| Previous Section | Home Page |
Mr. Wallace : I beg to move amendment No. 27, in page 6, leave out lines 22 to 27 and insert--
(b
(the union must do its best to give written notice of the fact and date of repudiation, without delay, to the employer of workers taking part, or likely to take part, in industrial action as a result of the act.)
(c
(on being notified of repudiation by the union, the employer must, without delay, inform his employees who are members of the union of the fact and date of the union's repudiation.'.) Mr. Speaker : With this it will be convenient to consider amendment No. 28, in page 6, line 29, leave out (b)(i)' and insert (c)'.
Mr. Wallace : This deals with the procedure that a union must follow in order to repudiate any suggestion of
Column 1107
industrial action. When these provisions were debated in Committee, the Under-Secretary of State said that their purpose was to be fair to unions. Many Committee members pointed out that onerous duties would be placed on unions under subsection (5)--not least to inform every union member who might take part in industrial action. The amendment seeks to oblige a union to give written notice of repudiation and the date of that repudiation without any delay to the employers of the workers taking part in industrial action. It would then be the duty of the employer without delay to inform his employees who are union members. The employer undoubtedly has more direct access and quicker means of communication with his employees than the union. It would undoubtedly be in the employer's interest to impart that information. If he could do so more efficiently and quickly than the union, it would relieve the union of an additional burden and responsibility. It might also be in the interest and to the benefit of the employer. In the interests, therefore, of achieving a fair balance, I hope that the Minister will accept the amendment.Mr. Tony Lloyd : We welcome the amendment. We are unhappy about the clause, but the Minister knows the arguments. The amendment is designed not to undermine the clause but to provide limited help to trade unions. I hope that the Minister accepts that it is in the interest of maintaining a proper balance, even though the clause is very unbalanced, that the amendment has been tabled.
Mr. Nicholls : On other occasions and at another time of day I should have had rather a lot to say about the amendment. I cannot accept it. The hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr. Wallace) is concerned that the obligations placed on unions are unduly onerous. We certainly do not accept that. The obligation is to take steps to repudiate what is effectively official action. If the union does not want to stand by that action and wants to repudiate it, it seems entirely right that it should draw that to the attention of those to whom the call has been made. The obligation is not absolute, even on the face of the Bill ; it is merely that the union has to do its best and to proceed without delay, so that is not particularly onerous. The hon. Gentleman says, in a moment of brevity-- I wondered whether it was in a moment of levity--that the obligation should be given to the employers ; let them deal with it, as it is their problem. It would also have the ingenious, and I assume unintended, effect-- It being Ten o'clock, the debate stood adjourned.
Ordered,
That, at this day's sitting, the Employment Bill may be proceeded with, though opposed, until any hour.-- [Mr. Nicholas Baker.] As amended (in the Standing Committee), again considered. Question again proposed, That the amendment be made.
Mr. Nicholls : All the employer would have to do would be to ensure that he did not give the employees notice. That would mean that the repudiation had not been effective and that the union would remain liable. Some might think that that would appeal to the Government, but they would be entirely wrong. I cannot accept the amendment.
Mr. Wallace : On the first day of the Committee, the Minister was generous enough to say that he would try not to make cheap debating points on the basis of inadequate
Column 1108
drafting. He could not help himself in the last gasp, but I forgive him. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Clause 10
Consequential revision or revocation of Codes of Practice
Amendments made : No. 9, in page 9, line 38, leave out subsections (1) and (2) and insert--
(1) A Code of Practice to which this section applies may be revised by the appropriate authority in accordance with this section for the purpose of bringing it into conformity with subsequent statutory provisions by the making of consequential amendments and the omission of obsolete passages.
"Statutory provisions" here means provisions made by or under an Act of Parliament, and "subsequent" statutory provisions means provisions coming into force after the Code was issued (whether before or after the commencement of this section).
