Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
    • Advertise
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • XpertHR
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Pricing
    • Free trial
    • Subscribe
    • XpertHR USA
  • Webinars
  • OHW+

Personnel Today

Register
Log in
Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
    • Advertise
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • XpertHR
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Pricing
    • Free trial
    • Subscribe
    • XpertHR USA
  • Webinars
  • OHW+

Case lawLatest NewsIndustrial action / strikesTrade unions

Trade union detriment: action short of dismissal is legal, finds Court of Appeal

by Ashleigh Webber 25 Mar 2022
by Ashleigh Webber 25 Mar 2022 The Royal Courts of Justice, where the Court of Appeal is housed
Shutterstock
The Royal Courts of Justice, where the Court of Appeal is housed
Shutterstock

Employers are able to sanction employees that take part in industrial action without breaching their human rights, the Court of Appeal has ruled.

In a judgment handed down this week – Mercer v Alternative Futures Group & Another – Lord Burnett of Maldon, Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, confirmed that the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 (TULRCA) does not protect employees from action short of dismissal if they take part in strike action.

The case concerned a care worker, Fiona Mercer, who was a workplace representative for the Unison trade union.

In early 2019 there was a dispute regarding payments for sleep-in shifts. Unison called a series of strikes which ran between 2 March and 14 May 2019, and went through the required balloting and notification process.

Mercer, who was involved in planning and organising the strikes, was suspended in March 2019. She was told this was because of allegations that she had abandoned her shift on two separate occasions without permission and had spoken to the press without authorisation. She received normal pay during her suspension, but did not receive pay for the overtime she would normally have worked.

Trade union detriment and strikes

Ryanair pilots’ trade union detriment case over first hurdle

How can HR respond to the threat of industrial action?

Industrial action detriment

She took a claim for unlawful detriment under the TULRCA – particularly section 146 which protects workers who participate in industrial action – to the employment tribunal.

Her case was dismissed, with the tribunal deciding that case law from the late 1970s meant that trade union activities protected under TULRCA did not include preparing for or taking part in strike action.

Mercer took an appeal to the Employment Appeals Tribunal, which was upheld in June 2021. The EAT said the TULRCA was incompatible with article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), and therefore the Human Rights Act 1998 – the UK’s domestic interpretation – which protects the right to freedom of peaceful assembly, including the right to form and to join trade unions.

The Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy intervened in the case and took an appeal against the EAT’s decision to the Court of Appeal.

The Court of Appeal has reversed the EAT’s decision and restored the employment tribunal’s decision.

The judgment says that failure to give legislative protection against any sanction short of dismissal for official industrial action “may put the United Kingdom in breach of article 11 [of the ECHR]… if the sanction is one which strikes at the core of trade union activity”, but suggested this would depend on the facts of the case.

It noted that domestic legislation was sometimes incompatible with the ECHR, but there was no need to change it.

The judgment says: “It is far from obvious that article 11 requires protection to be given against every form of detriment, at any rate in a private sector case, in response to industrial action. For example, does it require the law of each state to provide that the employer will be acting unlawfully if the employees concerned were refused a discretionary bonus; or were not considered the next time that a vacancy occurred for an internal promotion? The Strasbourg case law cited to us does not give a clear answer to those questions.”

Essentially, the court has confirmed that UK legislation does not prevent an employer taking action short of dismissal in response to an employee’s participation in industrial action.” – Jonathan Tuck, Baker McKenzie.

Jonathan Tuck, employment and benefits partner at Baker McKenzie, said: “The Court of Appeal’s decision in this case is likely to be significant for employers, employees and trade unions who are contemplating industrial action. Essentially, the court has confirmed that UK legislation does not prevent an employer taking action short of dismissal in response to an employee’s participation in industrial action.

“In light of this case, for example, an employer might take steps to encourage workers to cross the picket line and attend work during a strike, and could potentially remove discretionary benefits for those who do participate. These actions would no longer give rise to a standalone claim under the UK legislation.

“The legal arguments for and against centred around how UK legislation creates a distinction between industrial action and the ‘activities of a trade union’. There are some protections from dismissal in both cases, but the legislation as drafted only provides protection from action short of dismissal in the case of ‘activities of a trade union’.

“The court has said that, whilst the right to freedom of assembly guaranteed by the European Convention of Human Rights could be breached in some cases, this would not always be the case and, as such, was not prepared to alter the meaning of the words in the UK legislation.”

A similar case on trade union detriment went to the EAT last year. In Ryanair DAC v Morais, Judge Auerbach found that the requirement to read the legislation compatibly with the ECHR meant that an employment tribunal had correctly concluded that a group of pilots who saw their staff travel benefits removed after striking in 2019 had been taking part in trade union activities for the purposes of the TULRCA legislation.

HR Director opportunities on Personnel Today


Browse more HR director jobs

Ashleigh Webber
Ashleigh Webber

Ashleigh is editor of OHW+ and HR and wellbeing editor at Personnel Today. Ashleigh's areas of interest include employee health and wellbeing, equality and inclusion and skills development. She has hosted many webinars for Personnel Today, on topics including employee retention, financial wellbeing and menopause support. Prior to joining Personnel Today in 2018, she covered the road transport sector for Commercial Motor and Motor Transport magazines, touching on some of the employment and wellbeing issues experienced by those in road haulage.

previous post
P&O Ferries: Grant Shapps told of ‘issues’ by DP World in late 2021
next post
‘Urgent’ action needed to support mental health of young Black men

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

You may also like

Junior doctors announce nine more strike days

5 Dec 2023

Who is on strike and when?

5 Dec 2023

Warrington council refused injunction to stop bin strike

1 Dec 2023

Train drivers vote to continue strikes

1 Dec 2023

RMT members accept train companies’ pay offer

30 Nov 2023

Education minimum service levels consultation published

28 Nov 2023

Nurses threaten strikes after consultants’ pay offer

28 Nov 2023

Consultants could end strikes after fresh pay offer

27 Nov 2023

Poor toilet provision for women is more than...

27 Nov 2023

Cruise giant accused of planning ‘fire and rehire’...

24 Nov 2023

  • BetterMe for Business: How to Build Wellness Culture at Work PROMOTED | Ever encountered a...Read more
  • Global growth with simple HR compliance (webinar) WEBINAR | In an increasingly global marketplace...Read more
  • Talent acquisition: How AI can complement a ‘back to basics’ approach PROMOTED | Artificial intelligence is now...Read more
  • What will it mean to be an HR professional in 2024? (webinar) WEBINAR | As we approach 2024...Read more
  • HR Budget Planning for 2024: Preparing your People Strategy PROMOTED | As organisations continue to adapt...Read more
  • Almost a fifth of UK workers feel undervalued – we need to solve this PROMOTED | A new report has found...Read more

Personnel Today Jobs
 

Search Jobs

PERSONNEL TODAY

About us
Contact us
Browse all HR topics
Email newsletters
Content feeds
Cookies policy
Privacy policy
Terms and conditions

JOBS

Personnel Today Jobs
Post a job
Why advertise with us?

EVENTS & PRODUCTS

The Personnel Today Awards
The RAD Awards
Employee Benefits
Forum for Expatriate Management
OHW+
Whatmedia

ADVERTISING & PR

Advertising opportunities
Features list 2023

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Linkedin


© 2011 - 2023 DVV Media International Ltd

Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
    • Advertise
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • XpertHR
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Pricing
    • Free trial
    • Subscribe
    • XpertHR USA
  • Webinars
  • OHW+