PAY review bodies (PRBs) are a “buffer” for employers and should be made independent of government or replaced by collective bargaining, TUC Congress heard last night.

TUC Congress backed a composite motion saying pay review bodies could play a role in setting pay if they were not subject to political interference or hand-picked, as currently, by ministers.

But several delegates argued the bodies should be abolished entirely.

PCS deputy president Martin Cavanagh blasted the “false premise that there is partnership to be had between employers and workers in a capitalist system,” saying that the “only way to achieve justice for workers” is through collective bargaining.

”PRBs cannot be a substitute and never have been for free collective bargaining … unfettered by recommendations that set false structuring on our members.”

The National Education Union’s Phil Clarke said it supported collective bargaining and backed the motion’s calls for the TUC to campaign for PRBs to enhance the engagement process with unions and limit the influence of government on appointments.

But Steve Wright of the FBU opposed the motion because it “makes too many concessions to PRBs.”

He said: “PRBs have been imposed in order to downgrade and scrap collective bargaining.”

POA deputy general secretary Joe Simpson backed collective bargaining and said: “The PRB has got a place but it’s also got to be fair and it’s got to be free from interference from government and the employer.”

Dave Penman, general secretary of senior civil servants’ union FDA, which proposed the composite motion, said: “Governments, of all colours, have interfered in this process so much that the independence of those bodies has been critically undermined.”

He said whether pay review bodies were appropriate or not in a sector should be determined by the unions in the sector.

The motion was carried.