On 19th-21st March, Accord, the union organising the largest number of workers at Lloyds Banking Group, will hold its biennial conference. The main subject of debate will be Lloyds’ decision to press ahead with its attack on the Defined Benefit Scheme, introducing a 0% cap on pensions – and, importantly, what the response of the union should be to this attack.
On 19th-21st March, Accord, the union organising the largest number of workers at Lloyds Banking Group, will hold its biennial conference. The main subject of debate will be Lloyds’ decision to press ahead with its attack on the Defined Benefit Scheme, introducing a 0% cap on pensions – and, importantly, what the response of the union should be to this attack.
Accord’s press release states the bank stands to gain £1 billion from this “reform” alone, and has tried to drive a wedge between those members on the Defined Benefit (DB) scheme by offering a meagre enhancement to pay, pay progression, and an equal pay commission – none of which makes up for the lost pay and pensions as a result of five years of below inflation pay offers, not to mention establishing the precedent that the bank can offer peanuts and the union leaders will simply roll over.
Workers at Lloyds are faced with a stark choice: fight or flight. They can vote to strike, and act on the principles of trade unionism – strength through unity – or accept the miserly bribes offered by the uber-wealthy board of executives – bribes which can be taken away as easily as they’re given once the unity of the workers is broken.
For five years Lloyds has inched forward in it’s campaign to drive back wages and conditions. Initially weakened by the crisis of 2008, organised capital in Lloyds, lead by Horta-Osorio – Antonio as senior management call him – is becoming increasingly bold. That the bank has not turned a profit in five years, or paid a penny to shareholders, paints a desperate hue to the attack carried out by the bank.
The response from the leaderships of the three unions organising in Lloyds has been mixed, to say the least. Unite the Union continue their vow of silence. Accord have announced they will, with reluctance, hold a consultative ballot on holding a ballot to take industrial action(!). Lloyds Trade Union on the other hand, have already held a consultative ballot, and have announced their intention to ballot for industrial action. If the results of LTU’s consultative ballot are anything to go by, the full ballot will be a crushing ‘yes’ for industrial action: in the consultation 13,592 papers were sent out, 10,058 returned (73.9% turnout); 98% voted to reject the bank’s pensions proposal and 93% voted in favour of industrial action.
It may seem to many active trade unionists that Accord have waited until the negotiation period is over before holding a consultative ballot, in order to demonstrate the strength of feeling and opposition amongst the members. The value of a consultative ballot after the changes have been implemented is questionable to say the least, as it made it a lot easier for Lloyds to push forward in their attack on pensions, regardless. It was a mistake not to go into negotiations without a consultative ballot completed to both know our own strength, but also to demonstrate the opposition and willingness to fight amongst workers to Lloyds if necessary.
It is not a mistake which cannot be corrected though. A vigorous campaign to prepare members for industrial action, and to win a solid ‘yes’ in a full ballot may force the bank to blink and think twice. Such an energetic campaign has yet to begin on the part of Accord’s leadership. It will take pressure from the rank and file members to press the leadership of the union into action.
Of particular note for the conference of 2014, however, is that Accord delegates will vote on two important motions which Socialist Appeal supporters in Accord have put forward. The first calls for Accord to ballot for escalating industrial action to defend the DB pension scheme against the bank’s attempt to raid pensions. The motion reads:
This conference notes the past policy of the Union has been to reject any form of industrial action in favour of negotiation alone. While this may have been sufficient in the past, times have changed. The financial crisis of 2007-08 crippled both HBOS and Lloyds, bringing their continued existence into question, requiring state intervention in the short term to avoid collapse.
In order to restore profitability, the bank has destroyed the jobs and livelihoods of thousands of colleagues, while greatly increasing the workload of the remaining staff. The huge increase in stress levels, the negative impact on colleague’s health, the intensifying pressure on colleagues, the below inflation pay offers eroding the real value of our wages, the direct attacks on our pensions are the policy and result of the bank trying to restore profitability.
It is therefore no longer possible to defend, much less advance, the interests of members in the old way. The bank has no concessions to make because it has been through a serious crisis, and can only restore profitability by driving down wages, pensions contributions and pushing to intensify work on the part of colleagues – in short, more work for less pay. Every new attack on staff pay and conditions, every intensification of pressure, has been met with less than token resistance, and this has served only to encourage the bank to be bolder in its attacks, to put more pressure on staff.
Conference resolves it is necessary to use the methods of industrial action, in order to draw a line in the sand and defend our jobs and livelihoods – both today and in retirement. The first step is to ballot to strike, with a clear plan of escalating action, to defend the DB pension scheme. This defensive action will form the basis to then move forward to win back the lost pay and conditions of recent years.
More significant, however, is the second motion which calls for the full nationalisation of Lloyds, without compensation, under democratic workers control. The second motion reads:
This conference notes the PPI scandal has now cost the bank approximately £10 billion, the equivalent of four to five years of profits, compounding the impact of the financial crisis.
The bank has not been able to make a profit for several years without state intervention (the bailout), a mis-selling scandal (PPI, Bancassurance) or without attacking the pay, conditions and pensions of colleagues. This is characteristic of the finance sector as a whole and is a result of the crisis of the economy in the UK, Europe and around the globe.
This conference notes the services provided by the bank are vital to the day-to-day lives of millions of people, almost as much as utilities, road and rail. Banking is therefore a public service, and should be run as such.
Conference recognises the interests of the large shareholders, and their profits, are not compatible with the interests of those workers employed by the bank and society as a whole. For profits to increase, colleague pay, pensions and working conditions must be decreased. For colleague conditions to be protected, and the services provided to society to be maintained, expanded and improved, it is necessary to take the bank into public ownership entirely, and operate it as a public service – that is to nationalise the bank, without compensation to the large shareholders who have enjoyed years of profits and more than received back their initial investment.
Conference resolves that in order to protect the pay, pensions and jobs of colleagues, and to ensure the stability of the bank as a public service, it is necessary to nationalise the bank entirely, and to run it under the democratic control of the workers employed by the bank, and in society at large.
Socialist Appeal will be arguing for these motions at the upcoming conference, where it is hoped that socialist ideas will have an echo amongst workers in the banking sector. We urge all delegates to support these motions and help us in the fight for a socialist alternative to the attacks by Lloyds and the rest of the bankers and bosses.
