Young Workers: Protection (Hansard, 7 February 1989)

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, Parliament removed the pay of young workers under 21 from the statutory framework of wages council regulation in 1986. The Government have no plans to establish any framework of this kind in future.

§ Lord Graham of Edmonton
My Lords, will the Minister confirm that young workers are among the most vulnerable sector in the community, that they already suffer from exploitation and that they need protection, especially in respect of their wage rates but also in respect of other matters? If indeed Parliament thought about this as long ago as 1939, when Winston Churchill had something to say about wages councils, what has changed in the intervening 80 years? The attitude of employers to young workers certainly has not.

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, I am afraid that I profoundly disagree with the noble Lord. A great deal has changed in this century a[...] am surprised that he has not noticed.

§ Lord Boyd-Carpenter
My Lords, does not all past experience show that a statutory framework for the protection of young workers is one of the best methods of securing that they suffer unemployment?

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, my noble friend is entirely correct. Indeed, those were the arguments which I deployed in 1986 when your Lordships were considering the legislation, and those arguments commended themselves to the House.

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, is the Minister aware that among the many very useful and moral things which the wages councils did, both through members of the councils who were from the employers' side and through those who were from the trade unions, was to seek to prevent and, where it existed, to eradicate the appalling exploitation of young people? The wages councils were well worth their weight in gold for that reason alone. Does the noble Lord therefore not think that the principles of those councils on that score should, in the interests of young folk, be maintained?

§ Lord Trefgarne
No, my Lords; I am afraid that I do not agree. As my noble friend Lord Boyd-Carpenter just confirmed, the principal effect of the wages councils was to secure a lower level of employment among young people and not a higher one.

§ Lord Thorneycroft
My Lords, will my noble friend agree that thanks partly to demographic reasons and partly to the admirable policies of Her Majesty's Government there will be a great shortage of young workers in this country; that it will be very difficult to find them; and that they will be in a sellers' market? In those circumstances would it not be very odd indeed to try to clutter the whole matter up with bureaucratic statutory instruments?

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, I entirely agree with my noble friend. Indeed, that was why we passed the legislation in 1986 and why we have now made new proposals, contained in a consultative document which was issued towards the end of last year. Perhaps I may add that none of that affects health and safety protection for young people because we closely follow the recommendations of the Health and Safety Commission in those matters.

§ Baroness Turner of Camden
My Lords, does the Minister not agree that the abolition of wages councils, as proposed in the consultation paper to which he has just referred, will leave Britain, alone of the countries of the European Community, without any minimum wage legislation? Does he not further agree that we are the only country in the EC to denounce the 1986 convention to which he has referred?

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, that may have something to do with the fact that our unemployment rate is now dropping faster than any other country in the European Community.

The Lord Bishop of Manchester
My Lords, does the Minister not agree that if we abolish all wages councils and all such protection we are encouraging the inefficient use of labour, and that many employers do not want to see such restrictions abolished?

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, if I may be forgiven for saying so I do not believe that the right reverend Prelate is right. I believe that the abolition of wages councils would be a good thing; but I must emphasise that the Government have not yet reached a final view on the matter. We have issued what is a 1437 consultative document only, but we have made our view clear.

§ Lord Rochester
My Lords, will the Government pay due regard to the views of members of the CBI that wages councils can fulfil a useful role in the sectors in which they operate; and that a sector-by-sector review is to be preferred to wholesale abolition?

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, I believe that I am right in saying that the CBI is among those who have submitted views following publication of the consultation paper. The consultation period ended only last week. I am not yet in a position to express the Government's view on the outcome of that consultation.

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, is the Minister aware that many employers within the CBI and many trade unions are still somewhat apprehensive about the exploitation of young people? When will the Government stop claiming that they are reducing the massive unemployment that they created?

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, I hope that the noble Lord will forgive me if I do not follow him down that line, save to say that I profoundly disagree with him. Wages councils are approaching the end of their useful life. That is the view we have expressed in the consultation document. We shall now take into account all the other views that have been expressed.

§ Lord Graham of Edmonton
My Lords, will the Minister respond to the current situation in retailing whereby the wages of many young workers are £50 or £60 a week? Does the Minister take on board the fact that there are employers, especially in retailing, who will take advantage of the removal of the existing minimum protection?

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, a much better way to establish appropriate wage levels, whether for young people or anyone else, is by agreement between the parties concerned and not by imposition from on high by wages councils or any other body.

§ Lord Wedderburn of Charlton
My Lords, in view of the fact that there are many studies, known of course to the Minister, which support the remarks of the right reverend Prelate about the inefficient use of labour, and as the views of many employers have also been cited, will the Minister see to it that studies which support the view of the consultative papers already published and of the Government—at any rate prospectively—are themselves published? So far the Government have published no evidence for the view they seem to take and which the Minister has put forward.

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, the Government have expressed their view in the consultation document to which I have referred. Other people have now made their responses to what we have proposed. I dare say that among those responses is one from the noble Lord. They will all be taken into account, and the Government will express their view on them in due course.