Unfair tribunal fees plan shows government is out of ideas, says UNISON

Commenting on the launch of a government consultation into tribunal fees, UNISON general secretary Christina McAnea said:

“The government should be tackling the real issues the country faces, not trying to pick another fight with working people.

“The fact that ministers want to reheat a failed and illegal policy shows that this is a government that ran out of ideas some time ago and needs to step aside.

“Tribunal fees denied the poorest and most vulnerable access to justice. The only people who would benefit from their reintroduction are unscrupulous bosses.

“When UNISON forced the fees to be scrapped in 2017, the UK Supreme Court said the government had acted unlawfully and unconstitutionally. Nothing has changed. Tribunal fees were unfair then and they are still unfair today.”

Notes to editors:
– The judgment UNISON v The Lord Chancellor [2017] UKSC 2015/0233 can be found here
– The seven Supreme Court judges ridiculed the government’s misunderstanding of “elementary economics, and plain common sense”, when ministers claimed higher fees would mean increased demand. The Supreme Court also stressed that the administration of justice was not merely a public service, where courts and tribunals were only of value to the “users” who appeared before them and who obtained a remedy. It also said the fall in claims when fees came in was “so sharp, so substantial and so sustained” that they could not reasonably be afforded by those on low to middle incomes.
– Employment tribunal fees were originally introduced on 29 July 2013.
– UNISON is the UK’s largest union with more than 1.3 million members providing public services in education, local government, the NHS, police service and energy. They are employed in the public, voluntary and private sectors.

Media contacts:
Dan Ashley M: 07908 672893 E: d.ashley@unison.co.uk
Liz Chinchen M 07778 158175 E: l.chinchen@unison.co.uk

The article Unfair tribunal fees plan shows government is out of ideas, says UNISON first appeared on the UNISON National site.

Unfair tribunal fees plan shows government is out of ideas, says UNISON

Commenting on the launch of a government consultation into tribunal fees, UNISON general secretary Christina McAnea said:

“The government should be tackling the real issues the country faces, not trying to pick another fight with working people.

“The fact that ministers want to reheat a failed and illegal policy shows that this is a government that ran out of ideas some time ago and needs to step aside.

“Tribunal fees denied the poorest and most vulnerable access to justice. The only people who would benefit from their reintroduction are unscrupulous bosses.

“When UNISON forced the fees to be scrapped in 2017, the UK Supreme Court said the government had acted unlawfully and unconstitutionally. Nothing has changed. Tribunal fees were unfair then and they are still unfair today.”

Notes to editors:
– The judgment UNISON v The Lord Chancellor [2017] UKSC 2015/0233 can be found here
– The seven Supreme Court judges ridiculed the government’s misunderstanding of “elementary economics, and plain common sense”, when ministers claimed higher fees would mean increased demand. The Supreme Court also stressed that the administration of justice was not merely a public service, where courts and tribunals were only of value to the “users” who appeared before them and who obtained a remedy. It also said the fall in claims when fees came in was “so sharp, so substantial and so sustained” that they could not reasonably be afforded by those on low to middle incomes.
– Employment tribunal fees were originally introduced on 29 July 2013.
– UNISON is the UK’s largest union with more than 1.3 million members providing public services in education, local government, the NHS, police service and energy. They are employed in the public, voluntary and private sectors.

Media contacts:
Dan Ashley M: 07908 672893 E: d.ashley@unison.co.uk
Liz Chinchen M 07778 158175 E: l.chinchen@unison.co.uk

The article Unfair tribunal fees plan shows government is out of ideas, says UNISON first appeared on the UNISON National site.

UNISON given go-ahead to join judicial review of government inaction over Windrush

UNISON has been given the go-ahead to join a legal challenge of former home secretary Suella Braverman’s decision to renege on three key recommendations made by the Windrush scandal inquiry.

