Receive free UK Government updates
We’ll ship you a myFT Daily Digest e mail rounding up the most recent UK Government information each morning.
Legislation launched by the UK government permitting employers to interchange putting workers with non permanent staff has been quashed by the High Court in a victory for commerce unions.
In a judgment on Thursday, Mr Justice Linden dominated that the strategy taken by ministers in implementing strikebreaking rules, which took impact in July final yr, was “so unfair as to be unlawful, and, indeed, irrational”.
The court docket resolution is a setback to prime minister Rishi Sunak’s broader try to scale back the facility of commerce unions at a time of widespread industrial motion over below-inflation pay rises, significantly within the public sector.
The legislation made it simpler for employment businesses to provide companies and public sector organisations with workers to cowl for strikers on a brief foundation, a observe that for many years had been a legal offence.
Unions representing staff together with academics, prepare drivers and well being workers introduced a judicial overview. Their authorized case rested on two grounds: firstly, that ministers had didn’t adjust to a statutory responsibility to seek the advice of earlier than introducing the legislation, and secondly that the principles violated a proper to strike enshrined by human rights legislation.
The court docket’s judgment upheld the union’s criticism on the primary floor, though it didn’t specific an opinion on the second.
Ministers had argued that the change was a “modest amendment” to the legislation that didn’t “directly impinge” on commerce unions’ skill to stage walkouts. They additionally mentioned the government had held an “extensive” session into the identical proposals in 2015 and that there was no requirement to rerun it.
However, the court docket discovered the government ought to have sought “updated views and evidence given the lapse of time, given the developments which there had been in the intervening period”.
Linden additionally mentioned that Kwasi Kwarteng — who as then enterprise secretary launched the change final yr — had didn’t adequately assess responses to the session in 2015.
“The secretary of state did not even consider the information available as to the responses to the 2015 consultation,” the choose mentioned.
Unions had warned that the legislation would worsen industrial disputes and endanger public security if poorly educated company staff stuffed essential roles.
Paul Nowak, common secretary of the TUC, the umbrella physique for the UK labour motion, mentioned the government had “railroaded through this law change despite widespread opposition”.
Sharon Graham, common secretary of Unite, mentioned the judgment was a “total vindication for unions and workers”, including: “This ill-thought out, divisive legislation must be consigned to the dustbin of history.”
The UK government mentioned it was “disappointed” with the ruling, noting that it “believed the decision to repeal the ban on agency workers covering strikes complied with our legal obligations”. It added that it could “consider the judgment and next steps carefully”.
Kwarteng was contacted for remark.
As a part of broader efforts to curb strikes, the government this yr introduced new proposals that may impose minimal staffing ranges in giant components of the general public sector throughout walkouts.
Ministers have described the legislation, which is quickly anticipated to develop into legislation, as a “proportionate” means of guaranteeing folks can use public providers throughout stoppages, however union leaders have labelled it “draconian”.
Sir Keir Starmer, chief of the Labour get together, which receives giant donations from the massive unions, has promised to reverse the reforms if he turns into prime minister after subsequent yr’s common election.
