Showing posts with label Politics- Employee Rights. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Politics- Employee Rights. Show all posts

Saturday 17 January 2015

'New York Times' Launches All-Out Attack on Christianity

'New York Times' Launches All-Out Attack on Christianity



Former Atlanta Fire Chief Kelvin Cochran



Apparently, The New York Times is in favor of faith in the public square—if the purpose is to mock it. Editors at theTimes poured gasoline on the fire of Atlanta's latest controversy with an editorial that should shock even their most liberal readers. Just when you thought the media couldn't sink any lower, the Times takes on the same First Amendment that gives it the freedom to print these vicious attacks on Christians.

In a stunning column on Jan. 13, the newspaper argues that men and women of faith have no place in public management of any kind. The piece, which shows a remarkable disinterest in the facts, claims that Atlanta Fire Chief Kelvin Cochran didn't have permission to publish his book on biblical morality. Not only did Cochran have permission from the city's ethics office to publish his book, but he only distributed it in his personal capacity at church—where a handful of his coworkers attend.

But the shoddy journalism didn't end there. Editors insisted that Cochran's book was full of "virulent anti-gay views"—when in fact, the 162 page book only mentioned homosexuality twice. And both times, the conversation merely echoed the Bible's teachings on the subject. For that—privately espousing a faith that a majority of Americans share—Kelvin was fired.

"It should not matter," The New York Times conveniently suggests, "that the investigation found no evidence that Mr. Cochran had mistreated gays or lesbians. His position as a high-level public servant makes his remarks especially problematic, and requires that he be held to a different standard." And what is that "standard," specifically? That he has no First Amendment rights? If so, that's the height of hypocrisy for these editors, who just days ago championed the press's freedom to ridicule religion in the public square. Apparently, The New York Times believes in the freedom of the press to attack faith, but not the public's right to hold a faith in the first place.


Saturday 11 January 2014

Think Benefits Street makes shocking TV? Try living there! A worrying dispatch from the once respectable street that's been making headlines all week, Daily Mail


  • Resident George Drummond used to be proud of the street where he lives
  • Not any more - the street features thieves, benefit cheats and child brides
George Drummond’s mid-terrace has what estate agents call ‘kerb appeal’. Neighbouring properties could do with a good lick of paint (and a lot more besides), but Mr Drummond’s home in James Turner Street, a brisk stroll from Birmingham city centre, is as neat as a pin, inside and out. 
The windows are spotless, the black and gold railings glisten in the winter sun, and his front garden, resplendent with potted plants and hanging baskets, could grace the Britain in Bloom contest.
‘I’m 83 and I have spent 53 years on this street,’ he said. ‘Always in this house.’ George Drummond is proud of his home, where he and his wife, a nurse, raised their three children. He is proud of his adopted country, having arrived here from Jamaica in the Fifties and spending the next 30-odd years as a bus driver, barely missing a day at the wheel. Once upon a time, he also used to be proud of the street where he has lived all his adult life. 
Stole £13,000: 'White Dee' (Deirdre Kelly) presents herself as a leader of the local community
Stole £13,000: 'White Dee' (Deirdre Kelly) presents herself as a leader of the local community
Anyone who tuned in to Channel 4 at 9pm on Monday will understand why that last sentence is in the past tense. For the row of Victorian terraces is now the subject of a controversial five-part series, called Benefits Street, which began this week. 
By the time the first instalment had finished (it was repeated on Wednesday), James Turner Street in the heart of Winson Green had become possibly the most infamous residential street in the country. 
The ‘majority’ of residents in the 99 addresses are living off the state, the programme-makers told us, before introducing a motley cast of characters who could have walked straight off the set of The Jeremy Kyle Show.
Recidivist ‘Danny’ (Danny Smith) admitted being too lazy to work and was filmed demonstrating the tricks of his trade as a shoplifter. Mark and Becky (Mark Thomas and Becky Howe) brazenly told how they had all their benefits stopped because of fraudulent claims. 
‘White Dee’ (Deidre Kelly) and ‘Black Dee’ (Dee Roberts), nicknamed by their neighbours on account of their colour, presented themselves as leaders of the local community.
 
