The union sought leave to appeal against an interim injunction restraining it from calling a strike. It now called in aid also its members’ Article 11 Human Rights. The company had questioned whether the ballot met the requirements of the 1992 Act.
Held: The Union had not supplied to the employer the figures required by the statute, and ‘the 2004 amendments included provisions, at section 226A(2D) and (2E), and correspondingly in section 234A, which limit the obligation imposed on a union in this respect, by a reasonable practicability criterion and by defining restrictively the information which is deemed for this purpose to be in the possession of the union. The latter, in particular, bears on the obligation to provide an explanation, because it limits the process which has to be undertaken, and therefore has to be explained, to the information so defined, and makes it what might be called a reasonable endeavours process.’ The figure collection should not be a heavy burden on the Union, and its requirement was not disproportionate under Human Rights law. UNITE had not shown that it was likely to succeed in showing that it was protected by the Act from tortious liability.
Lloyd LJ, Maurice Kay LJ, Mark Potter PFD
[2009] EWCA Civ 829, [2010] ICR 173, [2009] IRLR 851
Bailii
Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 231 226A, European Convention on Human Rights 11
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Unison v United Kingdom ECHR 2002
(Third Chamber) The freedom of association under Article 11 of the ECHR did not include a right for a union to require ‘that an employer enter into or remain in any collective bargaining arrangement’.
‘The Court recalls that, while Article 11 . .
Cited – Demir And Baykara v Turkey ECHR 12-Nov-2008
Civil servants formed a trade union which entered into collective negotiation with a local authority resulting in an agreement. Union members then sued the authority for failing to fulfil the agreement. The local Court found in favour of the . .
Cited – Enerji Yapi-yol sen v Turkey ECHR 21-Apr-2009
The Union (of Civil Servants) complained of a ban on them taking part in industrial action on a national day of protest, saying that it interfered with their rights of free association.
Held: The Court acknowledged that the right to strike was . .
Cited – London Underground Ltd v National Union of Railwaymen, Maritime and Transport Workers (NURMT) CA 9-Oct-1995
A Union’s immunity from action was not lost where employees who had joined the company after the strike ballot had been completed, were encouraged by the union to join in the strike. The constituency defined in section 227(1) must include all . .
Cited – London Underground Ltd and Others v National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Worker CA 16-Feb-2001
When a union gave notice to the employer that it intended to hold a ballot as to industrial action, the union was obliged to give details of the members to be balloted, so as to permit the employer to exercise its own rights. ‘Information as to the . .
Cited – The International Transport Workers’ Federation And The Finnish Seamen’s Union v Viking Line ABP and O’ Viking Line Eesti ECJ 23-May-2007
(Freedom of Establishment) European Community law recognises the fundamental nature of the right to strike. The exercise of the fundamental rights at issue, that is, freedom of expression and freedom of assembly and respect for human dignity, . .
Cited – Unison v Westminster City Council CA 21-Mar-2001
The union served a notice of a pre-strike ballot on the council regarding a proposed privatisation and contracting out of services. The council alleged that this was not a trade dispute but one regarding public policy. The judge’s support for this . .
Cited – Wilson, National Union Of Journalists And Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 2-Jul-2002
There is no statutory obligation on employers to recognise trade unions although unions and their members must be free to seek to persuade employers to listen to what the union has to say on behalf of its members. . .
Cited by:
Cited – British Airways Plc v Unite The Union QBD 17-May-2010
The Union had taken a vote of its cabin crew members as to a strike. The airline sought an interim injunction to prevent the strike, saying that the Union had not met the requirements of the Act as to proper notification of the results.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment, Human Rights
Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.368600
