Collective action in the United Kingdom

Last updated

Collective action in the United Kingdom including the right to strike in UK labour law is the main support for collective bargaining. Although the right to strike (or "industrial action" traditionally) has attained the status, since 1906, of a fundamental human right, protected in domestic case law, statute, the European Convention on Human Rights and international law, the rules in statute have generated significant litigation. The "right of workers to engage in a strike or other industrial action" is expressly recognised in the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 section 180, [1] and has been recognised repeatedly by the Court of Appeal as "a fundamental human right"., [2] and the House of Lords (now Supreme Court). [3]

Contents

However, UK law has become "the most restrictive on trade unions in the Western world", [4] through a series of rule changes from 1979. In order for a group of workers to take strike action, they must,

If those rules are breached, a trade union will be liable for damages to the employer for the cost of the industrial action, an injunction may be issued against the industrial action going ahead, and workers may be fired even for a good faith trade dispute. The rules on industrial action in the UK have been subject to heavy criticism from the International Labour Organization and led to violations in the European Court of Human Rights.

History

Strikers gathering in Tyldesley in the 1926 General Strike in the UK Tyldesley miners outside the Miners Hall during the 1926 General Strike.jpg
Strikers gathering in Tyldesley in the 1926 General Strike in the UK

The right of workers to collectively withdraw their labour has always been used to make employers stick to a collective agreement. [5] At critical moments of history, it also combatted political repression (e.g. the Peasants' Revolt of 1381, and the Indian Independence Movement up to 1947), prevented military coups against democratic governments (e.g. the general strike in Germany against the Kapp Putsch in 1920), and overthrew dictatorships (e.g. in the 2008 Egyptian general strike). Anti-democratic regimes cannot tolerate social organisation they do not control, which is why the right to strike is fundamental to every democratic society, and a recognised human right in international law. [6] Historically, the UK recognised the right to strike in statute at least since 1906. [7] and there was widespread support at common law back into the 19th century. [8]

Historically common law judges, like international law today, argued the right to stop work in a good faith trade dispute was an implied term in every employment contract. [9] On the other hand, differently composed courts have asserted that the common law position sits at odds with international law: that a strike is a breach of contract, [10] and this creates tortious liability for unions organising collective action, [11] unless it falls within an immunity from statute. [12] On this view, even though an employer is not liable for economic loss to workers who are collectively dismissed, a union could be liable to the employer for taking collective action. Economic torts have been said to include conspiracy to injure, [13] inducement of breach of contract, [14] and tortious interference with a contract. [15]

The Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act 1875, repeated in the Trade Disputes Act 1906 after the Taff Vale case created the "golden formula" that collective action by a trade union becomes immune from any liability in tort if done "in contemplation or furtherance of a trade dispute". UK tradition inspired the International Labour Organization Convention 87 (1948) articles 3 and 10, [16] the case law of the European Court of Human Rights under article 11, [17] and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights article 28. However, the scope of the right to take collective action has been controversial. Reflecting a series of restrictions from 1979 to 1997, the law was partially codified in the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 sections 219 to 246, which now falls below international standards.

Right to strike

The Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 section 180 expressly recognises "the right of workers to engage in a strike or other industrial action", and section 219 contains the classic formula that collective action by a trade union becomes immune from any liability in tort if done "in contemplation or furtherance of a trade dispute". This said, various further hurdles must be jumped for a union to be certain of immunity from employers suing for damages, or an injunction to stop a strike.

