Skip to content or view screen version

Justice For Cleaners - Reinstate Alberto Durango

Peter Marshall | 12.02.2010 22:01 | Social Struggles

Around a hundred people took part in a noisy demonstration outside the offices of UBS Capital in Liverpool St, London at Friday lunchtime (12 Feb 2010) in support of the office cleaners and their sacked shop steward, Alberto Durango. Pictures Copyright (C) 2010 Peter Marshall, all rights reserved

Police tell demonstrators they must move
Police tell demonstrators they must move

A noisy demonstration
A noisy demonstration

Alberto Durango
Alberto Durango

Not Criminal
Not Criminal

Protesters and placards
Protesters and placards

The green 'trumpets' from the RMT were loud
The green 'trumpets' from the RMT were loud

Around a hundred came to the protest
Around a hundred came to the protest


The lavish offices of UBS (Union Bank of Switzerland) are at the southern end of the Broadgate estate and have a wide forecourt adjoining Liverpool Street which is open to the public. But the demonstrators were told by security staff at UBS that they could not demonstrate on the forecourt as it is private land, and I was told that the police would be called to remove me if I took any more photographs there. The entirely bogus reason given was that of "security."

After a few minutes, a number of police came and eventually the protesters were persuaded to move onto the pavement and the noisy protest continued for an hour, with speeches from a number of supporters including the sacked Unite shop-steward and leader of the Latin American Workers Association Alberto Durango.

The UBS is one of the world's leading financial firms and in the last 3 months of 2009 made profits of £772 million. On Feb 1 in a money-saving exercise they transferred their cleaners from Mitie to Lancaster Cleaning and Support Services.

Durango had formerly worked for Lancaster for 10 years, but when he became an active union organiser in a campaign for a living wage at Schroeders bank, they made allegations later shown to be false to get him arrested by the Home Office, who later released him without charge. Lancaster then made a further allegation that they later had to admit was false and sacked him.

Lancaster took over the RBS contract on Monday 1 Feb and suspended Durango the following day, sacking him on Thursday 4 Feb after what appears to be an unfair disciplinary hearing. They refused to recognise him as a Unite shop steward and gave as a reason for his sacking that in his previous employment with them he was sacked for "dishonesty", despite the fact that they had previously had to admit their allegations were false - a Tribunal case is still proceeding over his previous dismissal.

Lancaster had immediately changed the cleaner's hours to cut their already low wages by around £150 a month, in complete defiance of any protection they may have under employment law on the transfer of undertakings. The company appear determined to break the unionisation of cleaners that has led to many of London's cleaners now getting the London 'Living Wage' rather than the national minimum wage, which is well below that needed to live in London.

Support at the meeting came from a wide range of groups, and there were speakers from Unite and the RMT, which has been involved in the campaign on behalf of its own cleaners. Surprisingly, although Unite claims on its web site to be "a campaigning union, fighting for members in the workplace" I can find absolutely no mention of this clear case of attempted union-busting and discrimination there and it has so far failed to give official support.

More pictures on Demotix:
 http://www.demotix.com/news/246940/cleaners-protest-victimisation

and in a few days on My London Diary:
 http://mylondondiary.co.uk/2010/02/feb.htm#ubs

Peter Marshall
- e-mail: petermarshall@cix.co.uk
- Homepage: http://mylondondiary.co.uk

Comments

Hide the following comment

bogus

13.02.2010 00:00

>> The entirely bogus reason given was that of "security."

If you think about it, that is probably a very justified reason. A crowd of 100 noisy protestors looking to cause mischief is a security issue. What if no security was there? Would you all just stand outside and behave? I doubt it.

So, "security" is NOT a bogus reason is it?

loot