But we now know the former is a convicted criminal who, when employed by the city council, stole cash set aside for vulnerable tenants; and the latter is on bail in connection with a racially aggravated incident in James Turner Street last August and a drugs bust last June.
Some 4.2 million viewers saw the opening episode of Benefits Street, making it the most popular show on Channel 4 for more than a year. 
But there was instant controversy. Channel 4 itself could now face a police probe following complaints from members of the public and local politicians that the broadcaster ‘aided and abetted shoplifting in Birmingham’ by letting Danny brag about his methods. 
And there were howls of protest from those who took part in the programme. Residents claimed TV bosses bribed them with cigarettes, beer and McDonalds meals. 
Recidivist 'Danny' (Danny Smith) admits he is too lazy to work and was filmed demonstrating shoplifting
Recidivist 'Danny' (Danny Smith) admits he is too lazy to work and was filmed demonstrating shoplifting
They said they were made to look like ‘complete scum’ because the way they were portrayed was ‘unfair and unrepresentative’. 
The MP Dame Anne Begg complained that the show was a ‘misrepresentation’ of life for people on social security, as it focuses almost exclusively on people receiving unemployment benefits, which make up only a small proportion of the overall social security bill.
More than 3,000 people signed an online petition calling on Channel 4 not to screen the rest of the series. But would those same people feel the same way if they saw James Turner Street through the eyes of George Drummond and the many other decent residents we spoke to this week, many of whom were too frightened to be identified?
On Thursday morning, for example, a typical sight greeted Mr Drummond when he opened his curtains. Just a few yards from his front door, an old mattress and other rubbish had appeared in the middle of the road, surrounded by broken glass, empty cans of super-strength lager and discarded vodka bottles. Nearby gardens resembled Steptoe’s yard, with chairs, beds and junk piled high.
Lead has been stolen from the chapel roof four times in recent months. The stained glass windows, one couldn’t help but notice, were covered by metal security grilles. 
Home Office figures reveal police were contacted about some form of crime in James Turner Street every month last year, including drug abuse, criminal damage, arson and anti-social behaviour. 
One elderly couple told how, not so long ago, someone poured acid over the plants in their front garden. 
Why would anyone do such a thing? Simply because they had politely refused to allow some young children from the street to play in their back garden unsupervised. 
‘We could never prove it but we knew it was to do with that,’ said the husband. ‘That what we’re up against here.’
Insurance companies demand prohibitive premiums for vehicle cover in B18 — the Winson Green postcode. 
‘When I lived in Edgbaston, my insurance on one car was £500 a year and £400 on the other,’ said a young father, who ran a takeaway business in another part of Birmingham before being re-housed here by the council. 
‘When I called to renew my policy last month, they told me it would now be £3,000 a year for one car and £4,000 for the other. All because we live in B18.’
Benefit cheats: Parents Mark Thomas and Becky Howe were picking up £1,500 a month in benefits
Benefit cheats: Parents Mark Thomas and Becky Howe were picking up £1,500 a month in benefits
His 12-year-old son, he said, is being singled out at school because of his address.
‘After the show went out, he got a text from a friend. It said: “Why didn’t you tell us you live on a bad street. You live on a thieves street, you are a thief. We won’t be your friend anymore. [sic]’’’
Indeed, James Turner Street has become a bizarre local attraction. Drivers have been spotted lowering their car windows to photograph the street sign on their mobile phones, just as they might with a famous landmark.
Yet perhaps the more depressing thing about the street is that in the Britain of today it is not especially unusual.
Figures for benefit claimants are not broken down street by street, so it is impossible to get an exact figure for the number of people receiving handouts in the road. 
It is worth stressing that it was ‘White Dee’, not the documentary-makers, who said: ‘Probably, five per cent of people on this road are working.’ And it was ‘Black Dee’ who was seen walking along, pointing at house after house, declaring almost triumphantly: ‘Unemployed, unemployed, unemployed.’ The narrator was more circumspect, saying only that the ‘majority’ of residents were on benefits of between £500 and £900 a month.
James Turner Street was chosen because it falls within Soho ward, part of the Ladywood parliamentary constituency. In Soho, 9.8 per cent of all residents of working age claim Jobseeker’s Allowance alone, which is more than three times the national average according to the most recent data. 
But in other wards the jobless figure is even higher: Aston (12.1 per cent), Sparkbrook (11), Handsworth (10.5), Washwood Heath (10.2). Comparable areas can be found across the country.
In other words, James Turner Street is just one of many where the ‘something for nothing culture’ — to use Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith’s words — has transformed the fundamental character of a once-respectable neighbourhood. Take the house where Mark Thomas and Becky Howe live. The couple, both 23, have two children and were picking up £1,500 a month in benefits from this address at one point. By their own admission, all their payments stopped after they were caught fiddling claims — but they still see themselves as victims. 
‘They [the producers] just tried to make us look like slums — everyone on the street is fuming about it,’ Miss Howe told the Birmingham Mail. ‘Half of my family and friends have already disowned me because of it. Some want me to change my name by deed poll.’
Romanian immigrants - including a child bride and one English speaker - who clash with other residents
Romanian immigrants - including a child bride and one English speaker - who clash with other residents
Controversial: The series has been attacked for its portrayal of claimants
Controversial: The series has been attacked for its portrayal of claimants
Yet isn’t there a telling contrast when you see who once lived here? 
The 1911 census tells us that Mark and Becky’s house was once home to Edwin Toole, 69, and his wife Elizabeth, 59. Edwin was a blacksmith and Elizabeth a shop manager. Their daughter Sophie, 21, was a sewing machinist and her sister, 19, worked in a warehouse. 
Hard work, not fraudulent benefit claims, paid the family’s bills.
Or take the case of 32-year-old Dee Roberts, aka ‘Black Dee’, who has not worked for six years. 
Back when the street was first built, her house was occupied by Frederick Hodges, 48, his wife Laura, 47, Mabel, 18, and Howard, 16. 
Every member of the family was in employment — Frederick as a house painter, Laura as a nurse, Mabel as a typesetter and Howard as a sewing machine mechanic.
Today, a few doors along the road, we find Deirdre Kelly, 42. Viewers were told that ‘White Dee’ was struggling to bring up two children on benefits, and there was no sign of a partner. Yet her Facebook page, until a few days ago at least, was full of photos of family holidays and pop concerts.
‘I will always look out for my friends because that is the sort of person I am,’ declared the woman who boasts of being the ‘mother of the street’ but who once stole £13,000 from the vulnerable to fund her lover’s crack habit.
In 1911, Deirdre Kelly’s residence was home to Ellen Ashforth, 41, who was a full-time mum to five children, four aged under ten. Her husband Jesse, 38, and one son, 20, were both silversmith polishers.
The traditional values espoused by working-class families like the Ashforths, Hodges and Tooles, and passed down from father to son, mother to daughter, continued down the generations until George Drummond arrived on James Turner Street in the Sixties. 
Proof decent people still live there: Long-suffering resident George Drummond
Proof decent people still live there: Long-suffering resident George Drummond
By then he was married and employed on the buses. His three children attended the school at the top of the road. Many of their neighbours worked at firms such as General Electrics and IMI.
‘We all left in the morning and came back in the evening,’ he recalled in the lounge of his three-bedroom terrace, which is covered in family photos.
‘You knew everybody. Many  owned their own homes and people took pride in them. In summer, everyone would be out the back. Maybe you might have a beer, but there was never any trouble.’
Over the years, like most industrial cities, Birmingham slid into economic decline and ‘working class’ was replaced by ‘underclass.’
The most dramatic change in James Turner Street occurred around seven years ago, coinciding with the closure of General Electrics, which provided thousands of local jobs. Owner-occupiers began to move out, and people in temporary housing began to move in. 
It was around this time that Deidre Kelly surfaced in the road.
Mr Drummond stresses that he has nothing against any of the residents on his street but adds: ‘You don’t know now who your neighbours are. You’re not able to get to know them. They might be there one day and then they’re gone. The nextdoor house has been empty for a month, and so has the one with all the rubbish out the front.’
The school at the end of the street where Mr Drummond’s children went, and where pupils now speak 20 different languages, was placed in ‘special measures’ by Ofsted in July. Inspectors found attendance and standards of reading, writing and maths to be ‘below average’.
Back on the street, we finally caught up with ‘Black Dee’, in a manner of speaking. She ‘spoke’ to us through the letter box of ‘White Dee’s’ house: ‘You lot have been harassing me and I don’t want to talk to you. If you print anything that is wrong, I will sue for libel.’
No doubt, we will be seeing more of the two Dees in future episodes of Benefits Street. Apparently, we will also be introduced to a family of Romanian immigrants — including a child bride and one solitary English speaker — who clash with other residents.
‘I cried when I saw the documentary,’ admitted one elderly women, who has lived on the street for 40 years. ‘It broke my heart. It used to be a beautiful street. It was full of families and hard-working people. It was a lovely community.’
But isn’t the story of James Turner Road also the story of the way so much of Britain is now going?


