Victory. posted by Richard Seymour

This is very satisfying. It is the second time that the government has retreated on a major attempt at an offensive on unionised workers in the face of a major strike threat, on precisely this issue.

The look on the empurpled face of CBI-director Digby Jones, a slightly more mellisonant Colonel Blimp, as he expostulated on this 'craven surrender' for Channel Four news was such a laugh. Mark Serwotka, general-secretary of the PCS, dealt with Digby's outraged flatulence in his usual placid fashion, calmly explaining that these workers had been given a contract when they took the job and weren't about to allow it to be torn up. He did also mention that the Dirty Digger had a bit of a cheek to blubber about union greed and selfishness given the vast pensions that some of the big business bosses he represents get. Digby complaining about workers on salaries of £18,000 being greedy while he rakes in a whopping salary of £310,000 a year plus a top-up for non-executive directorship at a software company called iSoft, £30,000 at the moment, is just one of the absurd spectacles of life under capitalism*. "I wish," he moaned, "we could afford to live in this idealistic socialist society, but we can't." And he evoked the 1970s, as usual (as if the crisis of capitalism was the fault of the trade unions). To which I can only say, I wish I could afford his particular purview. I wish I could afford to play the red-faced 'wealth-creator' extemporising on behalf of the lowly taxpayer on the low-paid worker. I've got a suggestion: if Digby is worried about the cash in the public purse, then simply restore the taxes on higher earners, inheritance and corporate profits to what they were under Margaret Thatcher, and we could easily afford to give the public sector workers a real pay rise, cover the costs of present contrasts, renationalise several utilities, and put more investment in schools and hospitals.

As it happens, I don't think the CBI's ire arises from concern for the public finances. Digby was quite clear about it, actually: he doesn't like this because it is 'craven surrender'. He knows that if the government - the largest employer in the country - can't get away with ripping up employment contracts, this will make it more difficult for private sector corporations to attempt the same. He also knows that the repeated attempts by this government to take on the unions in a serious way are floundering. One lesson trade unionists should take away from this is that we have a government that is not merely nasty and reactionary, but also weak. It needs, particularly, to cover its left flank, and it knows it will have difficulty doing this if it continues to attack the unions.

Congratulations to the union workers. The trade unionists on the Underground also deserve a mention for refusing to risk their lives for the PPP and drive unsafe trains on the Northern Line, thus forcing the issue into the public domain. My advice to the low-paid - take a page out of the RMT's book. Look where it got them.

*Figures from 2002 - they will have risen since then, especially as his pay since 1999 had risen by 24%, a rise few public sector workers could ever hope for.