THE Bakers Food and Allied Workers Union (BFAWU) has recently launched a campaign to change statutory sick pay (SSP).

This is an issue that has been discussed and debated over the last few years at the union’s annual conference and has been amplified since March, with the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic.

We believe that SSP should be replaced by a sick pay structure based on the average hours worked and the real living wage. Across Europe, Britain falls behind other countries significantly in terms of SSP paying out a paltry 29 per cent of average wages in Britain, in contrast to 100 per cent in Germany, 93 per cent in Belgium and 64 per cent in Sweden to give just a few examples.

The desperate decision of either going into work and potentially risking one’s health and that of others, or being unable to pay for food and bills and possibly losing their homes, is a choice no-one should have to face.

However, the reality is that this is often the tough decisions many people have to make. Most employers are always keen to engage with tick-box exercises like equality and diversity workshops, but are a long way off replicating the perks of company sick pay that many salaried staff and senior management are afforded.

An often overlooked issue with sick pay is that it is often camouflaged as company sick pay, but it is only that in name, as it frequently bound together by unrealistic time limits.

A recent document published estimated that two million workers have no right to statutory sick pay because they earn under the base of £120 per week. If ever there was an example of punishing the lowest paid workers in society then this is surely it.

Another group of workers completely excluded from any form SSP are the self-employed. We have a group of members who are interpreters and recently formed their own branch.

Despite most of the interpreters being highly skilled, many of them are classed as self-employed, meaning that despite Rishi Sunak’s disingenuous “no-one shall be left behind” speech, all self-employed workers were duly left behind

Most interpreters work on a self-employment basis, which makes them ineligible for SSP. This means that they can’t afford to be ill or sick. It has been all the more challenging for them during the Covid-19 outbreak, as they have been expected to work in hospital wards and crammed police interview rooms.

They are not informed about potential risks such as these before accepting the job, hence some of them have had to refuse already limited work opportunities due to existing health conditions of their own. Any SSP that they might be eligible for under a zero-hours contract is often only a pittance that will not even pay for a single grocery shop.

When recognition agreements are drafted up as a result of workers joining a union and getting organised, it is vital that there is a robust company sick pay structure inserted into them. This on its own, would go a long way to expanding membership and also a benefit for the employer of being a good place to work and retaining skills.

In early May, I attended an online workshop where a question was posed to the panel: “What change in legislation would have the biggest effect on working people?” The overwhelming response was a complete overhaul of SSP.

Now, the argument from employers would be that if workers in Britain were receiving sick pay in comparison with some of the countries mentioned above, then there would hardly be anyone working, but that is why the same employers have such draconian absence management procedures that don’t allow for any compassion, never mind a decent wage while you recuperate from sickness or illness.

How many times do we hear members say in the workplace that they are too sick to stay off work, or that they can’t afford to be off work as they have bills to pay? That is where the real risk of spreading infection comes from, whether it be coronavirus, seasonal flu or gastroenteritis, which often goes through workplaces, missing nobody and isn’t really a good thing to have unchecked in food production or retail environments.

In the long run, which is more efficient; paying sick pay based on average hours, or back-filling absence with agency workers?

Is it any wonder that SSP, low pay, zero-hours contracts, youth and apprenticeship rates are the almost constant focus of conversation at employment-based meetings?

Each and every one of those practices are designed to keep people down, living in fear and ensuring that people never get beyond the “aspiration,” so often mentioned by our wretched political classes.

What a different society we could be living in, if hourly paid, part time and salaried employees were all paid a real living wage and company sick pay. It might not make society a better place to live, but it would certainly go a long way to ensuring a happier workforce and a level playing field.

Mark McHugh is a regional officer for the Bakers Food & Allied Workers union.