The meaning of a "trade dispute" under TULRCA 1992 section 244 is confined to mean a dispute "between workers and their employer" and must mainly relate to employment terms. In BBC v Hearn [18] Lord Denning MR granted an injunction against a strike by BBC staff to stop broadcast of the 1977 FA Cup Final to apartheid South Africa. He reasoned that this was a political dispute, not a "trade dispute", unless the union was requesting "putting a clause in the contract" to not do such work. Strikes against government legislation (rather than an employer), [19] or privatisation, [20] or outsourcing before it happens, [21] have been held unlawful. However, at the least, any dispute over the terms or conditions on which workers do their jobs will allow protection. [22]

"The Subsidised Mineowner - Poor Beggar!", Trade Union Unity Magazine (1925) The Subsidised Mineowner.jpg
"The Subsidised Mineowner – Poor Beggar!", Trade Union Unity Magazine (1925)

Economic torts and common law

Common law right?
Immunity

International law and European Convention

Secondary action and company groups

Tony Blair, New Labour Prime Minister from 1997 to 2007, said in 1997 that "changes that we do propose would leave British law the most restrictive on trade unions in the Western world." This is still seen as accurate. Tony Blair, UK Prime Minister (1997-2007) (8228591861).jpg
Tony Blair, New Labour Prime Minister from 1997 to 2007, said in 1997 that "changes that we do propose would leave British law the most restrictive on trade unions in the Western world." This is still seen as accurate.

The Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 section 224 prevents collective action against someone who is "not the employer party to the dispute". [26] "Secondary action" used to be lawful, from the Trade Union Act 1871 until 1927, [27] and again from 1946 till 1980, but today it is not. [28] This makes the definition of "employer" relevant, particularly where a trade dispute involves a company group. [29] A worker's written statement of the contract may purport to say that the only "employer" is a subsidiary, although the parent company carries out the employer's function of ultimately setting the contractual terms and conditions. [30]

Balloting

Under TULRCA 1992 section 226 a union wishing to take collective action for a trade dispute must conduct a ballot. [31] In summary, the union must give 7 days notice to the employer about holding a ballot, state the categories of employees being balloted, give a total number, all "as accurate as is reasonably practicable in the light of the information". [32] Since the Trade Union Act 2016, there is an additional requirement that a ballot has a 50% turnout for a strike to be supported, and a total of 40% of voters supporting a strike (i.e. an 80% turnout if the vote is evenly split) in "important public services" that include health services, schools, fire, transport, nuclear and border security. [33] A scrutineer must be able to oversee the conduct, the vote must be given to all workers who could strike, the vote must be secret and by post, allowing for 'small accidental failures' which are 'unlikely to affect the result of the ballot'. [34]

The union must inform the employer of the result "as soon as reasonably practicable", call action within four weeks, and tell the employer of the people taking part. [35] The rules are poorly drafted, and this has generated litigation where some courts allowed injunctions on ostensible technical glitches. [36] However, the Court of Appeal since emphasised in British Airways Plc v Unite the Union (No 2) [37] and RMT v Serco Ltd [38] that the rules are to be interpreted consistently with the purpose of reconciling the equally legitimate, but conflicting interests of employers and unions. [39] No employee can be dismissed for taking part in a strike for a period of 12 weeks, [40] so long as the strike is officially endorsed by the union.

Picketing

Any picketing or protest outside a workplace must be "peaceful" and there must be a picket supervisor. [41] There are a limited number of outright prohibitions on strike action, but in accordance with ILO Convention 87 this is only for workplaces that involve the truly essential functions of the state (for armed forces, police, [42] and prison officers [43] ), and only when impartial arbitration is used as an alternative. [44]

Injunctions

If strikes are not conducted in accordance with law, employers can (and often do) go to court to seek an injunction against a union conducting the strike, or potentially damages. [45] A court should not grant any injunction against a strike unless there is a 'serious question to be tried' and it must consider where the 'balance of convenience lies'. [46] In The Nawala the House of Lords stressed that injunctions should be granted rarely and give 'full weight to all the practical realities' and the fact that a court should not end the strike in the employer's favour. [47]