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2537414/Think-Benefits-Street-makes-shocking-TV-Try-living-A-worrying-dispatch-respectable-street-thats-making-headlines-week.html#ixzz2q4bk8uLy
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Sunday 5 January 2014

Now you can print your own TORNADO! RAF fighter jets fly for the first time using parts made with a 3D printer


  • BAE Systems said metal components were successfully used on the company's flight from airfield in Warton, Lancashire, late last month
  • Engineers are using 3D technology to design and produce parts which could cut RAF's maintenance and service bill by £1.2m over four years
  • 3D printing has been hailed as the future of manufacturing, but is also controversial owing to the production of guns in the United States
UK fighter jets have flown for the first time with parts made using 3D printing technology.
BAE Systems said the metal components were successfully used on board Tornado aircraft which flew from the defence firm's airfield at Warton, Lancashire, late last month.
The company said its engineers are using 3D technology to design and produce parts which could cut the Royal Air Force's maintenance and service bill by over £1.2 million over the next four years.
UK fighter jets have flown for the first time with parts made using 3D printing technology
UK fighter jets have flown for the first time with parts made using 3D printing technology
BAE Systems is working at RAF Marham, Norfolk, to engineer ready-made parts for four squadrons of Tornado GR4 aircraft, including protective covers for cockpit radios and guards for power take-off shafts. Some of the parts cost less than £100.
Mike Murray, head of airframe integration at BAE Systems, said: 'You are suddenly not fixed in terms of where you have to manufacture these things.
 
'You can manufacture the products at whatever base you want, providing you can get a machine there, which means you can also start to support other platforms such as ships and aircraft carriers.
'And if it's feasible to get machines out on the front line, it also gives improved capability where we wouldn't traditionally have any manufacturing support.'
BAE Systems said the metal components were successfully used on board Tornado aircraft
BAE Systems said the metal components were successfully used on board Tornado aircraft
While 3D printing is seen as a positive technology by many – it is thought it can revolutionise engineering and the medical industries – it is also a controversial innovation.
In the United States, several guns have been produced using the technology, with varying degrees of success.
One of the latest models, which includes a rifled barrel to ensure deadly accuracy, is said to have been made with just £15 of materials.
The latest generation of 3D printers work by building up layer upon layer of material - typically plastic - to build complex solid objects.
The guns are assembled from separate printed components made from plastic, with only the firing pin and a few bolts made from metal.
The Home Office in the UK said it will not be possible to ban 3D printers, so officials are working on alternative strategies.
These could include stiff jail sentences for possession of the weapons and making it illegal to download the plans.
In the US, more than 100,000 plans for a plastic gun known as 'The Liberator' were downloaded within hours.
The explosion of interest provoked the government into ordering the Texas-based company, Defense Distributed, who produced them to take them down.
It used a 3D printer that cost £5,140 from the online auction site eBay to make the parts which, when assembled, create a working handgun.
Defense Distributed’s leader Cody Wilson was voted the 14th most dangerous person in the world in November. 
Dangerous: Cody Wilson, of Defense Distributed, with the first completely 3D-printed handgun, The Liberator
Dangerous: Cody Wilson, of Defense Distributed, with the first completely 3D-printed handgun, The Liberator
But it is also hoped 3D printing will be used for the right reasons as well. For instance, the technology is already proven to be capable of making food.
In November, Rolls-Royce said it could use 3D printing on its models in the future.
And last week, the world’s first chocolate 3D printer was unveiled.
A company called Choc Edge has designed the machine that allows users to build any 3D shape out of chocolate - including their own face.
Customers can send an image of themselves through the company's website and the machine creates a thick layered chocolate portrait for between £50 and £80.
The machine, called Choc Creator, works by squirting out chocolate according to computer instructions and allows a user to build any shape they like out of the sweet liquid.

3D PRINTING HAILED AS THE FUTURE OF MANUFACTURING

This photograph shows the world's first chocolate 3D printer, unveiled last week
This photograph shows the world's first chocolate 3D printer, unveiled last week
The technology of 3D printing has been hailed as the future of manufacturing.
It works by building up layer upon layer of material - typically plastic - to build complex solid objects
The process, also called additive manufacturing, creates a three-dimensional solid object from a digital model.
The feat is achieved by laying down layer upon layer of plastic. The layers are then joined together to create the final shape.
The machine takes blueprints from computer aided designs and 'slices' them into digital cross-sections that the machine uses as a guideline for printing.
The process of addictive manufacturing has been in use on a large industrial scale since the early 1980s. 
However, since 2010, an entire industry has sprung up around personal 3D printers, which are increasingly small, increasingly powerful and increasingly affordable. 
Engineers hope 3D printing will begin an era of 'instant prototyping' that will allow product developers to forge and tinker with prototypes quickly and inexpensively.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2534084/Now-print-TORNADO-RAF-fighter-jets-fly-time-using-parts-3D-printer.html#ixzz2pX4RgHjn
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Friday 20 September 2013

Female teachers at Islamic school 'made to sign contract agreeing to wear headscarf even if they're NOT Muslim', Daily Mail


  • Female staff at Al-Madinah School, Derby, claim they have been asked to wear hijabs and make females sit at the back of classes

  • Non-Halal food and unacceptable jewellery also banned, it is claimed

  • Muslim faith free school was established in 2012 and caters for 200 students aged four to 16
  • National Union of Teachers have said they are 'worried over practices concerning discrimination at the school'

