Parliamentary report

9 RMT parliamentary column W HATEVER we may think of politicians, or whatever our different views are of political parties, the political process effects us on a daily basis. It could be the state of our local schools or hospitals, transport or crime. The pensions, working hours, rights at work and health and safety of transport workers are all affected by political decisions. And of course the privatisation of the railways, the Tube PPP, the break up of the bus industry and the decline in seafarers’ jobs all have their origins in political decisions. It is for these reasons that the forthcoming RMT Political Fund ballot is so important. As well as allowing RMT to run political campaigns the Political Fund gives members a political voice in parliament on the issues that specifically affects transport workers. And RMT has a tremendous record of working with sympathetic MPs in parliament to secure victories for RMT members. These include the protection of pensions and travel facilities for rail and tube, and bus workers and seafarers, and the right for workers to receive compensation for injuries at work. The union is currently working very closely with those MPs on all those vital issues for transport workers. The tonnage tax campaign for seafarers, for public ownership of the railways, an increase in freight of rail, an end to the London Underground PPP, for minimum fire safety standards on rail and Tube, for regulation of the bus industry and a reduction in hours with no loss of pay of road transport workers to name but a few. Perhaps it is also worth reminding ourselves why we have the Political Fund in the first place. This dates back to the beginning of 20th century when employers used the courts to prevent the founding fathers of the unions from campaigning and speaking out on behalf of their members. The outcry that followed forced the government of the time to bring in legislation that allowed the unions to have a separate political fund. The right of unions to engage in political campaigning on behalf of its members was again challenged in the early 80s when the conservative government introduced the legislation that compelled unions to ballot their members every ten years if they wished to retain their fund. The thinking behind this attack on trade union rights was that members would vote against the maintenance of their Political Funds, leaving unions without the ability to campaign politically. Those who wished to weaken the unions in this way could not have been more wrong. Not only did union members turn out to vote in record numbers, the Yes voters were in an overwhelming majority: 83 per cent of members voted YES. So it is clear that the unions’ political voice has been hard fought for and the RMT continues to gain a strong reputation for its political campaigning and its parliamentary work. By voting YES in the forthcoming ballot we and fellow MPs will be able to continue that work on your behalf. Let’s keep the political voice. JOHN McDONNELL MP Vote YES for a political voice Model Letter Dear............................MP Facilitating shore leave for seafarers and improved maritime security I wish to highlight a particular problem confronting the global shipping industry and the 1.25 million seafarers that service international trade. Due to the special nature of seafarers’ employment the provision of shore leave in the foreign ports that seafarers visit is vital to ensure their wellbeing and welfare. However, one of the unresolved problems created by post 9/11 security concerns is the tighter restrictions being placed on the movement of seafarers by the US government. Apart from concerns about welfare, the entry into force of the International Maritime Organisation, International Ship and Port Facility Security (ISPS) Code has conferred a major new security role on seafarers. Maritime employers and seafarers’ trade unions believe that unreasonable restrictions on shore leave are counter productive, simply generating ill feeling amongst those who have such an important part to play in ensuring the security of ships and port facilities. The most acute problems have been experienced in the US, where in addition to the frequent denial of shore leave, some companies have even been required to pay for armed guards to prevent foreign seafarers from leaving their ships. To address concerns about security in a manner compatible with providing seafarers with shore leave, the International Labour Organisation has adopted a new Convention on the Security of Seafarers’ Identity Documents (ILO 185). The new Convention requires seafarers’ identity documents to include a bar-coded fingerprint, and sets out the detailed procedures for their issue. It maintains the principle that port states must afford special treatment to seafarers to facilitate shore leave or crew transits, and that seafarers holding the new ID should not be required to apply for a visa in advance. The global shipping industry and seafarers’ trade unions are especially disappointed by the US decision to abolish “crew list visas” and insist that seafarers appear in person at US consulates to obtain visas. Apart from the huge practical difficulties this policy creates, it also gives a very negative signal to other governments that are considering whether to ratify the new ILO Convention. On World Maritime Day, I urge the UK government to use all diplomatic means to secure from the US government an agreement that facilitates the movement of seafarers and the provision of shore leave. ✍