THURROCK Council has continued to ramp up its response to strike action by members of its bin collections service and has now brought in contractors to supplement agency and temporary staff it is using to man some of its vehicles.

The strike began two weeks ago when members of the Unite union decided to stop work at 9am each day in protest at planned cuts to terms and conditions, which mean many members of its environmental team will face cuts in the money they have been working as payments for shift allowances and bank holiday working will be cut.

The council has conceded '188 staff are negatively impacted by the current proposals' but says it wants to negotiate a compensation package.

The union and members say the additional hours have become a part of the normal and recognised working week for crews and to cut them is effectively slashing their salaries. They also point to the fact that its workers have been on the front line during the Covid pandemic and they say the time of the cuts adds insult to the financial injury suffered by some members.

The council disagrees and a gulf between the sides has widened since strike action began, with talks involving the arbitration service ACAS failing to bridge the gap.

Unite has just announced a two week extension to the strike in May and it is possible industrial action could escalate as the GMB and Unison unions, whose members are also facing cuts due to the planned changes, are contemplating elevating their grievances.

A demonstration by GMB workers, which includes many carers at residential homes and sheltered complexes across the borough is scheduled to take place outside the civic offices on Friday (30 April).

However, the council remains adamant it will not yield to pressure and has now brought in bin crews from East London recycling and waste management company Bywaters.

A statement says: "The council will continue to do whatever it can to mitigate the impact of this needless action on its services to Thurrock's residents.

"The council has remained clear that the pay review is not reducing salaries and is not delivering savings, staff are continuing to see salaries increasing year on year which, in the majority of cases, will more than balance out any financial impact from changes to allowances.

"In total, 188 staff are negatively impacted by the current proposals being consulted on and the council remains committed to compensating all eligible staff negatively impacted overall. There is no intention for any member of staff to lose out financially from the pay review overall.

"After the pay review carried out by the council in 2018, a new pay scale was introduced in April 2019 which resulted in 68 per cent of staff receiving pay increases above what they would have received under the old scheme. Due to a large investment in pay, it was agreed with all three trade unions that there would subsequently be a review of the benefits and allowances currently paid to staff.

"The agreement made by all unions in April 2019, included a council investment of a further £800,000 into pay up front in the first year of the four year pay deal and a commitment to work with the council in the next phase to review ways in which this additional early funding could be off-set through changes to allowances.

"It is deeply disappointing that this agreement has been reneged on and further disrespected with the extension to strike action, despite Unite the Union's public declaration of wishing to negotiate."

The council has extended its attack on unions beyond just Unite, adding: "Some trade unions continue to misinform their members and Thurrock's residents, presenting inaccurate and misleading information. The council continues to greatly value all of its staff and will continue communicating directly to reassure them and ensure the factual position is clear."

Unite's response to the council assertion it is telling untruths is to bat the same assertion back.

It says: "So far Thurrock Council have forced residents to dump their own rubbish, spent a fortune opening up new tips and are now hiring in Bywaters from East London. Now they have put out a leaflet stating that these cuts 'are not savings'.

"All of this raises some questions:

2) If they are concerned with public money then why are they spending tens of thousands of pounds in hiring in firms from London?