header-logo header-logo

31 May 2024 / Charles Pigott
Issue: 8073 / Categories: Features , Employment , Tribunals
printer mail-detail

What protection for strikers?

175052
Where does the Supreme Court’s decision in Mercer leave us in terms of the law on union-related detriment? Charles Pigott reports
  • The Supreme Court has declared trade union detriment legislation incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights.
  • It has departed from the Court of Appeal in granting what is believed to be the first ever declaration of incompatibility in the field of employment law.

Secretary of State for Business and Trade v Mercer [2024] UKSC 12, [2024] All ER (D) 64 (Apr) represents the final stage in a dispute about the interpretation of s 146 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 (TULR(C)A 1992).

Section 146 creates a right for workers not to be subjected to a detriment for, among other things, taking part in trade union activities ‘at an appropriate time’. Appropriate time is defined as outside working hours, unless the employer agrees to the relevant activities taking place inside working hours (s 146(2)).

All parties agreed that a literal interpretation of this provision would

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll