Vox pop: Would more union visibility benefit construction?

Following UCATT’s Living Wage deal for Battersea Phases 2 and 3, would more union visibility benefit construction?

Phase 2 of the Battersea Power Station scheme, designed by Wilkinson Eyre and due to be delivered by Skanska

Stuart Green MCIOB, head of school of construction management and engineering, University of Reading

We need to improve the performance of the construction sector – not only in terms of satisfying its clients – but also in terms of improving onsite employment conditions.

The construction improvement agenda too often ignores the needs and aspirations of the workforce. In this respect increased visibility of the unions would be a good thing.

The rhetoric of “collaborative working” continues to sit uneasily with the legacy of illegal blacklisting, false self-employment and the ongoing exploitation of vulnerable migrant workers by gangmasters. What we don’t need, of course, is a return to the divisive industrial relations climate of the 1970s.

Chrissi McCarthy MCIOB, managing director, Constructing Equality

I agree with the Living Wage in principle, however, like any initiative the impact will depend on how it is implemented. If it is not thought through, making contractors pay a Living Wage could in fact end up making things worse for the most vulnerable.

Contractors and subcontractors may decide to push more people from their businesses and hire self-employed people to avoid having to pay the Living Wage. Then they will be able to say “100% of our employees earn the Living Wage”, but they only have a skeleton staff.

They will have to be very careful not to make things worse, and that whatever they do is not just for PR. Possibly a better way to tackle wages would be the industry coming together collaboratively identifying the problems and trying to make progress towards solving them.

Paul Bogle, head of policy and research, National Federation of Builders

The unions have made positive contributions to the construction industry in a number of areas: raising awareness of health and safety issues as well as working with employers to negotiate collective pay agreements are just two examples.

Rather than looking at union visibility, we need to focus on effectiveness because there will be a large number of companies for which union membership is unlikely.

Between 1997 and 2014, the number of companies with five or fewer employees in construction grew from 149,650 to 188,203 and continues to rise. By focusing on activities such as collective bargaining, which touches even those outside membership, unions can benefit the industry.

Mark Wakeford, joint managing director, Stepnell

On the frontline of construction we are not overly worried about the rise of unions, as the structures we have in place for agreeing wages have worked for many years and unions have contributed significantly to industry improvements in health and safety.

Like many small and medium-sized contractors we use the Construction Industry Joint Council (CIJC) Working Rule Agreement to set base rates and these are agreed through collective bargaining between unions and employers.

Where we may see pressure to meet the Living Wage is on the peripheral support staff, but this is not too concerning as they make up a relatively small percentage of the workforce and, if implemented, will be a pan-industry initiative.

My only concern is that there may be a knock-on effect if staff see lower wages increase. There may be a pressure to increase the standard industry rates to maintain the current differentials.

Dr Neil Cutland, director, Cutland Consulting

Essentially, anything that can improve employment security and the knock-on issues such as health and safety has to be a good thing. The wider the debate the better, and I think unions have a role to play in that debate.

Internal industry bodies also have a role to play and are doing good work, but when you consult on any project you should involve all stakeholders. The unions are stakeholders, so they should be included.

As for finances, it’s almost inconceivable that in a civilised country people should not be paid a “living wage”. I run a small business and can certainly understand the issue of costs related to salaries, but you nevertheless have to make a decision to pay people a reasonable wage. It seems bizarre to me that a company wouldn’t do that.