Snow dusts the ground. A chill wind sends a shudder through a group of men and women huddled together around a brazierA portable heater with a pan for lighting coals. . But despite the cold, their spirits are high. They are holding up signs, telling the world about their mission: "On strike for fair pay!"

This scene was repeated at picket linesA boundary made by striking workers near the entrance to their workplace. up and down the land as thousands of workers went on strike in 2022.  

2023 looks set for yet more strike action in Britain. January alone will see educators in Scotland walk out over pay as well as nurses, bus drivers, train drivers, railway workers, driving examiners, government employees and bin workers. Other workers are also holding ballotsA secret voting system. to decide if they will take action or not. These include firefighters and teachers in England and Wales. In total, 1.5 million workers could down tools. 

Now, some are comparing the weeks ahead to a now famous series of strikes that led to widespread disruptions in the 1970s. At the height of this wave of industrial action, 12 million working days were lost to strikes, compared to the 741,000 days lost in 2022. It was known as the Winter of DiscontentA period between November 1978 and February 1979 in the UK when widespread strikes disrupted life. . 

Today, it is the cost of livingThe money that someone needs to afford basic food, housing and clothes. crisis that is prompting workers to hold up their signs. As prices rise in shops, many complain that their pay is not keeping pace with their expenses. If inflation runs at 10%, they say, a pay rise of any less than 10% would in real terms mean a pay cut. 

Some argue that striking is not the correct answer to this debate. Paying workers more would cost governments around the world a huge amount of money, at a time when financial pressures are high. 

The British government has quoted a cost of £28bn. Others say the real figure is nearer to £12bn. And still more argue that the exact figure does not matter - whatever the cost, they say, it could be covered by the fall in the cost of government borrowing or by a progressive tax on the wealthiest. 

But pay is not the only matter up for debate. If teachers walk out, students will miss days of lessons. If nurses walk out, patients in hospitals could be left without vital care. Trade unions argue that the strikes are necessary to ensure they receive the funding needed to do their jobs. Others say leaving students without teachers and patients without nurses, for however short a time, is an unacceptable price to pay. 

Despite this, a poll conducted last month shows that support for the strikes remains high amongst the public.¹

The UK government has responded to the strikes by bringing in what prime minister Rishi Sunak has called "new, tough" anti-strike laws. The new head of the TUC Paul Nowak has warned that this could "undermine the fundamental right to strike" and has warned that this would go against international conventions and break human rights legislation. 

Yes: Strikes have led to major reforms to workers' rights throughout history. Every worker should have the power to unite to demand positive changes and better working conditions.

No: There are other ways to campaign for change. Strikes inconvenience many people, risk alienatingMake someone feel distant from or disunited. the public and could leave vulnerable people without vital services.   

Or... 2022 saw a number of victories for strikers, with bus drivers and barristersA type of lawyer. winning pay rises after taking action.² Whatever your view on the strikes it is difficult to argue that they are not effective.