Government humiliated as High Court rules draconian anti-strike laws are illegal
The Government has suffered a humiliating defeat after the High Court ruled laws allowing bosses to bring in agency staff to cover for striking workers is illegal.
The botched legislation was pushed through by former Business Secretary Kwasi Kwarteng last year, after he ignored the advice of civil servants last year.
In a scathing ruling, Mr Justice Linden branded the move "so unfair as to be unlawful and, indeed, irrational”.
It is a huge victory for more than 10 unions, including Aslef, Unite and Usdaw, who took legal action against ministers after complaining that changes undermined the right to strike.
They argued that the 2022 Conduct of Employment Agencies and Employment Businesses (Amendment) Regulations -which lifted a ban on agency staff standing in for striking workers - were unlawful.
Teachers, civil servants and train drivers walk out in biggest strike in decade
Kwasi Kwarteng pushed the legislation through last summer (AFP via Getty Images)Following the landmark ruling, TUC General Secretary Paul Nowak said: “This defeat is a badge of shame for the Conservatives, who have been found guilty of breaching the law.
“Bringing in less-qualified agency staff to deliver important services risks endangering public safety, worsening disputes and poisoning industrial relations."
And Unison general secretary Christina McAnea said it was "embarrassing" for the Government.
She said: “Parachuting untrained agency workers into the midst of industrial hostilities isn’t fair or safe for them, the public or the staff out on strike. This is embarrassing for ministers.
"Not only did Kwasi Kwarteng help trash the economy as Chancellor. Now his bulldozer attitude when business secretary has made the government look extremely foolish. With his fingers stuck firmly in his ears, Kwasi Kwarteng ignored the advice of almost everyone around him. He showed a total disregard for working people and their historic rights."
Ms McAnea said she hopes ministers have learned a "big lesson" and said: “To spare themselves future shame, ministers should ditch their ill-advised strikes bill, and focus instead on working with unions to solve the country’s many problems.”
Richard Arthur, head of the Union Law team at Thompsons Solicitors - which represented the TUC and the unions - said: “This is a significant victory for the entire trade union movement and preserves a vital safeguard in ensuring the right to participate in industrial action is effective.
“The judgment makes clear that the then Secretary of State had a staggering disregard to his legal obligations when introducing legislation that enabled employers to engage agency workers to cover the duties of striking workers. He was driven solely by a political ideology to meet a self-imposed deadline to implement the regulations in the face of mounting industrial action across the country.
“He took this decision notwithstanding advice he received that it was likely to be counter-productive to the problem he wanted to address and was being rushed through without regard for the duty to consult, which was a fundamental legal requirement. This is bad law-making made “on the hoof” and the Court has rightly held the Government to account”.
A Department for Business and Trade spokesperson said later: "We are disappointed with the High Court's decision as we believed the decision to repeal the ban on agency workers covering strikes complied with our legal obligations.
Greggs, Costa & Pret coffees have 'huge differences in caffeine', says report
"The ability to strike is important, but we maintain there needs to be a reasonable balance between this and the rights of businesses and the public. We will consider the judgment and next steps carefully."
* Follow Mirror Politics on Snapchat, Tiktok, Twitter and Facebook.
Read more similar news:
Comments:
comments powered by Disqus