Claims: A member of staff from Al-Madinah School, some of whom are claiming they have been asked to wear headscarves
Claims: A member of staff from Al-Madinah School, some of whom are claiming they have been asked to wear headscarves
Female teachers at a Muslim school have been told to cover their heads with Islamic scarves during school hours - even if they are not Muslim.
Staff at Al-Madinah School, Derby, claim they have been told to sign new contracts agreeing to wear hijabs and even make girls sit at the back of classes.
The Muslim faith school, which caters for 200 students aged four to 16, is also thought to have forbidden teachers from bringing in non-Halal food or wearing unacceptable jewellery.
Non-Asian staff have been spotted removing the headwear immediately after stepping outside the school building during lunch hour, but today refused to reveal the extent of the school’s demands.
It is thought that at least five teachers at the school have complained to union bosses about the dress code change - which was introduced over the summer.
Stunned staff at the free school - who faced losing their jobs if they did not agree - are now working with the National Union of Teachers to seek legal advice.
Sue Arguile, branch secretary of Derby National Union of Teachers (NUT), insists that the possible breach of employment law is a result of the Al-Madinah's status as a free school.
She said: 'We have always had a number of concerns about this school ever since it was first set up as essentially they can do what they like.
'There is no buffer between them and the state and no protection for staff and pupils.
'Our understanding is that the teaching staff were told about the contractual changes over the summer in time for the new academic year.
'But at least five teachers - both male and female - have made complaints to the union of concerns about the school breaching employment law.
'We will now be seeking legal advice in order to determine what action to take - but it may very well be that teachers have to bite the bullet and agree.
'Free schools set their own rules, curriculum and dress codes and so long as pupils and staff are aware of them before joining then there is no upset.
'But forcing people to agree to contractual changes or face being out-of-work could breach employment law.'
Nick Raine, regional NUT officer, said: 'We are very worried about the school and the education of the 200 children there.
Banned: Non-Halal food is thought to have also been banned at the school, some of which is based in Norman House in Derby, pictured.
Banned: Non-Halal food is thought to have also been banned at the school, some of which is based in Norman House in Derby, pictured.
'It’s one thing to have a dress code which we can challenge and quite another to build it into a contract.
'The school is publicly accountable so there needs to be greater transparency.'
However, acting Principal, Stuart Wilson, says he has not received any complaints from staff.
He said: 'I've been told not to speak about the school's policy. I haven't received any complaints from members of staff.'
The school, which caters for primary-age children and secondary children, was set up in September 2012.
 
It is based in two different locations in Derby - one in Midland House, Nelson Street and the other in Norman House, Friar Gate.
The then head teacher Andrew Cutts-Mckay, who has left after less than a year in post, said at the time that the school was being set up so that ‘the timetable will be flexible with time for Islamic teaching but pupils will be able to opt out of this and there will be a chance to learn about other faiths’.
He said the school would ‘honour all faiths’ and that he envisaged a school where 50 percent of pupils are Islamic and the other half were not.
Allegations: The National Union of Teachers have said they are concerned about the school, the Midland House campus of which is shown above
Allegations: The National Union of Teachers have said they are concerned about the school, the Midland House campus of which is shown above
The free school was initially scheduled to admit 120 reception and year-one children, together with 180 pupils into years seven and eight. Eventually, the all-groups school will have up to 1,100 pupils.
Al-Madinah is a new type of free school, which the government is allowing groups of parents, or interested parties, to set up.

THE HIJAB: 'A SYMBOL OF MODESTY'

A hijab is typically worn by a Muslim female beyond the age of puberty in the presence of adult males - it covers the head and chest, but not the face.
It not only refers to the physical body covering, but also a state of mind, where al-hijab refers to ‘the veil which separates man or the world from God’.
Hijab can also be used to refer to the seclusion of women from men in public.
Most often, it is worn by Muslim women as a symbol of modesty, privacy and morality. If differs from a burqa, a veil that covers the entire body head and face, and the niqab which covers the entire head and face except for the eyes.
These operate in much the same way as private schools, outside local authority control but qualifying for government funding.
Sue Arguile, the branch secretary of Derby National Union of Teachers, added: 'There are worries over practices concerning the discrimination between male and female pupils in the school, with the girls being told to sit at the back of the class regardless of whether they can see the board properly.
'This school was first launched as based on Muslim principles and not as a Muslim school.
'If the school is not sticking to the original reasons behind why it was set up, then it does call into question whether public money is being used properly and for its intended purpose.'
The school has yet to receive an inspection by the Office for Standards in Education, but is due one this academic year.
However, the inspection could be brought forward in view of representations from the teaching unions and the city council.
An Ofsted spokeswoman said: 'As schools are only notified the afternoon before inspections begin, we would not be able to let anyone know when the school is being inspected.'


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2426626/Female-teachers-Islamic-school-sign-contract-agreeing-wear-headscarf-theyre-NOT-Muslim.html#ixzz2fSHeus9E
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Monday 2 September 2013