(2) The Codes of Practice to which this section applies are (a) those issued under section 3 of the Employment Act 1980, in relation to which the appropriate authority is the Secretary of State,
(b) those issued under section 6 of the Employment Protection Act 1975, in relation to which the appropriate authority is the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service, and
(c) that having effect under paragraph 4 of Schedule 17 to that Act, in relation to which the appropriate authority is the Secretary of State.'.
No. 10, in page 10, line 7, at end insert--
(3A) Where the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service proposes to revise a Code under this section, it shall transmit a draft of the revised Code to the Secretary of State who shall-- (a) if he approves of it, lay the draft before each House of Parliament ;
(b) if he does not approve of it, publish details of his reasons for withholding approval.'.
No 11, in page 10, line 9, leave out the' and insert a'. No 12, in page 10, line 9, after Parliament' insert
under subsection (3) or (3A)'.
No. 13, in page 10, line 16, leave out Secretary of State' and insert appropriate authority'.
No. 14, in page 10, line 20, leave out subsection (6) and insert-- (6) A Code of Practice to which this section applies may be revoked by the Secretary of State by order made by statutory instrument ; but no such order shall be made--
(a) in the case of a Code in relation to which the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service is the appropriate authority, except at the request of the Service, and
(b) in any case, unless a draft of the order has been laid before and approved by resolution of each House of Parliament.
(6A) If the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service requests the Secretary of State to revoke a Code of Practice in relation to which it is the appropriate authority and he decides not to do so, he shall publish details of his reasons for his decision.'.-- [Mr. Howard.]
Schedule 2
Consequential amendments
Amendment made : No. 15, in page 17, leave out lines 12 to 35 and insert--
Column 1109
(2) For subsections (1) and (2) substitute- -"(1) An act done by a trade union to induce a person to take part, or continue to take part, in industrial action is not within section 13 of the 1974 Act (protection from certain liabilities in tort) unless the industrial action has the support of a ballot.". (3) In subsection (3), for the words from "an act" to "done with" substitute "industrial action shall be regarded as having", in paragraph (a) for the words from "strike" to "occurred" substitute "industrial action in question", and for paragraph (c) substitute-- "(c) the requirements of section --( --Calling of industrial action with support of ballot --) --of the Employment Act 1990 are satisfied ;".
(4) In subsection (3A), in paragraph (a), for the words from "by an act" to "performance" substitute "to take part, or continue to take part, in industrial action", in paragraph (b) for the words from "strike" to "interference" substitute "industrial action", and omit the words "of that breach or interference".
(5) In subsection (4) omit the words "strike or other". (6) In subsection (4A), omit the words "inducing a breach or interference", and for the words from "in the course of which" to the end substitute "to which the act relates".
(7) In subsection (5) omit the definitions of "authorisation or endorsement", "commercial contract", "contract of employment", "relevant act" and "tort" and the words from "and any reference" to the end.
--Employment Act 1988 (c.19)
3.--(1) Section 1 of the Employment Act 1988 (right to a ballot before industrial action) is amended as follows.
(2) In subsection (1), for the words from "that the union" to "continue to take part" substitute "that members of the union, including himself, are likely to be or have been induced by the union to take part or to continue to take part in industrial action which does not have the support of a ballot".
(3) In subsection (2), for paragraphs (a) to (c) substitute "that the application is well-founded" and omit the words from "(including" to "endorsement)".
(4) For subsections (3) and (4) substitute--
"(3) For the purposes of this section an act shall be taken to have been done by a trade union if it was authorised or endorsed by the union ; and the provisions of subsections (3) to (7) of section 15 of the Employment Act 1982 apply for the purpose of determining whether an act is to be taken to have been so authorised or endorsed. Those provisions also apply in relation to proceedings for failure to comply with an order under this section as they apply in relation to the original proceedings.".
(5) In subsection (5) omit the words "an authorisation or endorsement by a trade union of any" and for paragraph (e) substitute--
"(e) the requirements of section ( --Calling of industrial action with support of ballot) of the Employment Act 1990 are satisfied.".'.-- [Mr. Howard.]