See also

Notes

  1. ↑ TULRCA 1992 s 180
  2. ↑ London Underground Ltd v RMT [1996] ICR 170, per Millett LJ. Also Morgan v Fry [1968] 2 QB 710, 'It has been held for over 60 years that workmen have a right to strike...' per Lord Denning MR, referring to the Trade Disputes Act 1906
  3. ↑ Crofter Hand Woven Harris Tweed Co Ltd v Veitch [1942] AC 435, 463, per Lord Wright, the "right of workmen to strike is an essential element in the principle of collective bargaining". Also Mogul Steamship Co Ltd v McGregor, Gow & Co [1892] AC 25, 'I have always said that a combination of workmen, an agreement among them to cease work except for higher wages, and a strike in consequence, was lawful at common law; perhaps not enforceable inter se, but not indictable. The Legislature has now so declared.' Lord Bramwell referring to the Trade Union Act 1871
  4. ↑ Tony Blair, 'We won't look back to the 1970s' (31 March 1997) The Times, 'The essential elements of the trade union legislation of the 1980s will remain. There will be no return to secondary action, flying pickets, strikes without ballots, the closed shop and all the rest. The changes that we do propose would leave British law the most restrictive on trade unions in the Western world. The scenes from Wapping, Grunwick or the miners' strike could no more happen under our proposals than under the existing laws.'
  5. ↑ E McGaughey, A Casebook on Labour Law (Hart 2019 Archived 2020-11-01 at the Wayback Machine ) ch 10. S Deakin and G Morris, Labour Law (2012) ch 11
  6. ↑ e.g. Certification of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa [1996] ZACC 26, [66], confirming the right to strike as more important than a right to lock-out.
  7. ↑ Morgan v Fry [1968] 2 QB 710, 'It has been held for over 60 years that workmen have a right to strike...' per Lord Denning MR, referring to the Trade Disputes Act 1906
  8. ↑ e.g. Mogul Steamship Co Ltd v McGregor, Gow & Co [1892] AC 25, 'I have always said that a combination of workmen, an agreement among them to cease work except for higher wages, and a strike in consequence, was lawful at common law; perhaps not enforceable inter se, but not indictable. The Legislature has now so declared.' Lord Bramwell referring to the Trade Union Act 1871
  9. ↑ In the US, see Commonwealth v. Hunt , 45 Mass. 111 (1842)
  10. ↑ cf P Elias, 'The Strike and Breach of Contract: A Reassessment' in KD Ewing, CA Gearty and BA Hepple, Human Rights and Labour Law (1994) ch 11
  11. ↑ See Taff Vale Rly Co v Amalgamated Society of Rly Servants [1901] UKHL 1, Quinn v Leathem [1901] UKHL 2 and South Wales Miners' Federation v Glamorgan Coal Co [1905] AC 239, reversed by the Trade Disputes Act 1906.
  12. ↑ e.g. Rookes v Barnard [1964] UKHL 1 and Metrobus Ltd v Unite [2009] EWCA Civ 2009
  13. ↑ e.g. R v Mawbey (1796) 6 Term Rep 619, 101 ER 736, cf Timeplan Education Group Ltd v NUT [1997] IRLR 457
  14. ↑ Lumley v Gye (1853) 2 E&B 216
  15. ↑ Tarleton v McGawley (1793) 1 Peake 270, 170 ER 153
  16. ↑ B Gernigo, A Odero and H Guido, 'ILO Principles Concerning the Right to Strike' (1998) 137 International Labour Review 441
  17. ↑ RMT v UK [2014] ECHR 366
  18. ↑ [1977] ICR 686
  19. ↑ Express Newspapers Ltd v Keys [1980] IRLR 247
  20. ↑ Mercury Communications Ltd v Scott-Garner [1984] ICR 74
  21. ↑ University College London Hospitals NHS Trust v Unison [1999] ICR 204, surviving an ECHR article 11 challenge in Unison v United Kingdom [2002] IRLR 497
