Days of action: the legality of protest strikes against government cuts
"This latest publication from the Institute considers whether a day of action called by the TUC and trade unions, taking place on a weekday and intended to protest at the government's cuts and austerity measures, could be lawful in the UK in the light of recent jurisprudence of the Europea...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Institution: | ETUI-European Trade Union Institute |
| Format: | TEXT |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
London
2011
IER |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.labourline.org/KENTIKA-19132356124919505389-Days-of-action-the-legality-of.htm |
| Summary: | "This latest publication from the Institute considers whether a day of action called by the TUC and trade unions, taking place on a weekday and intended to protest at the government's cuts and austerity measures, could be lawful in the UK in the light of recent jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights
Trade unions and their members are deeply concerned by government policies and by the actions being taken in the name of austerity. That concern was evident at the extraordinary TUC march and rally on 26th March 2011 and again in the public sector pension strike on 30th. It will no doubt also be evident on the 30 November 2011 Day of Action, as trade union members respond to cuts in their public sector pension.
If the government's committment to austerity measures is likely to continue, it is also likely to give rise to more protest in the form of industrial disputes, demonstrations, marches and rallies. It is quite possible that non-attendance at work will be an incidental consequence of the latter forms of protest.
In this timely publication the authors - two of the UK's leading experts on labour law - consider whether a day of action against government policy could be lawful in the UK given the restrictive nature of UK laws. They conclude that such a call and participation in the action should be protected by Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. They go on to consider how that conclusion would impact on domestic law." |
|---|---|
| Physical Description: | 57 p. Paper |