty, with vast swathes of the country’s labour force having to rely on benefits to top up paltry wages.

The knock-on effect of this is that an increasingly high number of working people have no disposable income which in turn, has a negative effect on the economy. Indeed, research also suggests that people are often having to use more than 50 percent of their wages just to pay rent, leaving very little for food or other items.

Ian Hodson, national president of the Bakers’ Food and Allied Workers’ Union said, “It is a scandal that a number of people who are working full-time are having to suffer the indignity of visiting a food bank in order to feed their families. What a savage, damning indictment of austerity Britain and its government, which has clearly turned a blind eye to this shameful inequality and brazen exploitation.

“15 April will prove to be a massive day of action which, in addition to raising the plight of workers in the fast food industry, will also expose the government’s failure to properly deal with tax dodging companies. If that’s not enough, we will be joining together with other workers to stop the privatisation of the National Art Gallery and fight to secure affordable housing. This entire event will unite a number of issues to bring about a collective demand to end the total injustice caused by greedy employers, poverty wages and vulnerable employment contracts.”

Join the April 15 Fast Food Rights global day of action – for more details of protests: follow the following twitter hashtags: #fastfoodglobal #April15 #10Now #joinaunion #strikefastfood – download campaign materials here

<https://fastfoodrights.wordpress.com/> read more from BFAWU website

<http://www.bfawu.org/hungry_for_justice_global_day_of_action_on_april_15th>

A short animation including some researched facts can be found here

<http://fastfoodright-bakersunion.nationbuilder.com/>

Reports of Fast Food Rights protests on Youth Fight for Jobs

<http://www.youthfightforjobs.com/wordpress/wordpress/?p=1125> and Fast Food

Rights <https://fastfoodrights.wordpress.com/> websites

Please send details of any local actions to fastfoodrights@mail.com

<mailto:fastfoodrights@mail.com> / ian.hodson@bfawu.org

<mailto:ian.hodson@bfawu.org>

BFAWU bakers’ union General Secretary Ronnie Draper to speak at NSSN conference on July 4th

Southampton TUSC candidates, 100% anti-cuts!

The ConDem Coalition government has slashed funding to Southampton Council, whilst passing tax cuts on to the super-rich and their friends in big business. But Labour councillors in the city have failed to fight and have meekly implemented the cuts. Hundreds of jobs have gone and vital services in the city such as youth services, day centres and adult social care have been lost.

Screen Shot 2015-04-10 at 16.59.29

We need councillors who won’t vote for cuts like Coxford anti-cuts councillors, Keith Morrell and Don Thomas. Campaign victories have been won over Oaklands Pool and the Bitterne Walk-In, which show what can be done.

Join the campaign to restore council jobs and services. A united mass campaign of anti-cuts councillors, trade unions and the community can force the return of funding stolen since 2010.

On May 7th to oppose cuts, vote TUSC across Southampton.

In Coxford give your support to the campaign of anti-cuts councillor Don Thomas.

LindaProtest

A vote for anyone else is a vote for cuts!

SOUTHAMPTON TUSC COUNCIL CANDIDATES

BARGATE: ANDREW HOWE, BASSETT: NEIL KELLY, BEVOIS: GLYN OLIVER, BITTERNE: DECLAN CLUNE, BITTERNE PARK: LINDA BOULTON, FREEMANTLE: MIKE MARX, HAREFIELD: GRAHAM O’REILLY, MILLBROOK: DAVID RAWLINSON, PEARTREE: GRAHAM HENRY, PORTSWOOD: NICK CHAFFEY, REDBRIDGE: KIERAN WILSON, SHIRLEY: TARA BOSWORTH, SHOLING: DARREN GALPIN, SWAYTHLING: KEV HAYES, WOOLSTON: SUE ATKINS

Southampton can fight back against council cuts!

Screen Shot 2014-11-12 at 10.54.51

“There is a way to stop Southampton’s public services from closing down and to protect jobs. With a determined and imaginative campaign spearheaded by the City Council, trades unions and community groups we can succeed in winning back from the government the money stolen from us.”

Southampton City Councillor Keith Morrell

Re-elected May 2014  

(“by a landslide” Daily Echo)

SOUTHAMPTON

TUSC RALLY

SUNDAY 30 NOV, 2PM

JAMES MATTHEWS BUILDING

ABOVE BAR STREET

SOUTHAMPTON

ALL WELCOME • FULL ACCESS

Are you fed up with broken promises?

Southampton needs councillors who will protect jobs and services!

People power keep Bitterne Walk-In open!

People power keep Bitterne Walk-In open!

No one wants to see local jobs and essential services like local libraries cut. But what can we do? Campaigning shows that when we are organised, our voice can be heard and politicians can be forced to respond to our demands.

We believe communities and workers in their trade unions, united together can resist the cuts and elect councillors who are prepared to fight for the needs of the city.

Come and find out how you can get involved in the Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition.

Bitterne Walk In meeting votes to keep centre open!

Saturday’s Southampton TUSC meeting voted unanimously to oppose the closure of the Bitterne Walk In centre. Over 40 attended the meeting urged on by a striking health worker to fight to save the NHS. One campaigner said, “The whole east of the city would vote to keep the Walk In open.”

IMG_0646

TUSC campaigners reminded the meeting that we would have a chance to vote in 2015 and urged the meeting to back those who fought to keep the centre open. The meeting agreed to lobby the Labour dominated Health Scrutiny meeting on Thursday to hold Labour to their word in throwing this proposal out for good.