  22. ↑ In re P (a minor) [2003] UKHL 8, [4]
  23. ↑ The ECtHR's press release Archived 2008-04-15 at the Wayback Machine
  24. ↑ Tony Blair, 'We won't look back to the 1970s' (31 March 1997) The Times, 'The essential elements of the trade union legislation of the 1980s will remain. There will be no return to secondary action, flying pickets, strikes without ballots, the closed shop and all the rest. The changes that we do propose would leave British law the most restrictive on trade unions in the Western world. The scenes from Wapping, Grunwick or the miners' strike could no more happen under our proposals than under the existing laws.'
  25. ↑ See A Manifesto for Labour Law: towards a comprehensive revision of workers' rights (Institute of Employment Rights, 2016) 1 and 70, reviewed in (2017) 46(1) Industrial Law Journal 169.
  26. ↑ TULRCA 1992 s 224(2)
  27. ↑ Trade Disputes and Trade Unions Act 1927, after in National Sailors' and Firemen's Union v Reed [1926] Ch 536, Astbury J declared that secondary action was unlawful in the General Strike.
  28. ↑ Trade Disputes and Trade Unions Act 1946 until, following Express Newspapers ltd v MacShane [1980] ICR 42 and the Employment Act 1980. It was then said in Department of Employment, Trade Union Immunities (1981) Cm 8128, para 149, that a total ban 'could tilt the balance of power unacceptably to the benefit of employers'. The present provisions were enacted in the Employment Act 1990
  29. ↑ RMT v United Kingdom [2014] ECHR 366, rejected an express challenge to the validity of the legislation under ECHR article 11, albeit without discussion of the inequality of bargaining power that is inherent when employees exercise freedom of association, including who the employer purports to make the contract with. cf Saskatchewan Federation of Labour v Saskatchewan , 2015 SCC 4
  30. ↑ See further J Prassl, The Concept of the Employer (2015) and cf Duport Steel Ltd v Sirs [1980] ICR 161
  31. ↑ Lord Donovan, Royal Commission on Trade Unions and Employers' Associations (1968) Cmnd 3623 rejected a need for ballots, but Department of Employment, Democracy in Trade Unions (1983) Cm 8778 led to their introduction in the Trade Union Act 1984
  32. ↑ TULRCA 1992 s 226A
  33. ↑ TULRCA 1992 s 226(2)(a)(iia) and (2E).
  34. ↑ TULRCA 1992 s 226B-232B
  35. ↑ TULRCA 1992 s 231-234A
  36. ↑ Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd v NURMT [2010] EWHC 1084 (QB), EDF Energy Powerlink Ltd v NURMT [2009] EWHC 2852 QB, British Airways Plc v Unite the Union [2009] EWHC 3541
  37. ↑ [2010] EWCA Civ 669
  38. ↑ [2011] EWCA Civ 226
  39. ↑ See RMT v Serco Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 226, [9] per Elias LJ
  40. ↑ TULRCA 1992 s 238A
  41. ↑ TULRCA 1992 ss 220-220A. See also R (Laporte) v Chief Constable of Gloucestershire [2006] UKHL 55, [47].
  42. ↑ Police Act 1996 s 91
  43. ↑ Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 ss 127-8. Anomalously, the Merchant Shipping Act 1995 s 59 grants a further exception. See further POA v United Kingdom [2013] ECHR 600 and Hrvatski Liječnički sindikat v Croatia [2014] ECHR 1417
  44. ↑ ILO Convention No 87, art 6. Civil Contingencies Act 2004 s 23(3)(b) requires that emergency powers cannot limit the right to strike.
  45. ↑ TULRCA 1992 ss 20–21 on damages.
  46. ↑ American Cyanamid Co (No 1) v Ethicon Ltd [1975] UKHL 1 , [1975] AC 396, [1975] 2 WLR 316, [1975] 1 All ER 504, [1977] FSR 593(5 February 1975)
  47. ↑ [1979] 1 WLR 1294

