HC Deb 18 December 1967 vol 756 cc891-3
3. Mr. Winnick

asked the Minister of Labour what further action has been taken by his Department in the current dispute to gain recognition for the National Union of Bank Employees from those banking firms that do not as yet recognise this union.

10. Mr. Montgomery

asked the Minister of Labour whether he has been asked to intervene in the dispute between banks and bank employees; and what reply he has sent.

33. Mr. Arnold Shaw

asked the Minister of Labour whether he will make a Statement on the current dispute between the National Union of Bank Employees and certain banking undertakings.

46. Mr. Bidwell

asked the Minister of Labour if he now proposes to intervene in the dispute between some members of the National Union of Bank Employees and the employers concerning the recognition of the National Union of Bank Employees for negotiating purposes.

49. Mr. Hunt

asked the Minister of Labour whether he will make a further Statement on his discussions regarding the dispute arising from the refusal of certain banks to recognise the right of the National Union of Bank Employees to negotiate on behalf of their members.

Mr. Hattersley

My right hon. Friend has received requests that he should intervene in this dispute from the T.U.C. and from the National Union of Bank Employees. Officers of the Ministry have had informal discussions over the past week with all the interests concerned and following these, the Committee of London Clearing Bankers will be holding meetings within the next two days with the union and with the Central Council of Bank Staff Associations to discuss the question of negotiating machinery in the banks.

Mr. Winnick

Is not it disgraceful that bank workers are still on strike in this day and age to win recognition from their employers? Does my hon. Friend hold out much hope that the bank employers will begin to see sense on this matter, and thus prevent strikes taking place in the next few weeks which will cause great inconvenience to the people and the country?

Mr. Hattersley

The chances of a happy settlement have appreciably improved in the last fortnight. I would not want to do or say anything to diminish those chances by describing the actions of either party as disgraceful.

Mr. Montgomery

Can the hon. Gentleman explain why his right hon. Friend said that he would not act until the Royal Commission reported in 1968 but has now taken the action he refused to take earlier and which, if he had taken it earlier, would have prevented a great deal of bitterness?

Mr. Hattersley

My right hon. Friend said that the Royal Commission would have something to say about recognition of staff unions, and we must be bound by consideration for the possible findings of the report before doing something about this matter generally. But that does not exclude an intervention by my right hon. Friend, and when he was asked to intervene in this dispute he accepted the invitation and took the action he did.

Mr. Hunt

Does not the hon. Gentleman agree that the attitude of some of the banks towards trade unions is more reminiscent of 1867 than 1967? Will he ask his right hon. Friend to continue to endeavour to persuade the banks to recognise this eminently respectable and responsible body of men?

Mr. Hattersley

I agree that the attitudes of the banks differ, but during a week when consultations are taking place I would not want to put a date to any of those attitudes.

Mr. K. Lewis

Will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind that, in many cases, the employees are quite happy with the staff unions? Will he try to get a compromise rather than pressurise one side against the other?

Mr. Hattersley

I am sure that some employees are happy with the staff unions, but it is interesting to note that the N.U.B.E. has shown an appreciable increase in membership during the last fortnight.