Monday 17 May 2010

This is Lawfare

An extremely unpleasant aspect of modern industrial relations is employers turning to the courts to prevent workers withdrawing their labour, despite overwhelming votes to strike. It's made easier by a set of 1980s union-bashing laws never repealed by the so-called Labour Party.

The British Airways staff voted massively in favour of a strike. BA has had the strike cancelled by the courts on a ridiculous technicality, a trap set by the Tories 20 years ago.


When balloting for strikes, unions should give those who took part a detailed breakdown of the result, as required by section 231 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992.
The union's barrister, John Hendy QC, said the airline had not been able to find even one employee who did not know the result of the ballot, which voted overwhelmingly for strike action.
This is madness. The ballot was legal. Union members knew the results. In this day and age, a letter in the post isn't relevant: union members see their reps, check Facebook and read websites. 


The facts are these: every member was informed of the result. However, the fact that 11 (eleven) ballot papers were spoiled, out of the 10-12,0000 cast, was 'only' publicised on the union notice board in every workplace - apparently that doesn't count as 'notification', according to this one judge's interpretation. 


What we're seeing is simple union-bashing, inspired and directed by specialist US law firms dedicated to furthering corporate power. Yes, Unite should have seen this coming, but the fact remains: these kinds of laws breach the globally-recognized right to strike. No doubt my employer, and every other one, is learning that the courts (staffed exclusively by rightwing, male, white, upper-class, private school and Oxbridge judges) will always defend corporate interests.


I've just made an official complaint to the BBC about John Humphrys' interview with the union's leader on this matter - Humphrys clearly crossed the line and emotionally hectored Derek Simpson from the perspective of BA's board of directors, rather than making any attempt to be impartial or objective.  

No comments: