How does Tebbit's

Scan page 8

You can only take action to disrupt these supplies. "wholly or mainly" connected with the following: *terms and conditions of emplovment *physical conditions of work *engagement or non engagement *sacking *suspension *work duties *distribution of *discipline *trade union rights *negotiating and consult machinery *procedural rights What does this mean for you?

Can you take action/issue leaflets concerning government policy?

Probably not. Action is only lawful if it's "wholly or mainly" concerned with a trade dispute. "Wholly or mainly" has yet to be defined by judges but remember in May 1980 (when disputes only had to be "connected") that the TUC's Day of Action was held to be an unlawful strike.

This will affect workers in local government; health service; civil service; teaching where disputes challenging policy could be construed as partly 'political'.

Can you support disputes between worker and worker?

(E.g. over the use of non-union No. This sort of dispute is excluded from protection. Even if your employer will inevitably be involved, it does not mean the courts will interpret it this way.

The 1980 Act also restricted interference with commercial contracts in pursuit of disputes between worker and worker.

This means NO solidarity action to recruit low-paid contract workers into unions.

NO solidarity action over pay and conditions.

NO action over demarcation disputes.

Can you take action supporting exploited workers abroad?

No. Action in connection with anything outside the UK is unlawful unless your terms and conditions will be affected by the outcome.

What is your position in a sympathy strike?

It is already the law that secondary action (i.e. supporting other workers where your own employer is not in dispute) is restricted. Your employer must have a customer/supplier link with the employer in dispute for it to be lawful, i.e.:

-be a current customer or supplier of the employer in dispute.

-principal purpose must -action must be likely achieve this purpose.

NOW strikers must be in discarsta tli thair amaliar Yan pule will iew empiuys. Ivu cannot take action by withdrawing supplies or other services, if it is to a company in which the employees of that company are not in dispute.

This will affect industry-wide disputes between unions and employers' associations. What other action will be unlawful now?

If you organise or threaten industrial action to put pressure on an employer to employ only trade unionists you are liable to be sued.

OR if you organise industrial action on the grounds that those employed are not union members, you are liable to be sued.

Can you still picket place of work?

The picketing provisions o f the 1980 Employment Act still apply. That is:

"lawful picketing is still limited to picketing by workers at their own place of work (or by union officers at the workplaces of members they represent)"

Only this type of picketing is protected. There is a Code of Practice which is guidance not law. This says:

"pickets and organisers should ensure that in general the number of pickets does not exceed six at any entrance to the workplace."

This is NOT LAW but could be used by police to back-up charges of obstruction or breach of the peace. not all of those involved, the industrial tribunal would hear your unfair dismissal claim.

NOW if you are dismissed while on strike but others are not, you can claim unfair dismissal UNLESS some workers who have been on strike have returned to work!

If this is the case you no protection.

So if your employer:

*gives notice to all on strike that anyone who does not return to work within four days will be dismissed *does nôt dismiss people within this minimum 4-day period *then dismisses all employees still taking action when this period ends these people cannot claim unfair dismissal.

This could facilitate sacking shop stewards and active members most likely to stay out.

It will encourage employers to use intimidatory types of ultimatums and will undermine union solidarity.

POVERTY WAGES N.U.PE What does the new Bill add to this?

Whether or not there is a union membership agreement it is now automatically -unfair to sack someone for non-union membership unless the closed shop has been confirmed by ballot in the LAST 5 YEARS preceding dismissal.

"Confirmed" means 80% of those covered by the present jagreement having now voted for it. For later agreements it will be 80% of those covered or 85% of those voting. • This means automatically anti-unionists can gain compensation of a minimum of £12,000 if sacked and £17,000 * For the immediate setting up of an action committee to rouse

----- pull-quotes -----

sucked hate on