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
Indeed. The time is needed so that other people—not just other employees—can be notified. Deliveries may need to be stopped, and customers may be waiting for those deliveries. There is a strong argument for increasing the notice period. Section 226A(1)(a) requires only seven days' notice, which is not very long. It will include a weekend, so there will be only five working days. That is not a long time in which to make all the necessary preparations, especially when the company involved has never experienced a strike before and does not know what to do. There will be a lot to be done in those seven days. There is a lot of merit in the argument that the period should be extended to 14 or 28 days, so that people know where they stand if a union starts to take industrial action.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 516 c1226
- 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
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 13:19:45 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_672067
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_672067
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_672067