Agency workers not being paid equally, TUC says, BBC News Story




The UK is failing to implement European rules designed to give equal pay to agency workers, according to the trade union umbrella body, the TUC.
Agency workers who have been with a company for more than 12 weeks should be entitled to the same pay as permanent staff.
The TUC is complaining to the European Commission, saying that agency workers are still being paid less.
It comes amid a row about workers on so-called zero hours contracts.
The TUC claimed the government's implementation of the Temporary Agency Workers Directive, which came into effect two years ago, was flawed.
It argued an exemption meant that if a worker was directly employed by an agency, the company did not have to pay that worker the same rate of pay as a staffer - although they do get paid for at least four weeks between assignments.
The TUC said there had been a big rise in these types of contracts, with more than one in six agency workers now on them, particularly in low-paid, low-skilled work.
'Appalled'
The TUC wants these contracts banned and has now asked the European Commission to investigate the problem.
General secretary Frances O'Grady said: "The recent agency worker regulations have improved working conditions for many agency workers without causing job losses.
"However, the regulations are being undermined by a growing number of employers who are putting staff on contracts that deny them equal pay.
"Most people would be appalled if the person working next to them was paid more for doing the same job, and yet agency workers on these contracts can still be treated unfairly," he added.
The government said it would listen to concerns.
"We worked closely with both employers and employee organisations to successfully implement the Agency Workers Regulations," the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills told the BBC.
"We will of course consider carefully any information the TUC presents to the European Commission."
The exemption has been called "the Swedish derogation" because that is where the contracts originate, though in Sweden, workers still receive equal pay once in post and 90% of normal pay between assignments.
Kevin Green, chief executive of the Recruitment and Employment Confederation, told the BBC that the issue of agency workers had been consulted upon, and the issue was not a loophole but a "legitimate part of the legislation".
"Agency workers have benefited since these rules came in," he said. "There are lots of things our members were unhappy with in these regulations, there was clearly a compromise made.
"The key thing is to get people into work, to make sure you're creating jobs, if you start unpicking regulations because you decide you don't like them, then you risk creating uncertainty, undermining employers confidence and end up with fewer people in work."
Zero hours
Zero-hours contracts, or casual contracts, allow employers to hire staff with no guarantee of work.
Employers say zero-hours contracts allow them the flexibility to take on staff in response to fluctuating demand for their services, in sectors such as tourism and hospitality.
Some employers have been accused of rolling over temporary employment in short-term amounts to get around having to pay workers full-time pay and benefits.
Figures from the Office for National Statistics show that 250,000 UK workers are on zero-hours contracts - around 1% of the UK workforce - though the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development thinks the figure is closer to one million.
The government has said it is concerned about the potential abuse of zero-hours contracts by some employers and will decide in September whether to hold a formal consultation on possible changes to employment laws covering them.

Tuesday 27 August 2013

What was behind the Bristol bus boycott? By Jon Kelly BBC News Magazine

Bristol boycott march A newspaper cutting shows students marching in Bristol in protest against a "colour bar" on the buses

working on Bristol's buses. Today the boycott is largely forgotten - but it was a milestone in achieving equality.
A spring afternoon in 1963. Eighteen-year-old Guy Bailey arrived on time for his job interview. Bailey was well qualified for the post, but he would not be taken on. Because he was black.
He strolled up to the front desk. He told the receptionist why he was there. She looked up at him. "I don't think so," she said.
Bailey thought she must be mistaken. "The name is Mr Bailey," he told her.
The receptionist stood and went to the manager's office. Bailey heard her call through his door: "Your two o'clock appointment is here, and he's black."

 

The manager shouted back from inside his room: "Tell him the vacancies are full."
Bailey protested. There was an advert for applicants in the local paper only the day before. Just an hour ago, his friend had rung the same office and been told there were plenty of jobs.
"There's no point having an interview," said the manager, still in his office, refusing to come out and meet Bailey's eyes. "We don't employ black people."
Encounters of this sort were then familiar in many parts of the world. The newspapers were full of stories about the struggle against segregation in the deep south of the US and the fight against apartheid in South Africa.
But this wasn't Alabama or Mississippi. This wasn't Johannesburg or Pretoria.
This was Bristol, in England, in 1963.

Guy Bailey recalls how in 1960s he was refused an interview for a job working on buses in Bristol because of the colour of his skin.
464 line
The manager who refused Bailey a job was acting entirely within his rights.
Half a century ago it was legal in the UK to discriminate against someone because of the colour of their skin.
At the state-owned Bristol Omnibus Company, run by the local council, the "colour bar" was an open secret. Despite the presence of an established Caribbean community in the city, no non-white driver or conductor had ever been employed on the network.
The company's management acted with the connivance of the local branch of the trade union that represented bus crews. These were the days when workplace unrest was common, but on this issue both sides of the industrial divide stood together against integration.
But Bailey's unsuccessful interview marked a turning point. Members of the local black community, supported by many of their white neighbours, led a boycott of the network in protest.
Quite consciously, the campaigners imitated the non-violent anti-racist crusade of Martin Luther King and other American advocates of racial tolerance.
The Bristol boycott was to prove a watershed moment. The campaigners maintain that their efforts directly led to the UK's first ever laws against race-based discrimination.
Today, outside Bristol, the story of the bus boycott is barely known. But to those who led it, this was the UK's own version of the civil rights movement that shook the American south.
464 line
In 1960, Bristol's Caribbean community numbered about 3,000. Most had arrived from the Caribbean after World War II. The 1948 British Nationality Act meant they had British passports with full rights of entry and settlement to the UK.
Many had served Queen and country. Nearly all, like Bailey, had been schooled under the British education system. And at a time of virtually full employment, employers like London Transport and the National Health Service had actively sought their labour.
But the reception they received from their fellow British subjects was frequently less than welcoming.
Bailey recalls his shock, not long after he first came to Bristol in 1961, when he was chased by gangs of Teddy Boys wielding bicycle chains, their blows landing on the back of his head as he ran.
For a young man raised in Jamaica by a fervently monarchist British Army veteran father, this went against everything he had been brought up to expect of the place he knew as the "mother country".
"Bristol was a very cold city," recalls Bailey of his early years in the UK, "both in terms of the weather and the people."
Fearful of physical attacks, the black community was largely confined to the deprived St Paul's area.
The few boarding houses prepared to rent rooms to non-whites charged a premium. Some others displayed signs in the window reading: "No Irish, no blacks, no dogs."
"You couldn't go into pubs in Bristol on your own, not if you were black," remembers Roy Hackett, who emigrated to the UK in 1952.
"You'd get a hiding. You had to go in two or three at a time. There were shops that wouldn't serve us. Ninety per cent of us, if we had been able to go back we would have. If I'd had £35, I would have done it."
Roy and Ena HackettRoy and Ena Hackett pictured on their wedding day
Hackett knew from bitter experience that the "colour bar" existed in employment.
When he went for one labouring job, he was told the company did not employ "Africans". Hackett protested indignantly that he was Jamaican - if he was going to be discriminated against, the least they could do was get his nationality right.
In 1962, his wife Ena applied for a job as a bus conductor. She was turned down despite meeting all the requirements of the post. Everyone assumed her colour was the disqualifying factor.
At the time, there was no Race Relations Act, and employers could not be prosecuted for discriminating on racist grounds. Newcomers from the Caribbean encountered prejudice when applying for work in other towns and cities, too.
But even in the early 1960s, Bristol's race bar on the buses stood out. Non-white drivers and conductors were a familiar sight across much of the UK.
Just 12 miles away in Bath, black crews were working on buses. London Transport recruitment officers had travelled to Barbados specifically to invite workers to come to the capital.

