Unions bring judicial review of agency worker strike regulations.
Since July, changes to the Conduct of Employment Agencies and Employment Business Regulations 2003 have permitted employers to hire agency workers to replace striking workers / employees, seriously curtailing strikers bargaining power. The move was always extremely controversial; speaking at the time the change was passed, Labour MP Angela Rayner argued the new regulations would ârisk public safety, rip up workersâ rights, and encourage the very worst practices.â Another Labour MP, Ian Byrne, called it a âscab charterâ. If striking workers can be replaced by agency workers, then it is difficult to see what effect going on strike would have to begin with.
P&Oâs sacking of 800 seafarers in March, replacing them with agency workers to save money, provides an example of why agency workers cannot adequately replace a fully trained workforce. An inspection shortly following the staffing change found numerous deficiencies in maintenance and working conditions, seriously calling into question the safety of the passengers and crew.
Predictably, the change was quickly met with outrage from unions, which reported the government to the International Labour Organisation for making it difficult for workers to take effective industrial action.
Now, eleven trade unions and the TUC have brought judicial review proceedings against the government. They claim the regulations are unlawful because (i) the government failed to consult unions as required under the Employment Agencies Act 1973 and (ii) the new regulations violate trade union rights protected by the European Convention on Human Rights, by violating the right to strike. TUC general secretary Frances OâGrady said: âThe right to strike is a fundamental British liberty. But the government is attacking it in broad daylight.â
Anyone travelling on trains this summer will have likely felt the impact of striking workers in their daily lives. Discontented workers caught between stagnating wages and skyrocketing inflation have brought various parts of the economy to a halt multiple times in the last few months. I do have some sympathy for employers scrambling to keep their businesses operating amid the chaos â especially when it comes to vital public services.
But on the other hand, the governmentâs continued efforts to gradually strip workers of their rights are deeply concerning. Employee rights are clearly in the new governmentâs crosshairs: before taking office, Prime Minister Liz Truss vowed to take âtough and decisive action to limit trade unionsâ ability to paralyse our economyâ within her first 30 days in office. Rather than addressing the fundamental issues at the core of workersâ grievances, the approach seems to be to scare workers out of airing them by making their jobs more tenuous.
Judicial review proceedings were issued in the High Court on 13 September and Business Secretary Jacob Rees-Mogg will have 21 days to respond. The case is likely to trundle through the courts for some time yet â weâll keep you updated as it progresses. Watch this space.
This blog was written by Kendal Youngblood, Solicitor at didlaw.
