Afternoon:
9°c
Business chiefs demand tougher strike ballot laws
21 Jun 2010Business leaders today called for changes to strike ballot rules so industrial action cannot be approved by a “relatively small turnout” of union members.
The CBI said stoppages should only be held if 40% of a balloted workforce supported action, as well as a simple majority of those voting.
It also suggested that the consultation period for redundancies should be shortened from 90 days to 30 days to reduce uncertainty among staff and allow firms to reshape their workforces to respond quickly to any significant falls in demand.
A package of measures published by the business group included calls for any employment laws to pass a “sustainable” test to make sure they helped create jobs.
John Cridland, deputy director general of the CBI, said: “As we enter a period of fragile recovery, we need to do everything we can to create a jobs market that works for Britain, and to ensure Britain is the place to work.
“To position the UK for growth, any new employment legislation must pass a simple test of whether it will encourage job creation. We also need to look at changing the rules around industrial action. Strikes cause misery. They prevent ordinary people going about their daily lives, whether it's getting to work or getting the kids to school.
“Strikes also cost the economy dearly and undermine our efforts to help rebuild the economy. That is why we believe the bar needs to be raised, so strike action is not possible unless 40% of the workforce has actively voted to withdraw its labour.”
TUC general secretary Brendan Barber said: “The UK already has some of the toughest legal restrictions on the right to strike in the advanced world. The courts regularly strike down democratic ballots that clearly show majority support for action. The number of days lost to industrial action is historically low and less than in many other countries.
“Any further restrictions would be extremely unfair and almost certainly breach the UK's international human rights obligations. The new Government's commitments to civil liberties are welcome, but the CBI seems to think human rights stop at the workplace door.”
Reader views (4)
A small group of socialists holding everyone else to ransom, it is absolutely cowardly and disgusting.
- Frank, Home Counties, England., 22/06/2010 11:52
Report abuse
If one cannot catch a Train because the Unions are on strike, then the passenger should be allowed to claim damages from the Union.
- stan white, leeds uk, 22/06/2010 07:55
Report abuse
If managers gave no reason to take industrial action, then no action would be taken.
Sadly in the UK there are there managers who use a bullying style, and people who work for them not only need legal protection. At the end of the day they must also beable to withdraw thair labour without any managment threats.
- Gerry, Chatham, Kent UK, 21/06/2010 16:46
Report abuse
Its hard to argue the rationale so a minimum majority of the union must therefore vote. But the quid pro quo must be that management has to directly inform the staff or its actions and not talk in double speak, so leaving a nest of untrust to develop.
Your biggest asset is your staff, show you can relate to them and what you plans are, roll up your sleaeeves and get involved not sit in white ivory towers, show the staff monthly and/or quarterly income/expenditure an make them belong.
Treat them like garbage and you get it thrown back in your face.
The problem is public company management is really second rate, grossly overpaid and just doesn't deliver and more is the case appears to be rewarded for failure.That must stop and all senior management of public and national bodies should be seconded to small firms to see what really goes on and how to get things sorted.
Until we stop rewarding for failure we will invite the Bob Crowes of this world to take centre stage time and again.
- Robert Marshall, London, 21/06/2010 11:27
Report abuse