To the black community, the history of Bristol - a one-time major slave port, which still had multiple streets and landmarks named after the slave trader Edward Colston - loomed large.
Hackett had had enough. Along with several other St Paul's residents he formed a group called the West Indian Development Council to lobby for rights.
The group was galvanised by the arrival in Bristol in 1962 of a young man called Paul Stephenson. The son of an African father and a white British mother, Stephenson had been brought up in Essex before National Service in the RAF and a social work degree in Birmingham.
Unlike the older immigrants who had served as de facto representatives of black Bristol, Stephenson did not fear rocking the boat and had no interest in effecting gradual change. He was bold, pushy and wanted equality there and then.
Stephenson was employed as a youth officer. But what really motivated him was racial injustice and the inspiration of the US civil rights movement.
In particular, he recalled the year-long bus boycott in the city of Montgomery, Alabama, launched after one African-American woman famously refused to take the seats reserved for black passengers.
"I had seen Rosa Parks - her defiant struggle against sitting at the back of the bus," he remembers.
Stephenson had an idea.
464 line
Newspaper headline reading: "No colour bar on the buses"
At first no-one admitted that black people were banned from working on Bristol's bus crews. Anyone who was even vaguely acquainted with the service, however, was aware that no non-white person would ever be seen behind the wheels of its fleet.
The cover was broken in 1961 when the local newspaper, the Bristol Evening Post, ran a series of articles alleging the existence of the "colour bar".
Ian Patey, the general manager of the Bristol Omnibus Company, told the paper that it did employ a few non-whites "in the garage but this was labouring work in which capacity most employers were prepared to accept them". In other words, he would not tolerate them working as drivers or conductors.
Patey made his position more explicit before a meeting of Bristol's Joint Transport Committee in March 1962. He told members there was "factual evidence" that the presence of black crews would downgrade the job and drive existing staff away. The committee voted not to overturn his policy.
But it was not only management which took this attitude. According to at least one account, in 1955 the Passenger Group (which represented drivers and conductors) of Bristol's Transport and General Workers Union (TGWU) passed a resolution that black workers should not be employed as bus crews.
The union operated a closed shop on Bristol's buses - no-one could be employed on the service unless they belonged to and were approved by the TGWU.
Unlike management, however, the TGWU did not acknowledge at the time that discrimination represented branch policy.
A Black London bus driver at the wheel in the late 1950sA 1950s London bus, where non-white drivers were a familiar sight
Indeed, the union - then the UK's largest, with more than a million members - was at least in theory committed to anti-racism. Its national leaders spoke out against apartheid in South Africa. In Bristol, hundreds of black employees at the city's Fry's chocolate factory belonged to the TGWU. So too - in the days when a union card was often essential to get work - did Bailey, Hackett and Stephenson.
There were even black TGWU members within the Bristol Omnibus Company. At the same time that the Passenger Group voted to exclude black workers, the maintenance section - which represented the garages - appears to have voted to take on non-white members in the garages.
But those who worked for the company were all too aware that black employees were not welcome on board once the buses left the station.
"I knew it was going on," says Steve Bishop (not his real name), who worked both as a conductor and a driver in Bristol. "It was a colour bar."
A young man with two small children to support, Bishop kept out of union politics. But he was aware of the mutterings in the canteen and the pubs after work.
If black workers were hired, he recalls, "everyone said there would be overtime cuts if not job losses".
Bishop didn't argue with them. He adds: "It wouldn't stand the light of day now."
464 line
As part of his youth worker duties, Stephenson had been teaching night classes to young people. One of his pupils was Guy Bailey.
Stephenson had decided the time had come to challenge the bus company's race bar. Bailey, he judged, made an ideal "stalking horse" - well-spoken, educated, a cricket player, churchgoer and former Boy's Brigade officer - and it would be difficult to justify refusing such an upstanding young gentleman a job.

The Bristol Omnibus Company

Green Bristol omnibus
  • One of the UK's oldest bus companies
  • Now known as First Somerset and Avon
  • Company went by other names of: "Bristol Blues" (even after buses were painted green), "Bristol tramways" and plain "Bristol"
  • Became a state-owned company in 1948
  • Employed black and Asian bus personnel from September 1963
For his part, Bailey was excited about the prospect of working on the buses. He had a steady job as a dispatch clerk in a garment warehouse, but the vehicles he saw rumbling through Bristol each day offered a more exciting career.
"I thought they were really unusual because I'd never seen them before I came here," Bailey recalls. "I thought, I'd love to drive one of those things." Driving sounded like a more exciting career than working behind a desk.
An advert had appeared in the Evening Post asking would-be conductors to call to arrange an interview. Bailey knew that drivers had to serve an apprenticeship collecting tickets before they were allowed behind the wheel. Stephenson saw an opportunity to expose the racist hiring policy.
Fifty years on, the two men's recollections differ as to just how aware Bailey was of the company's discriminatory policies. Stephenson insists he warned the younger man not to get his hopes up. Bailey says he had no idea he didn't stand a chance.
Both agree what happened next, however. One day in April 1963, Stephenson - who spoke with an Essex accent, and would not be identified from the other end of the phone line as black - called the company's headquarters on Bailey's behalf.
He said one of his night school pupils was keen to work as a conductor. Stephenson was told to send him along.
For his interview, Bailey wanted to look his best. His fashion role model was Simon Templar, the sharply dressed action hero played by Roger Moore in the TV serial The Saint.
"He used to dress quite nicely, he used to wear a blazer and grey trousers," smiles Bailey. "So I had shirt and tie, blazer, grey trousers and I thought I was Simon Templar."
It didn't do Bailey any good. That night he turned up to his night class and told Stephenson that he had been refused the job because of his colour.
The older man had been expecting this. The campaign he had been planning was about to begin.
"Now was the time to take up the issue and do what Martin Luther King was doing," he says.
Martin Luther King waves to supporters from the steps of the Lincoln Memorial 28 August, 1963Martin Luther King waves to supporters at the Lincoln Memorial in 1963
464 line
It started with a press conference. The local media were invited to Stephenson's St Paul's flat and told what happened to Bailey at the bus company headquarters.
Passionately denouncing the "colour bar", Stephenson urged a boycott of the service until the policy of discrimination was ended.
"I put the emphasis on the manager of the bus company to take responsibility," he says.
To illustrate the parallels with the US, local photographers were invited to follow a young black man named Owen Henry on to a Bristol bus. Pointedly, Henry stood at the back.