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United Kingdom labour law</span> Rights of workers, unions, and duties of employers in the UK

United Kingdom labour law regulates the relations between workers, employers and trade unions. People at work in the UK have a minimum set of employment rights, from Acts of Parliament, Regulations, common law and equity. This includes the right to a minimum wage of £11.44 for over-23-year-olds from April 2023 under the National Minimum Wage Act 1998. The Working Time Regulations 1998 give the right to 28 days paid holidays, breaks from work, and attempt to limit long working hours. The Employment Rights Act 1996 gives the right to leave for child care, and the right to request flexible working patterns. The Pensions Act 2008 gives the right to be automatically enrolled in a basic occupational pension, whose funds must be protected according to the Pensions Act 1995. Workers must be able to vote for trustees of their occupational pensions under the Pensions Act 2004. In some enterprises, such as universities or NHS foundation trusts, staff can vote for the directors of the organisation. In enterprises with over 50 staff, workers must be negotiated with, with a view to agreement on any contract or workplace organisation changes, major economic developments or difficulties. The UK Corporate Governance Code recommends worker involvement in voting for a listed company's board of directors but does not yet follow international standards in protecting the right to vote in law. Collective bargaining, between democratically organised trade unions and the enterprise's management, has been seen as a "single channel" for individual workers to counteract the employer's abuse of power when it dismisses staff or fix the terms of work. Collective agreements are ultimately backed up by a trade union's right to strike: a fundamental requirement of democratic society in international law. Under the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 strike action is protected when it is "in contemplation or furtherance of a trade dispute".

In employment law, constructive dismissal, also called disguised dismissal, constructive discharge or constructive termination, occurs when an employee resigns due to the employer creating a hostile work environment. This often serves as a tactic to avoid payment of statutory severance pay and benefits. In essence, although the employee resigns, the resignation is not truly voluntary but rather a response to intolerable working conditions imposed by the employer. These conditions can include unreasonable work demands, harassment, or significant changes to the employment terms without the employee’s consent.

Unfair dismissal in the United Kingdom is the part of UK labour law that requires fair, just and reasonable treatment by employers in cases where a person's job could be terminated. The Employment Rights Act 1996 regulates this by saying that employees are entitled to a fair reason before being dismissed, based on their capability to do the job, their conduct, whether their position is economically redundant, on grounds of a statute, or some other substantial reason. It is automatically unfair for an employer to dismiss an employee, regardless of length of service, for becoming pregnant, or for having previously asserted certain specified employment rights. Otherwise, an employee must have worked for two years. This means an employer only terminates an employee's job lawfully if the employer follows a fair procedure, acts reasonably and has a fair reason.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Trade unions in the United Kingdom</span>

Trade unions in the United Kingdom emerged in the early 19th century, but faced punitive laws that sharply limited their activities. They began political activity in the late 19th century and formed an alliance with the Liberal Party in the early 20th century. The grew rapidly 1900 to 1920, lost their legal disabilities, and were well established by the 1920s. Union members largely switched from Liberal to the new Labour Party. Its leader Ramsay MacDonald became prime minister in 1924 briefly, and then again in 1929. In the 1980s Margaret Thatcher's Conservative governments weakened the powers of the unions by making it more difficult to strike legally. Most British unions are members of the TUC, the Trades Union Congress, or where appropriate, the Scottish Trades Union Congress or the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, which are the country's principal national trade union centres.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Equal Pay Act 1970</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Equal Pay Act 1970 was an act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that prohibited any less favourable treatment between men and women in terms of pay and conditions of employment. The act was proposed by the then Labour government, and was based on the Equal Pay Act of 1963 of the United States. It has now been mostly superseded by part 5, chapter 3 of the Equality Act 2010.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 is a UK Act of Parliament which regulates United Kingdom labour law. The act applies in full in England and Wales and in Scotland, and partially in Northern Ireland.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Trade Disputes Act 1906</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Trade Disputes Act 1906 was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom passed under the Liberal government of Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman. The Act declared that unions could not be sued for damages incurred during a strike.

