Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Andrew Bridgen (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

Perhaps I could bring to my hon. Friend's attention another complication that might not have been considered of the possible implications of this Bill. If we move the burden of proof from the unions to the employers regarding substantial compliance with the provisions and the phrase"““on a scale…unlikely to affect””," does my hon. Friend agree that there could be a field day for the lawyers when employers, perhaps reasonably, claim that the unions have not complied fully with providing them with the information they need to decide whether there has been substantial compliance with the Bill or whether any errors are on a scale unlikely to affect the Bill's provisions? Would that not therefore require further legislation to give employers the rights to obtain the information from the unions in a reasonable, timely and full fashion? That is yet another field day for the lawyers and, yet again, will fail to achieve the aims of the Bill.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
516 c1233-4 
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