In December, a High Court judge granted a private individual, Trevor Donald, permission to lodge a judicial review of Ms Braverman’s actions, in a hearing that is likely be heard some time between March and May this year.

At the same time, both UNISON and civil rights group the Black Equity Organisation (BEO) were granted permission to ‘intervene’, or join the case. Each will be able to give evidence and argue their position when the matter comes to court.

UNISON general secretary Christina McAnea said today: “This is a landmark case to tackle a dreadful injustice caused by this grim period of recent history. Hundreds of lives and relationships have been torn apart by this government’s cruel and catastrophic decisions.

“Prior to and since the Windrush scandal broke, UNISON has worked actively to represent people who have been similarly affected by the “hostile environment”, through no fault of their own. It’s important for the union to be part of this case, to ensure all those affected have the best chance to rebuild what they’ve lost.”

The Windrush scandal came to light in 2018, when it was revealed that members of the Windrush generation were being declared “immigration offenders” and denied access to public services, housing and jobs. At least 83 people were wrongly deported despite having the right to live and work in the UK.

‘Ignorance and thoughtlessness’

Led by Wendy Williams, the inquiry published its findings, the Windrush Lessons Learned Review, in March 2020. It concluded that the Home Office had shown “ignorance and thoughtlessness” on race throughout the scandal, that immigration regulations were tightened “with complete disregard for the Windrush generation” and officials had made “irrational” demands for multiple documents to establish residency rights.

Ms Williams made 30 recommendations to avoid a repeat of the scandal, and the then-home secretary Priti Patel confirmed an action plan to implement them. Key among these was a commitment to create the post of a migrants’ commissioner, who would be responsible for speaking up for migrants and identifying systemic problems within the UK immigration system.

However, in January 2023 the new home secretary, Ms Braverman, decided to abandon the commitment to the commissioner role alongside the commitment to strengthen the powers of the immigration watchdog and to run reconciliation events with Windrush families.

UNISON litigation

UNISON launched its litigation in June 2023, during the Year of the Black Worker. The union believes that both the migrants’ commissioner and a strengthened watchdog would help to protect against a future ‘Windrush scandal’, allowing for greater protections for migrant workers and act as a break on yet more inhumane policies towards refugees.

The claimant in the judicial review, Mr Donald, is a member of the Windrush generation who arrived in the UK in 1967, aged 12, and was granted indefinite leave to remain in 1971.

Yet, when he visited Jamaica in 2010, to attend his mother’s funeral, he was prevented from returning to the UK and, effectively, exiled for nine years – until the scandal of which he was one of many victims finally came to light.

UNISON’s application to the High Court was supported by evidence  from UNISON member Michael Braithwaite, a London teaching assistant, working in particular with children with special educational needs, who lost his job due to the Windrush scandal, “a total nightmare that destroyed my life.”

When he learned of Ms Braverman’s reversal of the government commitment, Mr Braithwaite’s view was that, “It felt like we were being treated as if we didn’t matter again, as if no one really cared about what had happened… What scares me is that the hostile environment is still with us.”

Surviving the Windrush scandal

 

The article UNISON given go-ahead to join judicial review of government inaction over Windrush first appeared on the UNISON National site.

UNISON given go-ahead to join judicial review of government inaction over Windrush

UNISON has been given the go-ahead to join a legal challenge of former home secretary Suella Braverman’s decision to renege on three key recommendations made by the Windrush scandal inquiry.

In December, a High Court judge granted a private individual, Trevor Donald, permission to lodge a judicial review of Ms Braverman’s actions, in a hearing that is likely be heard some time between March and May this year.

At the same time, both UNISON and civil rights group the Black Equity Organisation (BEO) were granted permission to ‘intervene’, or join the case. Each will be able to give evidence and argue their position when the matter comes to court.

UNISON general secretary Christina McAnea said today: “This is a landmark case to tackle a dreadful injustice caused by this grim period of recent history. Hundreds of lives and relationships have been torn apart by this government’s cruel and catastrophic decisions.

