At the UNISON Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) seminar on Tuesday I was surprised to see the “Poplar Rebellion” being mentioned during a presentation on LGPS case law.This was really interesting (to me anyway). In 1921 a radical Labour Council was elected in Poplar, East London (now part of Tower Hamlets) led by George Lansbury (see photo left). This Council was most famous for refusing to set a “rate” since they felt that the poorer districts of London were unfairly treated when compared with richer parts of London. This meant that many of the Councillors were jailed for contempt of court.
However, this incredibility progressive Council also set an equal minimum wage of £4 per week for all employees - male and female. Which was unheard of at the time!
In the judgement Roberts v. Hopwood 1925, the courts found that the council had acted illegally in giving all employees equal pay, since women’s pay was usually far less than men at the time (even worse than now).
By paying women a rate the same as men the council was found to have been not acting in a “business-like manner” and it was declared unlawful.
This case is still cited as relevant case law with regard to to LGPS and British local authority governance.
9 comments:
I just hope that when I retire I can have a pension as good as Labour's Michael Martin. He has refused to give up his rights to taking 50% of his salary in pension every year until he dies. Even Brown gave this up...which considering he has wrecked everyone elses pension seems only fair. How much tax payers money did Gorbals Mick spend on "refurbishing his official residence"? That would be Errr.... 1.7million. Labour politicians just can't resist the high life.
Hi Anon
If you are a British company director (FT250) you will get a much better pension than any MP including the Speaker. It’s a bit desperate isn’t it having a go at the Speaker for work to his (temporary) Official Residence? Most of the cost was to improve security?
I think that there is indeed more than a whiff of snobbery and resentment against our “Gorbals Mick”, a genuinely working class MP, as the Speaker?
Actually the problem with Gorbals Mick is that he holds the one office in Parliament that has to be above reproach. He is supposed to elevate the chamber, to make it respected. The dignity and sovreignty of Parliament are embodied in this role, but he has failed to do this. Its not the 4,200 pounds of tax payers money that his wife claims in taxi fares, nor the 150K he spends on furniture..but this makes him a completely inappropriate person to oversee MP's expenses. To quote Martin Bell MP..."You run out of words in the end to describe his behaviour". He has become a figure of ridicule.
But John...you feel free to keep repeating that you think Boris is an upper class twit...it seems appropriate and reasonable therefore to say Mick is a thick working class peasant.
Hi Anon 1
Martin Bell is of course entitled to his view, but come on this is all a bit weak? You cannot really have it both ways – someone is in a high and respectable position upholding the dignity and sovereignty of Parliament without this costing a lot of dosh? If there was a Tory speaker in place then no one would have batted an eyelid.
Hi Anon 2
Fair enough – after all this is what the current Tory leadership actually thinks of us non-upper class Brits.
Labour made a serious mistake when they went against hundreds of years of tradition and allowed a Labour speaker to follow a labour speaker (Betty Boothroyd). This was made even worse by the fact that it was a Labour Govt in power at the time - Martin has lost all credibility - he is not respected in the same way as his predecessors and the press which traditionally has not attacked the speaker (receogniing that to do so was an attack on Parliamentary democracy) is now having a field day. Why can'y you just agree that this is damaging for Labour? One thing is sure - he won't get to enjoy his benefits for much longer - its damaging the credibility of Labour(even if you can't see it?). The problem is that now the problem of these benefits and hanging onto them is becoming associated with Labour because of Gorbals Mick. No one outside Parliament thinks it is reasonable but i guess you will just bury your head in the sand and keep on saying he is OK? Labour always back a loser.
Okay anon, I agree that the Parliament should not have allowed another Labour MP to become Speaker. However, I think Mick has done a really good job and I actually remember all past Speakers being attacked for similar reasons from time to time in the past.
BTW – I seem to remember that Labour have actually won a number of recent general elections? Maybe I am wrong?
I can't recall any other speaker ever being repeatedly battered in the press for the free air miles and taxi rides for their family's. Cameron has offered to disclose his expenses...but not the speaker? Can't we have someone we can look up to as speaker...Gorbals Mick just doesn't fit?
Look up to whom? Derek Conway?
Post a Comment