Schedule 3
Repeals
Amendments made : No. 16, in page 19, line 9, column 3, leave out from beginning to end of line 12 and insert--
Column 1110
In section 10--(a) in subsection (3A), the words "of that breach or interference" ;
(b) in subsection (4), the words "strike or other" ;
(c) in subsection (4A), the words "inducing a breach or interference" ;
(d) in subsection (5), the definitions of "authorisation or endorsement" "commercial contract", "contract of employment" "relevant act" and "tort" and the words from "and any reference" to the end.'.
No 17, in page 19, line 22, at end insert--
1988 c.19. Employment Act 1988. In section 1--
(a) in subsection (2), the words from "(including" to "endorsement)" ;
(b) in subsection (5), the words "an authorisation or endorsement by a trade union of any".'.-- [Mr. Howard.]
Order for Third Reading read.
10.1 pm
Mr. Howard : I beg to move, That the Bill be now read the Third time.
The Bill is a further step in the step-by-step reform of industrial relations that was begun more than 10 years ago. It carries that process of reform an important stage further by removing the last vestige of legal protection from the closed shop and imposing necessary restraints on secondary action and wildcat strikes. It also gives trade union members rights not to be refused employment on account of their membership.
Mr. Robert Hayward (Kingswood) : May I put on record the fact that I regret the continued omission of a dispensation for employers who hold strong religious beliefs and who do not have equal freedom not to recognise trade unions in the same way that employees have that right.
Mr. Howard : My hon. Friend knows that we have given careful consideration to that, as I undertook on Second Reading that we would, but we are unable to meet the point that he has raised.
The Labour party believes that the role of the law in these matters is to protect the striker and the union leader. We believe that the law must protect jobs and businesses from the abuse of industrial power and that it must guarantee the democratic rights of trade union members. That is what the Bill will achieve, and that is why I commend it to the House.
Column 1111
10.3 pmMr. Blair : We have debated the Bill for many weeks in Committee and again in the House today. I suggest that two issues have emerged clearly. First, the Bill is unfair because it fails to provide protection against discrimination on the ground of people's trade union activities and against the blacklisting of people who are active in trade unions--something which should unite all democratic members of society. It bans any form of sympathy action, no matter what the circumstances or justification.
The Bill is unfair, above all, because it removes from people the right to go to an industrial tribunal and it shuts out the jurisdiction of the tribunal when people take unofficial action, irrespective of the reasons for their action and even when they are about issues such as health and safety--matters which should concern us all.
The Bill is unfair and it is also irrelevant. As we examine the issues that face Britain today--the training and skills crisis, the problems of low pay and problems concerned with women at work--and measure the Bill against those problems, it is clear that it fails not merely because it is unfair but because it is utterly irrelevant to the nation's future. A Labour Government will in due course address that future.
10.5 pm
Mr. Wallace : The one good step that the Bill takes is to abolish the pre-entry closed shop. We on this Bench not only welcome that, but we called on the Government to take that step even before they were prepared to do so. That aside, the Bill and particularly clause 7 is so wholly alien to the promotion of good industrial relations that as a package it cannot possibly be supported.
The Government are aware that we on this Bench have been prepared to support some of the employment legislation that they have introduced. For example, we strongly supported ballots. But we believe that the purpose of the law in industrial relations--where it should appear at all--should be in the pursuit of balance and fairness. This Bill, like the measure on this subject introduced in the previous Session, is an effort to tilt the balance in favour of employers by introducing small measures here and there --and, in clause 7, a large measure--which disrupt that balance.
To bring in the law in that way is no substitute for a proper and good industrial partnership in industrial relations. The measure will not achieve the good industrial relations that hon. Members in all parts of the House wish to see.
10.7 pm
Mr. Peter Griffiths (Portsmouth, North) : I listened carefully to the remarks of Labour Members. I had not intended to intervene at this stage because my hon. Friend the Member for Kingswood (Mr. Hayward), in an intervention to the Secretary of State, covered the point that I wanted to make.