“Prior to and since the Windrush scandal broke, UNISON has worked actively to represent people who have been similarly affected by the “hostile environment”, through no fault of their own. It’s important for the union to be part of this case, to ensure all those affected have the best chance to rebuild what they’ve lost.”

The Windrush scandal came to light in 2018, when it was revealed that members of the Windrush generation were being declared “immigration offenders” and denied access to public services, housing and jobs. At least 83 people were wrongly deported despite having the right to live and work in the UK.

‘Ignorance and thoughtlessness’

Led by Wendy Williams, the inquiry published its findings, the Windrush Lessons Learned Review, in March 2020. It concluded that the Home Office had shown “ignorance and thoughtlessness” on race throughout the scandal, that immigration regulations were tightened “with complete disregard for the Windrush generation” and officials had made “irrational” demands for multiple documents to establish residency rights.

Ms Williams made 30 recommendations to avoid a repeat of the scandal, and the then-home secretary Priti Patel confirmed an action plan to implement them. Key among these was a commitment to create the post of a migrants’ commissioner, who would be responsible for speaking up for migrants and identifying systemic problems within the UK immigration system.

However, in January 2023 the new home secretary, Ms Braverman, decided to abandon the commitment to the commissioner role alongside the commitment to strengthen the powers of the immigration watchdog and to run reconciliation events with Windrush families.

UNISON litigation

UNISON launched its litigation in June 2023, during the Year of the Black Worker. The union believes that both the migrants’ commissioner and a strengthened watchdog would help to protect against a future ‘Windrush scandal’, allowing for greater protections for migrant workers and act as a break on yet more inhumane policies towards refugees.

The claimant in the judicial review, Mr Donald, is a member of the Windrush generation who arrived in the UK in 1967, aged 12, and was granted indefinite leave to remain in 1971.

Yet, when he visited Jamaica in 2010, to attend his mother’s funeral, he was prevented from returning to the UK and, effectively, exiled for nine years – until the scandal of which he was one of many victims finally came to light.

UNISON’s application to the High Court was supported by evidence  from UNISON member Michael Braithwaite, a London teaching assistant, working in particular with children with special educational needs, who lost his job due to the Windrush scandal, “a total nightmare that destroyed my life.”

When he learned of Ms Braverman’s reversal of the government commitment, Mr Braithwaite’s view was that, “It felt like we were being treated as if we didn’t matter again, as if no one really cared about what had happened… What scares me is that the hostile environment is still with us.”

Surviving the Windrush scandal

 

The article UNISON given go-ahead to join judicial review of government inaction over Windrush first appeared on the UNISON National site.

High Court rules ‘strike-breaking’ agency worker regulations unlawful

UNISON has defeated the government in the High Court over strike-breaking legislation that was introduced last summer.

The High Court has ruled that the legislation, which allows employers to use agency workers to replace those on strike, was unlawful, unfair and irrational.

The case marks another success for UNISON and its members in challenging laws restricting workers’ rights.

The judgment follows successful judicial review proceedings lodged by UNISON alongside the NASUWT and TUC, whose case is on behalf of 11 unions. Together, the unions represent millions of workers in the UK.

Since 1976, it has been illegal for employers to introduce or supply agency workers to replace workers who are taking part in a strike or industrial action.

However, in the heat of last summer’s rail strikes, then secretary of state Kwasi Kwarteng rapidly removed this regulation without consultation. 

Since July 2022, agencies have been permitted to supply temporary workers to replace striking workers. Following a hearing in May at the High Court, Mr Justice Linden has today upheld the claims of UNISON and other unions that the government acted unfairly, unlawfully, and irrationally

The judgment now quashes this strike-breaking legislation, removing it from the statute books. The previous protection for striking workers has been restored. 

