Pre-Strike Ballots, Picketing and Protest: Banning Industrial Action by the Back Door (original) (raw)
Related papers
The right to strike A trade union view
1991
This short book, written for and published by the Institute of Employment Rights, discusses the nature of an impact of the anti-strike laws as they existed in 1991. Unfortunately, although the book is over 20 years' old, much of this law still exists, and this is despite 13 years of a Labour government. Moreover, further controls were introduced by the Conservative’s Trade Union Act 2016, particularly through the imposition of special voting majorities In secret ballots . The main purpose of the book is to argue that trade union members have nothing to gain from repeal of the anti-union law being in the form of the re-widening of the statutory immunites. Rather, the system of immunites should be totally replaced by a system of positive rights to strike and engage in effective picketing.
Legislating For Control: The Trade Union Act 2016
Industrial Law Journal, 2016
In this introduction to a special issue on the Trade Union Act 2016 (TUA), we consider the background and context in which the new legislation was adopted and then outline briefly the actual provisions which were in fact adopted after the full parliamentary process had been followed. These were by no means identical to the Government's original proposals and involved political compromise in the build up to the Brexit referendum. As the contributions to this special issue demonstrate, the motivations and justifications behind the reforms were multiple, sometimes unexpressed, and far from straightforward. Here, we review the conclusions reached by the authors, and offer some thoughts of our own regarding the new mechanisms for controlling unions in the TUA. We conclude by suggesting strategies that workers and their organisations might deploy in resisting these controls, while conceding the limitations of these responses.
The Impact of Industrial Action Ballots on Trade Union Procedures, Practices and Behaviour
2005
This article provides an analysis of the developments that have taken place within British case-study trade unions in response to the introduction of the Conservative balloting legislation pertaining to ballots on industrial action. Using data derived from interviews with senior officials, national officials and shop stewards it links any changes in the unions’ approaches to calling, organising or conducting industrial action to the introduction of the new legislation. It considers the impact of industrial action ballots on the procedures, practices and behaviour of trade unions and, more specifically, whether workers under the new balloting system seemed more inclined to vote to avoid confrontation with employers and, in so doing, took a less conflictual and more accommodating stance than would have been the case under the old legislative provisions.
As well as this research, the author draws on recent empirical work of his own. Using data derived from interviews with senior officials, national officials and shop stewards it will examine the impact of industrial action ballots on the procedures, practices and behaviour of trade unions and, more specifically, whether workers under the new balloting system seemed more inclined to vote to avoid confrontation with employers and, in so doing, took a less conflictual and more accommodating stance than would have been the case under the old legislative provisions. T The expectation was that the empowerment of the individual member would result in more moderate decision-making. This paper draws on empirical data gathered from an in-depth analysis of seven case study trade unions: Transport and General Workers Union (TGWU), Electrical, Electronic Telecommunications and Plumbing Union (EETPU, now part of AMICUS), Civil and Public Services Union (CPSA, now part of the Public and Commercial Services Union (PCSA)), Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen (ASLEF), Rail and Maritime Trade Union (RMT), Bakers Food and Allied Trade Union (BFAWU) and National Association of Teachers in Further and Higher Education (NATFHE). The research also involved the execution of 101 interviews, which included trade union officials, members, the Commissioner for the Rights of Trade Union Members (CROTUM), the Certification Officer (CO) and the Deputy General Secretary of the Trades Union Congress (TUC).
Crossing the Rubicon: The Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Act 2023 as an Authoritarian Crucible
Industrial Law Journal
In the 1980s and 1990s, Conservative Governments contemplated but ultimately refused direct interventions in strikes in essential services as unenforceable and ineffective. The Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Act 2023 crosses this Rubicon. It does so not by a participatory framework but by granting Ministers and employers virtually unrestrained powers to restrict (and effectively prohibit by neutralising the impact of) industrial action by imposing minimum service levels. This article offers a critical account of the Act based on three main claims. First, it argues that the Act is shaped by what is termed ‘coercive dual unilateralism’, an authoritarian crucible of three elements: (i) executive unilateralism, (ii) employer unilateralism and (iii) coercion (severe sanctions compounded by chilling legal uncertainty of ill-defined duties). Secondly, it challenges the Government’s claim of the Act’s compliance with ILO standards and Article 11 ECHR as a misconstruction. Thirdly, it find...
Protest, 2024
Britain is currently seeing the most coordinated public sector strike action since the 1970s. In a post-pandemic, post-Brexit Britain, the general public are going through a cost-of-living crisis, with the rate of inflation rising and real-term pay cuts. This, paired with growing restrictions on the right of peaceful assembly through the passing of oppressive policing bills, means that people are increasingly turning to unions and striking to get their voices heard. This article highlights the push-factors leading to the 2022-2023 Public Sector Strikes through a socio-political analysis of democracy and power in post-pandemic, post-Brexit Britain, whilst capturing the voices of those striking and on picket lines.