AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

No union support for busmen

22nd March 1968, Page 38
22nd March 1968
Page 38
Page 38, 22nd March 1968 — No union support for busmen
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

from our industrial correspondent • A meeting of 2,000 Liverpool Corporation busmen in Liverpool Stadium on Wednesday decided to continue their unofficial strike. A delegate reported that Glasgow had been contacted in order to extend the dispute. One busman was shouted down when he suggested volunteers should drive buses to take handicapped children to school.

However, the 3,400 strikers are unlikely to get TGWU official backing for their strike demanding a 17 a week basic wage. This is because the claim outstrips the Liverpool settlement for 18s 4d on the basic rate (23s on earnings) referred to the Prices. and Incomes Board. TGWU national officials feel they must back an agreed settlement rather than the strikers' demands.

But although services have been at a standstill for over a week, the strikers are not acting illegally because the Government did not have to order their employers to "freeze" the rise. The men are not breaking the Prices and Incomes Act. Liverpool Corporation acted voluntarily in withholding the rises.

The PIB inquiry report is expected in mid-May.

The dispute originated as simply a protest at the delay in getting a payment. Then the strikers changed their demand to one for i17 a week basic minimum, a 5-day week with two consecutive days off, no victimization, and a guarantee on service payments.

Similar productivity agreements are held up in Glasgow and Belfast.