WHEN Margaret Thatcher became prime minister in 1979, she explained her anti-union plans by claiming it was necessary to counter a high level of strikes.

David Cameron doesn’t even have the fig leaf of widespread industrial action to justify his current assault against trade unionism.

Tories understand unions as the largest and most effective social force in opposition to their project to transfer wealth and power from the working class to the ruling class.

Making it harder for unions to defend workers’ rights or to finance campaigns is embedded in the Tory DNA.

For all the claptrap about fairness, the Tories know what they are doing and why.

Making unions give a fortnight notice of strikes while letting employers recruit scabs encapsulates their idea of a level playing field.

As representatives of big business and inherited wealth, Tory MPs are committed to the class struggle where their side can act freely while our side has to fight with one hand tied behind its back.

Proposed changes to rules over balloting are about making it harder to go on strike and bleeding union finances.

Imposing a Yes threshold of 40 per cent of all potential voters to call a strike in many public services is undemocratic and could be costly.

It means that unions will have to be convinced of overwhelming support for action before authorising the huge expense that a ballot entails.

The provision for strike mandates to be renewed every four months would also be a drain on union funds, given that the government insists on a full postal ballot.

There is no reasonable impediment to trade unionists casting their votes electronically for or against industrial action.

Cameron and company refuse to countenance this because voting online would result in a bigger turnout for strike ballots and it would cost union funds very little.

Business Secretary Sajid Javid insists that the government is delivering a “key commitment” from its manifesto, but it did not spell out details just as it was vague over plans to axe in-work benefits for low-paid workers before landing them fully formed on Parliament last week.

He also complains that people affected by strike action do not have a vote over whether it should take place.

For that matter, electricity and gas consumers don’t have a vote on whether they should be held to ransom by the big six oligopoly, but neither Javid nor any other minister sees this as unreasonable.

They are single-minded in their determination to boost the wealth of the rich at the expense of the poor.

Trade union political funds, whether affiliated to Labour or not, are to switch from opt-outs to opt-in arrangements, with the reasonable expectation that these funds will be slashed.

In contrast, there will be no restriction on rich people’s donations to the Tory Party. 

Nor will there be a ballot by employees — the real wealth-creators — before company directors are allowed to give vast sums to the Tories.

Cameron’s clear intention, with Tory membership declining, is to overwhelm all opposition by relying on corporate subsidies and media backing for his party while the labour movement is hamstrung.

Unlike with previous Tory anti-union legislation, all Labour leadership challengers have pledged to repeal this latest chapter.

Trade unionists would be well advised not to place all their eggs in the parliamentary basket but to prepare to take on the boss-class offensive with every means at their disposal.