Union warns of more strike action

Planned strikes by refuse workers could spread to other council staff

Union officials at Leeds City Council have threatened to step up strike action if their demands over a new pay and grading system are not met.

Refuse workers are set to strike on 23 April and 1 May, but the GMB union warned more action could be on the way.

GMB senior organiser Neil Derrick said: "We will ask other departments to vote on strike action if the council does not come back with better proposals."

Deputy council leader Richard Brett urged workers to call off the walkouts.

The strikes relate to a pay and grading review being carried out by all local authorities in response to a national requirement to evaluate all jobs to ensure people are paid fairly.

The GMB wants pay for women workers increased to match their male counterparts, but claims the council's offer would actually mean men's pay falling to the same level as their female colleagues.

'Best deal'

However, a council spokesperson said: "For the significant majority of staff there will either be no change or an increase to their total pay.

"There has been close working for several years with all three trades unions on this issue.

"The others, UNISON and the TGWU, continue to view the proposals as the best that can be achieved in the circumstances.

The refuse workers' strike is the first stage in what the GMB has called "a campaign of industrial action".

In December around 5,000 GMB members at Leeds City Council voted to reject the council's pay equality proposal and to reopen negotiations.

If negotiations failed then members of other departments also gave permission for GMB to ballot them over further strike action.

Deputy council leader Richard Brett claims the strikes will alienate residents and damage council working relationships.

Mr Brett said: "The GMB's demands for salaries to be 'levelled up' to the highest paid would cost the council �45m per year, which equates to an annual council tax rise of more than 18% and is simply unaffordable."

E-mail this to a friend

Printable version