EAT Trade Union Rights : Action Short of Dismissal – The Respondents are members of Unison. The Tribunal found that they were unjustifiably disciplined by the union contrary to s.64 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. They were each banned from holding office in the union for three-five years.
The restrictions on trade union discipline imposed by s.65(2)(c) do not amount to an unlawful contravention of Article 11 ECHR. Members of unions have a right to hold their unions to account for breaching union rules where the members act in good faith. ASLEF v UK [2007] IRLR 361 distinguished.
No issue estoppel arose from earlier tribunal proceedings where the issue was whether the decision to hold a disciplinary investigation was made on the grounds of the Respondents’ political beliefs.
The words ‘would be disciplined’ in s.65(5) mean would have been disciplined as the relevant individual was in fact disciplined.
The Tribunal’s finding that in the absence of the allegation that the union’s Standing Orders Committee was contravening union rules the Respondents would not have received the disciplinary sanctions that they did for having caused unintentional racial offence was not perverse.
No error of law was made by the Tribunal in the application of s.65(6). The Tribunal, having found that the Respondents genuinely believed the assertion to be true and that it was made in good faith, was entitled to consider it was not necessary for it to decide whether the assertion was in fact true or false.
Appeal dismissed.
Judges:
Supperstone J
Citations:
[2012] UKEAT 0188 – 11 – 2202
Links:
Statutes:
Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 64
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Employment
Updated: 05 October 2022; Ref: scu.451467
