Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from David Nuttall (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Friday, 22 October 2010. It occurred during Debate on bill on Lawful Industrial Action (Minor Errors) Bill.


Lawful Industrial Action (Minor Errors) Bill

My hon. Friend is right. I can well understand those who comply with the law for all of the time not being too happy about other groups being allowed to comply with the law for only part of the time. The rest of the time they can say, ““Well, we have substantially complied with the law.”” What should we do with a burglar who said, ““Well, I've been substantially compliant with the law for 364 days of the year, but today I happen to have fallen foul of the law””? Should we let him off? What absolute nonsense. Any employee who breaches their contract of employment leaves themselves open to the risk of being found liable, under the law of tort, to their employer, for breach of contract. That applies whether the contract is for unskilled manual labour, skilled manual labour, or what is often termed white collar services. The liability applies equally to those organising industrial action, such as—but not necessarily exclusively—trade unions, because those concerned will seek to procure a breach of contract, which is a tort under English law. Under those circumstances, both individuals and trade unions risk incurring liability to the employer. I add that there is also a potential liability to third parties. In individual terms, the employee is also, of course, liable to be dismissed. Only through the protection afforded by statute can employees and trade unions escape the consequences of their actions in withdrawing their labour and breaching the terms of their contract of employment. That was first accepted, as the hon. Member for Hayes and Harlington mentioned, as long ago as 1906 when the Trade Disputes Act was passed. Prior to that, the common law provided that trade unions were liable to claims for damages for inducing a breach of contract. The 1906 Act granted them immunities from those liabilities. As I mentioned in response to my hon. Friend the Member for North East Somerset (Jacob Rees-Mogg), 100 years earlier the Combination Acts of 1799 and 1800 made it illegal for workers to join together and press employers for shorter hours or increased pay. Those Acts remained on the statute book until 1824 when they were repealed, to be replaced by the Combination Act of 1825.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
516 c1223-4 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Disclosure of information Ballots Industrial disputes Injunctions Trade unions Torts Strikes British Airways Unite
Legislation
Lawful Industrial Action (Minor Errors) Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk