Only one side of the debate

Aug 8 2008

I REFER to the article dated July 18 alleging that ‘Ayrshire’s rural workers could be vulnerable to exploitation if the Scottish Government abolish the agency set up to protect them.’

Your article quotes only one side of the debate, as voiced by Cathy Jamieson MSP, and takes no account of the actual picture.

Proposals to dismantle Scottish Agricultural Wages Board are not part of a cost-cutting exercise, rather an attempt to bring to an end the series of unpopular and necessary decisions made by a committee whose remit has outlived its useful purpose.

We now have a national minimum wage and a whole plethora of employment regulations which render the SAWB obsolete. Scottish farmers would, of course, agree that farm and rural workers deserve wage protection, however, the SAWB’s recent decision to scrap age-related pay bands and impose huge statutory pay rises for 16-17-year olds has meant that 90% of Scottish farmers who have employed a young agricultural worker will never do so again.

Farmers want to employ youngsters but they cannot justify paying high wages to a young worker who legally cannot undertake many activities.

It must be remembered that many farmers operate small businesses, which employ only one or two workers with whom they enjoy a close working relationship. Ultimately, the major driver behind higher wages would be higher returns from the market place.

In the meantime, employment conditions for farm workers are best governed by national minimum wage and employment regulations and for this reason, in the best interests of farmers and their workers, the SAWB should go.

James Ireland

NFU Scotland Ayrshire

Regional Chairman