United Kingdom employment equality law is a body of law which legislates against prejudice-based actions in the workplace. As an integral part of UK labour law it is unlawful to discriminate against a person because they have one of the "protected characteristics", which are, age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, race, religion or belief, sex, pregnancy and maternity, and sexual orientation. The primary legislation is the Equality Act 2010, which outlaws discrimination in access to education, public services, private goods and services, transport or premises in addition to employment. This follows three major European Union Directives, and is supplement by other Acts like the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. Furthermore, discrimination on the grounds of work status, as a part-time worker, fixed term employee, agency worker or union membership is banned as a result of a combination of statutory instruments and the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, again following European law. Disputes are typically resolved in the workplace in consultation with an employer or trade union, or with advice from a solicitor, ACAS or the Citizens Advice Bureau a claim may be brought in an employment tribunal. The Equality Act 2006 established the Equality and Human Rights Commission, a body designed to strengthen enforcement of equality laws.

<i>Torquay Hotel Co Ltd v Cousins</i>

Torquay Hotel Co Ltd v Cousins [1968] EWCA Civ 2 (BAILII) is a UK labour law case concerning the liability of a union when its members take industrial action.

<i>Crofter Hand Woven Harris Tweed Co Ltd v Veitch</i>

Crofter Hand Woven Harris Tweed Co Ltd v Veitch [1941] UKHL 2 is a landmark UK labour law case on the right to take part in collective bargaining. However, the actual decision which appears to allow secondary action may have been limited by developments from the 1980s.

<i>Krasner v McMath</i>

Krasner v McMath [2005] EWCA Civ 1072 is a UK labour and insolvency law case concerning the priority of payments to workers of an insolvent company in priority to other creditors.

<i>Wilson and Palmer v United Kingdom</i>

Wilson v United Kingdom [2002] ECHR 552 is a United Kingdom labour law and European labour law case concerning discrimination by employers against their workers who join and take action through trade unions. After a long series of appeals through the UK court system, the European Court of Human Rights held that ECHR article 11 protects the fundamental right of people to join a trade union, engage in union related activities and take action as a last resort to protect their interests.

An employment contract in English law is a specific kind of contract whereby one person performs work under the direction of another. The two main features of a contract is that work is exchanged for a wage, and that one party stands in a relationship of relative dependence, or inequality of bargaining power. On this basis, statute, and to some extent the common law, requires that compulsory rights are enforceable against the employer.

<i>Fitzpatrick v British Railways Board</i>

Fitzpatrick v British Railways Board [1992] ICR 221 is a UK labour law case, concerning collective bargaining.

BBC v Hearn [1977] ICR 685 is a UK labour law case, concerning collective action and the scope of a "trade dispute" under what is now TULRCA 1992 section 244.

National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers v United Kingdom [2014] ECHR 366 is a UK labour law case, concerning collective action and the right to take secondary action under ECHR article 11. It held that UK restrictions cannot be questioned on human rights grounds.

RMT v Serco Ltd and ASLEF v London & Birmingham Railway [2011] EWCA Civ 226 is a joined UK labour law case, concerning the right to strike under the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Trade Union Act 2016</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Trade Union Act 2016 is an Act of Parliament that amended the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. It forms part of the UK's labour law. Passed during the second Cameron ministry, it was fiercely opposed by all UK trade unions. Alan Bogg, professor of labour law at the University of Oxford, described the act as authoritarian.

London Underground Ltd v National Union of Railwaymen, Maritime and Transport Staff [1996] ICR 170 is a UK labour law case, concerning the right to strike.

<i>Kostal UK Ltd v Dunkley</i>

Kostal UK Ltd v Dunkley [2021] UKSC 47 is a UK labour law case, concerning the right to suffer no detriment for joining, or inducements to not join, a trade union.

References

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.