I welcome the Bill because of the contribution that it will make to providing a more satisfactory mechanism by which powerful bodies representing workers and employers may settle disputes and because it seeks in a genuine way to provide for the consciences of individual workers to be met.
When my hon. Friend the Member for Kingswood raised with the Minister the question of people's religious
Column 1112
conscience, there was a cry from the hon. Member for St. Helens, North (Mr. Evans), from a sedentary position, to the effect that we should not take notice of the Plymouth Brethren because they did not vote. That was a disgraceful statement to make--Mr. John Evans : On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Is it in order for the hon. Gentleman to put words in my mouth? I did not make the statement that he claimed I made. I said that the hon. Member for Kingswood (Mr. Hayward) would not get the Plymouth Brethren vote because they did not vote.
Mr. Speaker : I do not intend to get involved in that matter.
Mr. Griffiths : I accept the hon. Gentleman's interpretation of his own words. The suggestion that we should ignore the legitimate, deeply held views of a body of people who may not vote is unacceptable to me. It is important for us to put on record the fact that at least some hon. Members take the view that we are here to represent all the people, regardless of whether they voted in the last election or will vote in the next. The genuinely held conscience of individuals is a matter of great concern to the House, even at a little after 10 o'clock.
Question put, That the Bill be now read the Third time : The House divided : Ayes 173, Noes 133.
Division No. 216] [10.08 pm
AYES
Aitken, Jonathan
Alexander, Richard
Alison, Rt Hon Michael
Amos, Alan
Arbuthnot, James
Arnold, Jacques (Gravesham)
Arnold, Tom (Hazel Grove)
Atkins, Robert
Atkinson, David
Baker, Rt Hon K. (Mole Valley)
Baker, Nicholas (Dorset N)
Baldry, Tony
Bellingham, Henry
Bennett, Nicholas (Pembroke)
Benyon, W.
Bevan, David Gilroy
Blaker, Rt Hon Sir Peter
Bonsor, Sir Nicholas
Boswell, Tim
Bowden, Gerald (Dulwich)
Bowis, John
Braine, Rt Hon Sir Bernard
Brandon-Bravo, Martin
Brown, Michael (Brigg & Cl't's)
Browne, John (Winchester)
Budgen, Nicholas
Burns, Simon
Butler, Chris
Carlisle, John, (Luton N)
Carlisle, Kenneth (Lincoln)
Carrington, Matthew
Carttiss, Michael
Channon, Rt Hon Paul
Chapman, Sydney
Chope, Christopher
Clark, Dr Michael (Rochford)
Clark, Sir W. (Croydon S)
Conway, Derek
Coombs, Anthony (Wyre F'rest)
Curry, David
Davies, Q. (Stamf'd & Spald'g)
Davis, David (Boothferry)
Day, Stephen
Dickens, Geoffrey
Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James
Dover, Den
Dunn, Bob
Durant, Tony
Dykes, Hugh
Eggar, Tim
Evennett, David
Fallon, Michael
Field, Barry (Isle of Wight)
Fishburn, John Dudley
Forman, Nigel
Fox, Sir Marcus
Franks, Cecil
Freeman, Roger
Gardiner, George
Garel-Jones, Tristan
Gill, Christopher
Glyn, Dr Sir Alan
Goodhart, Sir Philip
Goodlad, Alastair
Goodson-Wickes, Dr Charles
Gorman, Mrs Teresa
Gow, Ian
Grant, Sir Anthony (CambsSW)
Greenway, Harry (Ealing N)
Griffiths, Peter (Portsmouth N)
Ground, Patrick
Hague, William
Hamilton, Neil (Tatton)
Hanley, Jeremy
Hannam, John
Hargreaves, Ken (Hyndburn)
Harris, David
Hawkins, Christopher
Hayhoe, Rt Hon Sir Barney
Hayward, Robert
Hill, James
Howard, Rt Hon Michael
Howarth, G. (Cannock & B'wd)
Howell, Ralph (North Norfolk)
Hughes, Robert G. (Harrow W)
Hunt, Sir John (Ravensbourne)
| Next Section
| Home Page |