1/3
The stunt caught the imagination of the newspapers. They contacted Patey, who confirmed explicitly once again that black people were not welcome to serve on his fleet.
"We don't employ a mixed labour force as bus crews because we have found from observing other bus companies that the labour supply gets worse if the labour force is mixed," Patey told the Evening Post.
In an editorial, the newspaper strongly condemned the policy.
But it did not lay all of the blame on Patey and his management. The TGWU, it alleged, was not doing enough "to get the race virus out of the systems of their ranks and file".
As the national as well as the local media began to take notice of the boycott, the focus was about to shift towards the drivers and conductors.
464 line
Prince Brown (left), Roy Hackett (right) and other campaigners in Bristol The campaigners in Bristol
The bus crews and their union were caught off-guard by the boycott.
For as long as most of the younger staff could remember, the absence of any black colleagues had been an unmistakable, if rarely acknowledged, fact.
"I never worked on the buses with black guys," says Bishop, who had previously served quite happily alongside black colleagues in other workplaces. "I was a member of the union but I didn't give it much thought - I wasn't directly affected.
"I was always a union man. I remember being of the opinion - well, it's the union, and they're of the same mind."
At first the TGWU's regional secretary Ron Nethercott - at the time dubbed "the most powerful man in the West Country" by the local media - publicly declared that the crews would have no objection to black labour joining their ranks. He was soon contradicted by drivers and conductors who told the media they would refuse to serve alongside non-whites.
However, Nethercott, now aged 90, insists the bus workers were not motivated by colour prejudice but by a fear that their income would be eroded.
Basic wages on the buses were relatively low by Bristol standards. Before the war they had matched those of skilled workers at the city's British Aerospace plant, but had since fallen behind.
To match the standards of living of their neighbours, bus crews invariably volunteered for overtime.
According to one ex-conductor, it was common to work from 04:30 or 05:00 each morning until midnight. Most aimed to clock in 100 hours a week, which would raise their take-home pay to £20 - just above the average weekly wage in the early 1960s.
To be guaranteed this much overtime, however, the bus crews' rotas had to be understaffed.
At the same time, management had raised the prospect of "one-man operated buses" (OMOs), which required only one bus worker on board each vehicle to act both as driver and conductor. As a result, many felt their jobs were precarious.

Start Quote

Ron Nethercott
The busmen's wages were so low that they depended on overtime to make a living”
Ron Nethercott
According to Nethercott, it was the threat of having their incomes diluted by a newly arrived pool of migrant labour that motivated the Passenger Group's members to uphold the bar, not racial prejudice.
"Wherever they they came from, Europe, China, Alaska, it made no difference," he says.
"The busmen would have still resented it because they were taking away their overtime. Their wages were so damn low that they depended on overtime to make a living."
Not everyone agrees that the crews were entirely motivated by economic concerns, however.
Tony Fear began working as a "strapper", or a new conductor, at the start of 1961 aged 18. Having served in the Territorial Army he had a number of black friends, and was shocked by what he considered outright racism on the part of his new colleagues.
"The worst were the conductresses, I have to say," Fear recalls. "They were terrible. They'd say a black conductor would eventually become a driver, therefore they'd have to work with a black driver, and the things they could do at the end of the journey, you know? It was terrible. They thought they were wide open to rape. They believed that."
As for male bus crews, the older staff - men in their 40s and 50s who had typically served alongside Commonwealth regiments in WWII - tended not to have a problem with the prospect of black colleagues, according to Fear. It was their younger counterparts who were more likely to be bigoted.
"Where did that prejudice come from in that generation, people in their 20s and 30s? I was saddened by it," recalls Fear.
As voices from outside the depot were raised in opposition to discrimination at the company, Fear voiced his support for Bristol's black community: "I was sympathetic and I wasn't afraid to say so." His colleagues listened to him respectfully, but few signalled their agreement.
For all that the union undoubtedly played its part in denying black workers jobs, however, Stephenson believes the ultimate blame for the discriminatory policies lay with the management for having set the terms of debate.
"The ordinary workers took their cue from the Bristol Omnibus Company," he says.
"The unions were more concerned about their economic situation. They thought the black workers were lower status and would bring about wage decreases - it was economic racism.
"Some of them were racist - they didn't want to work with black people. But it was the management, it was the city council that was ultimately responsible."
464 line
Guy Bailey, Roy Hackett and Paul Stephenson in front of one of the original green buses - modern photoGuy Bailey, Roy Hackett and Paul Stephenson with a 1960s-era Bristol bus
The boycott quickly gathered pace. Supporters refused to use the buses. Marches were held across the city. Depots were picketed.
Students at Bristol University - particularly those in radical groups like the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament and the Campaign Against Racial Discrimination - swelled the ranks of the protests. Around a hundred of them marched on the TGWU's offices.
High-profile politicians lent their support, too. Bristol South East MP Tony Benn - then known as Anthony Wedgwood Benn - declared he would "stay off the buses, even if I have to find a bike". Labour leader Harold Wilson, who would be elected prime minister the following year, told an anti-apartheid rally in London he was "glad that so many Bristolians are supporting the [boycott] campaign… we wish them every success".
Sir Learie Constantine, the celebrated ex-West Indies cricketer who was High Commissioner for Trinidad and Tobago, publicly condemned the bus company. So too did diplomats from Jamaica and other Caribbean territories.

