Tag: anti-union legislation

Defending the right to strike: Lessons from GCHQ

Forty years ago – on 25th Jan 1984 – Margaret Thatcher’s Conservative government attacked trade union rights at GCHQ (writes TUC General Secretary PAUL NOWAK).

Trade union members were told to resign their membership or be sacked.  

But after a long and heroic campaign marked by the fortitude of the workers and their families, and the solidarity of the whole movement, they were reinstated when an incoming Labour government repealed the ban.  

The spirit and fight shown at GCHQ in Cheltenham has never been more badly needed. 

Today, the Tories are once again hellbent on attacking the right to strike – a fundamental British liberty. 

Their draconian Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Bill is even more extreme than Thatcher’s attack in 1984. 

This time over five million workers face losing their right to strike – including PCS members in border security. 

It would place onerous restrictions on public sector and rail unions and make taking effective industrial action far harder. 

Last month the TUC called its first Special Congress in 40 years to discuss how we resist these spiteful new laws. 

The message from the trade union movement was unanimous, resounding and clear – we will defend the right to strike at all costs. And we will not rest until this pernicious legislation is repealed from the statute books. 

Because let’s be clear: if the Tories get their way this is just the start. We should expect further attacks on the rights of workers and trade unions in other sectors not yet affected.   

The government wants to use this heinous new bill as a Trojan horse for other anti-union measures, including an attempted clamp-down on picketing. 

It is an ideological assault on workers’ and trade unions’ rights and a brazen attempt to silence workers’ voices and reduce their power. 

The imposition of minimum service levels means that when workers lawfully vote to take strike action, they could be told to attend work – and sacked if they don’t comply. 

Our public services are crying out for investment to address the recruitment and retention crisis they face. But, instead, the Conservatives are seeking to poison industrial relations, with the result that services deteriorate even more.  

It is all driven by an unelected and out-of-touch prime minister who has lost the confidence of the British people. We won’t let this happen.  

We will use every lever at our disposable to defeat these unworkable – and almost certainly illegal – new laws. We will name and shame any employer or public body that uses this legislation. We will challenge every work notice issued by employers. 
 
And the full force of the whole union movement will stand behind any worker disciplined or sacked for exercising their right to strike.    

Please join me – and trade union members from across the country – on Saturday the 27th of January 2024 as we march and rally in Cheltenham to commemorate the 40th anniversary of the GCHQ trade union ban. 

Let’s channel the spirit of those brave GCHQ workers and show our collective defiance against the Tories’ attack on the right to strike.

TUC vows to fight Tory attacks on the right to strike “tooth and nail” as strikes bill passes

  • TUC condemns Tory “wrecking ball” to right to strike and says it won’t rest until the legislation is repealed
  • Union body urges employers to do “everything in their power” to avoid using this counterproductive legislation to settle disputes

The TUC has vowed to fight the anti-strike bill “tooth and nail” as the legislation passed its final parliamentary stage.

The union body said the Conservatives were threatening to “take a wrecking ball” to the fundamental right to strike – adding that “unions won’t rest” until the legislation is repealed.

The Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Bill will soon receive Royal Assent and make its way onto the statute book as the legislation passed in the House of Lords – after several previous defeats.

The Bill will mean that when workers lawfully vote to strike in health, education, fire, transport, border security and nuclear decommissioning, they could be forced to attend work – and sacked if they don’t comply.

1 in 5 workers

TUC research found a massive 1 in 5 workers in Britain – or 5.5 million workers – are at risk of having their right to strike undermined. The legislation gives ministers sweeping powers to impose strike restrictions in any service within those extremely broad sectors.

As a result, the legislation has faced a barrage of criticism from employers, civil liberties organisations, the joint committee on human rights, House of Lords Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee, race and gender equalities groups, employment rights lawyers, politicians around the world – as well as a whole host of other organisations.

The UK’s actions have already come under scrutiny from international organisations. The UN workers’ rights watchdog, the ILO, recently slapped down the UK government over its anti-union agenda and demanded it respect international law.  

The Bill will give ministers the power to impose new minimum service levels through regulation, but ministers have given few details on how they intend minimum service levels  to operate.

Humiliating defeat

The government is rushing this latest legislation onto the statute book just days after a “humiliating defeat” on its agency worker regulations – as the High Court deemed the regulations unlawful.

The “strike-breaking” regulations were brought in last summer and allow agencies to supply employers with workers to fill in for those on strike.  

The High Court ruled that the then Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, Kwasi Kwarteng, failed to consult unions, as required by the Employment Agencies Act 1973 – quashing the 2022 changes.

The TUC has accused the government of adopting the same “reckless approach” with its anti-strike bill.

TUC General Secretary Paul Nowak said: “The Conservatives are threatening to take a wrecking ball to our fundamental right to strike.

“No one should be sacked for trying to win better pay and conditions at work – especially in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis. But that is exactly what this draconian legislation will allow.

“These new laws will give ministers the power to snatch away the right to strike from a massive 1 in 5 workers – that’s 5.5 million people.

