Hospital Workers (Dispute)

HC Deb 27 March 1973 vol 853 cc1078-81

9. Mr. Pavitt

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what action his conciliation machinery has taken to secure a settlement of the pay dispute involving hospital ancillary workers.

Mr. Maurice Macmillan

The wage increase offered is at the limit allowable in stage 2 of the counter-inflation policy, and the unions concerned have been urged to put their case to the Pay Board which is being asked to report on anomalies created by the standstill by 15th September. In these circumstances there is no scope for conciliation.

Mr. Pavitt

Is it not time that the right hon. Gentleman changed his policy of masterly inactivity in disputes of this kind? Is it not time he used all the initiative his Department may have, especially in this case when a very hard-pressed section of the community will be able to cease its dispute immediately if its request for a provisional inquiry, as put forward by the BMA, is met? Will he not move on this?

Mr. Macmillan

The suggestion of the BMA was for an inquiry whether by the Pay Board or other methods. As has been made clear to the unions concerned, the Pay Board is operational and will be formally so very shortly. The union can put its case to the board immediately. The hon. Gentleman refers to the conciliation power of my Department. Since the offer made by the employers is at the limit allowable under stage 2 of the counter-inflation policy, there is clearly no room for further conciliation.

Sir P. Bryan

Would my right hon. Friend agree that one result of the present dispute has been to show up the anomalies in the wage structure within the industry? Will he confirm that the Pay Board is in a position to make recommendations not only on wage rates but also on wage structure?

Mr. Macmillan

The terms of reference of the Pay Board, which will be formally published as soon as the board is formally constituted, make it quite plain that it is within its remit to consider anomalies and relativities both as between different industries and within any given industry. My hon. Friend's point is fully covered.

Mr. William Hamilton

Is it not quite plain that as a result of the Government's policies the standard of living of these people—some of the lowest-paid in the country—will be worse 12 months from now?

Mr. Macmillan

No, Sir.

Dame Irene Ward

Reverting to my right hon. Friend's answer about anomalies and things, may I ask whether that means that women will be paid the same as men?

Mr. William Hamilton

No.

Dame Irene Ward

This is very important. I would like to know. May I also ask my right hon. Friend, whose policy; support, whether it is in the national interest—I am not now making a party political point—that people such as the hospital workers should be so low-paid? Ought not action to be taken before this kind of situation arises? I wish that all parties in Government would consider this angle, because we do not want our people to be underpaid.

Mr. Macmillan

This is the whole purpose of the Pay Board and of referring to it not only the National Health Service ancillary workers but also other groups which have put forward precisely the same argument. As for the point my hon. Friend makes about pay for women, in addition to the £1.80 per week now available to women workers in the National Health Service there is a further offer of 80p per week as a step towards equal pay in equal steps of one-third between now and 1975. It is not possible to consider the position of one group of low-paid workers except in the way which is laid down for the Pay Board. We must then consider the anomalies and relativities arising initially out of stages 1 and 2 and the further terms of reference. Then we must go, by the end of the year, into the other anomalies.

Mr. John Grant

In view of the Minister's appalling intransigence over these disputes involving many low-paid workers, may I ask why he allowed the recent settlement in the newspaper industry to stand? Can he tell us the result of his investigations into that dispute?

Mr. Macmillan

It was settled under the same terms as a number of other settlements, as far as I recollect. If the hon. Gentleman wants more details he had better put down a Question about it. There have been 30 settlements within the stage 2 terms covering about 370,000 workers.

Mr. Harold Walker

Did I hear the right hon. Gentleman correctly, that the Pay Board would not be required to report until September? Is he aware that his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Services was reported on the one o'clock news today as having said that implementation would be in December? Is not this an intolerable and unacceptable length of time for these low-paid workers to have to wait for justice? If the right hon. Gentleman is so sure that the Pay Board can resolve the dilemma, why is he being so stiff-necked about an alternative form of inquiry?

Mr. Macmillan

The alternative form of inquiry is not compatible with the exercise that is the whole function of an independent Pay Board. The Pay Board has been asked to report as soon as possible and in any case not later than 15th September. This is to enable all its findings, including those concerning other low-paid groups of workers, to be considered by the Government, and I hope by the unions, when framing policies for stage 3 of the counter-inflation programme.