Roy Hackett, who was instrumental in the 1963 Bristol bus boycott, recalls the events that sparked the anti-racist protests
The media was lobbied tirelessly by the indefatigable Stephenson. Intrigued by the parallels with the American south, reporters from London headed west and made the comparison, to the embarrassment of Bristol's civic leaders.
They were not the only ones who found the attention uncomfortable. "I was being bombarded or harassed or being set upon by the media," says Bailey, who had a less effusive personality than Stephenson.
And yet as Stephenson predicted, Bailey's quiet dignity made him an ideal figurehead. It wasn't only outsiders who disapproved of his treatment. Public opinion in Bristol itself shifted in favour of the protesters.
In Montgomery, Alabama, the boycott had succeeded in part because African-Americans formed a large proportion of the bus operators' customers. In Bristol their numbers were not so large. Instead, the purpose of the British boycott was to generate propaganda - drawing parallels with US segregation and shaming the authorities - while causing as much disruption as possible.
Pickets of bus depots and routes were a key part of the strategy. Hackett organised blockades and sit-down protests at Fishponds Road in the north-east of Bristol to prevent buses getting through to the city centre.
"White women taking their kids to school or going to work would ask us what it was about," Hackett says. "Later they came and joined us."
Like King's campaign, the methods were strictly non-violent. "I said to everyone, not one stick and not one stone."
In fairness, he says, their opponents responded on the same basis: "They gave us a lot of harsh words but they never harassed us physically."
By now, it was the bus crews who were bearing the brunt of the pressure.
Map of key points in Bristol
As the summer wore on, the TGWU in Bristol was increasingly isolated.
Their erstwhile comrades in Bristol's other unions were becoming hostile.

Race Relations Act 1965

  • Forbade discrimination on the "grounds of colour, race, or ethnic or national origins" in public places and applied to both British residents and overseas visitors
  • Critics called for it to be tougher, making racial discrimination a criminal offence
  • Race Relations Board was established in 1966
  • The law was tightened in 1968 when racial discrimination was extended to include employment and housing
  • It was further extended in 1976 when, for the first time, it identified direct and indirect discrimination and also established the Commission for Racial Equality
At a May Day rally organised by Bristol Trades Council, the bus workers were condemned from the platform while TGWU members were heckled and barracked by other unionists for bringing shame on the labour movement.
Passengers, too, were increasingly voicing their disapproval of the bus crews. "In those days the buses were so important that all they'd want to do was see a bus that they could get on," recalls Fear. "I don't think they cared who drove it or who conducted it.
"People were saying: 'If it was a black driver we'd be on time.' That didn't help. Or: 'Oh flipping heck, if you were a black conductor you'd know where I want to get off.' That caused a lot of bad feeling, it really did."
Nethercott was feeling embattled. Attacked by his own members for suggesting they would be prepared to work alongside black crews, he engaged in a public war of words with Stephenson which led to the union leader losing a libel action brought by the young activist.
An attempt to broker a compromise, with a black TGWU member signing a statement which called for "sensible and quiet compromise", came to nothing.
"Everybody was scared of it," complains Nethercott, still visibly aggrieved 50 years on.
"The great problem around that time was that people lacked courage. They didn't want to get involved. So it was left to the likes of me."
It was clear something had to give.
"I think the union realised they were losing the argument," says Fear.
464 line
On 28 August 1963, 250,000 people marched on Washington DC to demand civil rights for African-Americans. At the Lincoln Memorial, Martin Luther King stood before the crowd and delivered his famous "I have a dream" speech.
"From every mountainside," King declared, "Let freedom ring."
That same day was a momentous one for Bristol, too. On 28 August, Ian Patey declared a change in policy at the Bristol Omnibus Company. There would now be "complete integration" on the buses, "without regard to race, colour or creed", Patey added.
The night before, a meeting of 500 TGWU bus workers had voted to agree to "the employment of suitable coloured workers as bus crews". The boycott had succeeded. The colour bar was dead.
By mid-September Bristol had its first non-white bus conductor. Raghbir Singh, an Indian-born Sikh, had lived in Bristol since 1959. On his first day, he told the Western Daily Press he would wear a blue turban to work because it "goes with my uniform. If I wear a brown suit I have on a brown turban". Further black and Asian bus crews quickly followed.
Guy Bailey was not among them. The rejection he had experienced, and the campaign that followed him, had put him off the notion of working on the buses.
"I felt unwanted, I felt helpless, I felt the whole world had caved in around me. I didn't think I would live through it," he says. "But it was worth it."
Those black and Asian crews might have expected a hostile reception but, says Tony Fear, the most vociferously bigoted conductors and drivers handed in their notice rather than work with non-whites.
Bus conductors On 28 August, Ian Patey declared there would be "complete integration" on buses
The impact of the boycott's success was not only felt by those who gained jobs with the Bristol Bus Company. Stephenson believes the Race Relations Acts of 1965 and 1968, which banned discrimination in public places and in employment, were brought in by Harold Wilson's government to prevent a situation like that in Bristol occurring again.
"I met him at the House of Commons," says Stephenson. "He made it quite clear he was going to do something against racism."
Bailey, Hackett and Stephenson were all subsequently awarded the OBE for the part they played in the boycott.
Their names may not be as recognisable to most Britons as those of King and Parks are to most Americans, but all remain quietly proud of their achievements.
Those who found themselves on the other side of the barricades feel differently.
Tony Fear celebrated when the bar was lifted. Before this, he argued against discrimination with his fellow bus workers, but never went to any union meetings to state his case because he disagreed with the concept of the closed shop. Today, he wonders if he should have done more.
"When you get to my age, you think: 'I should have said this, I should have stood up,'" he says.
Bishop, who now has two mixed-race grandchildren, kept quiet at the time, something he now regrets.
"When I was a callow youth, I wasn't much concerned about it," he says. "But later I felt guilty about it. You get more aware of it as you get older."
Their union eventually voiced its remorse, too. Unite, into which the TGWU merged in 2007, issued an apology in February 2013 for siding with management 50 years earlier.
However obscure the dispute remains today, Britain's post-colonial legacy was shaped by its contortions. It began in a bus company office, when a young man walked up to reception.

Picture research by Susannah Stevens
You can follow the Magazine on Twitter and on Facebook
Watch Tulip Mazumdar's report on the Bristol bus boycott, and the impact it had, on Newsnight on BBC Two on Tuesday 27 August at 22:30 BST, or catch up afterwards on the BBC iPlayer and Newsnight website.

Today's post

Jesus Christ, The Same Yesterday, Today and Forever

I had the privilege to be raised in a Christian Home and had the input of my parents and grandparents into my life, they were ...