This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/jan/18/tata-job-cuts-union-calls-for-government-action
The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
Version 1 | Version 2 |
---|---|
Tata job cuts: union calls for government action | Tata job cuts: union calls for government action |
(about 1 hour later) | |
The steel industry and trade unions have called on the government to defend the sector after Tata Steel announced more than 1,000 job cuts at its UK business. | |
The Indian conglomerate plans to cut about 1,050 jobs, including 750 at its Port Talbot plant in Wales. A further 200 jobs will be cut from support functions and 100 workers will lose their jobs at the company’s plants in Llanwern and Trostre in Wales; Corby in Northamptonshire; and Hartlepool in County Durham. | |
Tata, which owns the remnants of British Steel, blamed falling global steel prices and a flood of cheap imports for the cuts and said the UK and the EU needed to act more urgently to deal with the crisis in the industry. The cuts take announced job losses at Tata’s UK operations to more than 3,000 in the past six months. | |
Related: Tata to cut 1,000 jobs at steel plants in Wales | Related: Tata to cut 1,000 jobs at steel plants in Wales |
Karl Koehler, chief executive of Tata Steel’s European business, said: “We need the European commission to accelerate its response to unfairly traded imports and increase the robustness of its actions. Not doing so threatens the future of the entire European steel industry. | |
“The government must take urgent action to increase the competitiveness of the UK for its vital steel sector. This includes lowering business rates and supporting energy efficiency and anti-dumping cases so we can compete fairly.” | |
Britain’s steel industry has been battered by falling prices, the strength of the pound against the euro, high energy costs and alleged dumping of cheap steel by China. A parliamentary committee criticised the government last month for reacting too slowly to the crisis, which has caused more than 5,000 job losses and left the sector permanently damaged. | Britain’s steel industry has been battered by falling prices, the strength of the pound against the euro, high energy costs and alleged dumping of cheap steel by China. A parliamentary committee criticised the government last month for reacting too slowly to the crisis, which has caused more than 5,000 job losses and left the sector permanently damaged. |
Gareth Stace, director of the industry lobby group UK Steel, said: “This [Port Talbot] is a site of critical importance to our national industrial infrastructure. The whole industry needs to be reassured that ministers and officials – in Westminster and in Cardiff – are doing everything possible to support the future of steel production. The government needs to be creative, co-operative and fleet of foot to make sure every possible option for support is considered.” | |
Roy Rickhuss, Community’s general secretary, accused the government of slowness in responding to the steel crisis: “Today’s announcement is no reflection of the skills and commitment of the Tata Steel workforce, which has been breaking production records over the past year. | |
“Even now, promised compensation for energy intensive industries is yet to be received. The dumping of cheap Chinese steel is one of the biggest causes of this crisis, yet the UK government remains a cheerleader for China.” | |
Anna Soubry, the business minister, said the government would work with the Welsh assembly to support workers and find them new jobs. She added: “The government has taken clear action to help the industry, through cutting energy costs, taking action on imports, government procurement and EU emissions regulations and meeting key steel industry asks.” | |
Tata announced almost 1,200 cuts, mainly in Scotland and Scunthorpe, Lincolnshire, in October and 720, mainly in Rotherham, Yorkshire, in July. Other job cuts in the industry include 1,700 caused by the closure of the SSI plant at Redcar on Teesside. | |
Unite said Britain’s steel industry could be wiped out despite the government’s claim that it was doing all it could to support the sector. Harish Patel, the union’s national officer, said: “The knock-on effects of these latest job losses will be felt throughout the supply chain and the wider manufacturing community across the UK, torpedoing George Osborne’s promise to rebalance the economy. When will the penny drop with government ministers that a strategically important part of the UK economy faces wipeout because of their continued failure to take decisive and swift action?” | |
Many of the job cuts have been concentrated in towns that rely on jobs at steelworks to support local businesses. Tata employs more than 4,000 people at its Port Talbot plant and about 3,000 more contractors and agency staff work there, Community said. | |
Alan Coombs, a Port Talbot steelworker and the president of Community, said: “Port Talbot is a town built on steel. My father and grandfathers worked here but we risk losing these jobs forever. Thousands of other families here in Port Talbot rely on the steelworks.” | |
The Federation of Small Businesses said the job cuts would harm small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in and around Port Talbot with severe consequences for prosperity. | |
Ben Cottam, the federation’s head of external affairs, said: “We have not seen job losses like this in Wales since the closure of the Ebbw Vale steelworks. We would urge the Welsh government to bring forward measures to aid both those SMEs in Tata’s supply chain locally and those businesses in the wider Swansea Bay area that will be hit as the result of the loss of so many well-paid jobs.” | |
Community demanded that Tata make a long-term commitment to steelmaking in Britain. The union said workers had made large sacrifices based on an assurance that jobs would be protected, but Tata had not kept its side of the bargain. |