Commenting on the ongoing campaign against the bill, Paul added: “Make no mistake. The TUC will fight this pernicious legislation tooth and nail – exploring all options including legal routes.

“We won’t stand by and let workers get sacked for defending their pay and conditions. And we won’t rest until this bill has been repealed.

“It’s unworkable, undemocratic and almost certainly in breach of international law.

“After the government’s humiliating defeat in the High Court over its unlawful attempt to undermine the right to strike, ministers should spare themselves further embarrassment.

“Every employer must reject this blatant attempt at union busting. That means doing everything in their power to avoid using this counterproductive legislation – it will only poison industrial relations and drag out disputes.

“Our message is loud and clear. The entire trade union movement will rally behind any worker sacked for exercising their fundamental right to strike.”

On Labour’s plans to repeal the legislation in its first 100 days, Paul said: “The right to strike is a fundamental British liberty – Labour gets this. That’s why they have done the right thing and promised to repeal this nasty legislation at the earliest opportunity.”

Badge of Shame: Unions secure important win against the UK Government’s attacks on trade unions

 In a major defeat for the Conservative government, the High Court yesterday (Thursday) ruled that its agency worker regulations are unlawful, after a successful legal challenge by trade unions, coordinated by the TUC. 

The “strike-breaking” regulations were brought in last summer and allow agencies to supply employers with workers to fill in for those on strike.   

The High Court ruled that the then Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, Kwasi Kwarteng, failed to consult unions, as required by the Employment Agencies Act 1973 – quashing the 2022 changes. 

Eleven trade unions, coordinated by the TUC and represented by Thompsons Solicitors LLP, brought legal proceedings against the government’s changes to agency worker regulations in a bid to protect the right to strike. 

The unions – ASLEF, BFAWU, FDA, GMB, NEU, NUJ, POA, PCS, RMT, Unite and Usdaw – come from a wide range of sectors and represent millions of workers in the UK.  

Unison and NASUWT also brought separate legal challenges against the laws. 

The TUC says the ruling is a “badge of shame” for the Conservative government – and a “major blow” to “ministers’ attempts to undermine the right to strike”. 

In addition to these agency worker regulations brought in last summer, ministers are currently rushing through the Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Bill, which is currently making its way through parliament.  

This could lead to workers being forced to work even when they have democratically voted to strike, and workers facing the sack if they refuse to comply. 

Damning assessment 

The Court was damning in its assessment of ministers’ failure to consult – and in particular, the conduct of the former Secretary of State for Business, Kwasi Kwarteng. 

The judgment says “the Secretary of State’s approach was contrary to section 12 (2) of the 1973 Act, so unfair as to be unlawful and, indeed, irrational.” 

The judgment goes onto say “the approach of Mr Kwarteng was to commit to the revocation of regulation 7 at a time when the advice to him was that it would be of negligible short-term benefit and probably be counterproductive.” 

Heavy criticism 

The change in agency worker regulations was heavily criticised by unions, agency employers, and parliamentarians. 

The TUC has warned these new laws could worsen industrial disputes, undermine the fundamental right to strike and endanger public safety if agency staff are required to fill safety critical roles but haven’t been fully trained.  

The Recruitment and Employment Confederation (REC), which represents suppliers of agency workers, has previously described the proposals as “unworkable”. 

The Lords Committee charged with scrutinising the legislation said “the lack of robust evidence and the expected limited net benefit raise questions as to the practical effectiveness and benefit” of the new rules. 

TUC General Secretary Paul Nowak said:  “This defeat is a badge of shame for the Conservatives, who have been found guilty of breaching the law. 

“Bringing in less-qualified agency staff to deliver important services risks endangering public safety, worsening disputes and poisoning industrial relations.   

 “The government railroaded through this law change despite widespread opposition from agency employers and unions. The courts even found ministers ignored evidence that the measure would be counterproductive. 

“This is the same reckless approach behind the anti-strike bill, which has faced a barrage of criticism from employers, rights groups and international bodies, and which has been amended by the House of Lords on three separate occasions during parliamentary ping-pong.  

“Ministers should spare themselves further embarrassment. These cynical strike-breaking agency worker laws must be scrapped once and for all – and the draconian anti-strike bill must be junked for good too.” 

Richard Arthur, head of trade union law, Thompson solicitors added: “This is a significant victory for the entire trade union movement and preserves a vital safeguard in ensuring the right to participate in industrial action is effective.  

“The judgment makes clear that the then Secretary of State (above) had a staggering disregard to his legal obligations when introducing legislation that enabled employers to engage agency workers to cover the duties of striking workers.  

“He was driven solely by a political ideology to meet a self-imposed deadline to implement the regulations in the face of mounting industrial action across the country.  

“He took this decision notwithstanding advice he received that it was likely to be counter-productive to the problem he wanted to address and was being rushed through without any regard being taken to the duty to consult which was a fundamental legal requirement.  

“This is bad law-making made on the hoof and the Court has rightly held the Government to account.”