Commenting on the judgment, UNISON general secretary Christina McAnea said:  

“No one ever wants to go on strike. But when that difficult decision has been taken, employers should be throwing everything but the kitchen sink at ending a dispute, not inflaming tensions by undermining staff.  

“This futile piece of legislation has barely spent a year on the statute book. Parachuting untrained agency workers into the midst of industrial hostilities isn’t fair or safe for them, the public or the staff out on strike. 

“This is embarrassing for ministers. Not only did Kwasi Kwarteng help trash the economy as chancellor, now his bulldozer attitude when business secretary has made the government look extremely foolish. 

“With his fingers stuck firmly in his ears, Kwasi Kwarteng ignored the advice of almost everyone around him, showing a total disregard for working people and their historic rights.”

And she continued: “Hopefully, the government has learned a big lesson. If ministers act in haste, they’ll end up repenting at leisure, as this judgment proves. 

“To spare themselves future shame, ministers should ditch their ill-advised strikes bill, and focus instead on working with unions to solve the country’s many problems.” 

UNISON’s director of legal services Adam Creme said: “UNISON will speak up and challenge unlawful legislation that restricts our members’ rights. This judgment is the latest in a long line of victories in strategic litigation for UNISON and our members”.

UNISON continues to fight to protect the right to strike as the Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Bill continues to make its way through parliament.  

The article High Court rules ‘strike-breaking’ agency worker regulations unlawful first appeared on the UNISON National site.

High Court rules ‘strike-breaking’ agency worker regulations unlawful

UNISON has defeated the government in the High Court over strike-breaking legislation that was introduced last summer.

The High Court has ruled that the legislation, which allows employers to use agency workers to replace those on strike, was unlawful, unfair and irrational.

The case marks another success for UNISON and its members in challenging laws restricting workers’ rights.

The judgment follows successful judicial review proceedings lodged by UNISON alongside the NASUWT and TUC, whose case is on behalf of 11 unions. Together, the unions represent millions of workers in the UK.

Since 1976, it has been illegal for employers to introduce or supply agency workers to replace workers who are taking part in a strike or industrial action.

However, in the heat of last summer’s rail strikes, then secretary of state Kwasi Kwarteng rapidly removed this regulation without consultation. 

Since July 2022, agencies have been permitted to supply temporary workers to replace striking workers. Following a hearing in May at the High Court, Mr Justice Linden has today upheld the claims of UNISON and other unions that the government acted unfairly, unlawfully, and irrationally

The judgment now quashes this strike-breaking legislation, removing it from the statute books. The previous protection for striking workers has been restored. 

Commenting on the judgment, UNISON general secretary Christina McAnea said:  

“No one ever wants to go on strike. But when that difficult decision has been taken, employers should be throwing everything but the kitchen sink at ending a dispute, not inflaming tensions by undermining staff.  

“This futile piece of legislation has barely spent a year on the statute book. Parachuting untrained agency workers into the midst of industrial hostilities isn’t fair or safe for them, the public or the staff out on strike. 

“This is embarrassing for ministers. Not only did Kwasi Kwarteng help trash the economy as chancellor, now his bulldozer attitude when business secretary has made the government look extremely foolish. 

“With his fingers stuck firmly in his ears, Kwasi Kwarteng ignored the advice of almost everyone around him, showing a total disregard for working people and their historic rights.”

And she continued: “Hopefully, the government has learned a big lesson. If ministers act in haste, they’ll end up repenting at leisure, as this judgment proves. 

“To spare themselves future shame, ministers should ditch their ill-advised strikes bill, and focus instead on working with unions to solve the country’s many problems.” 

UNISON’s director of legal services Adam Creme said: “UNISON will speak up and challenge unlawful legislation that restricts our members’ rights. This judgment is the latest in a long line of victories in strategic litigation for UNISON and our members”.

UNISON continues to fight to protect the right to strike as the Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Bill continues to make its way through parliament.  

The article High Court rules ‘strike-breaking’ agency worker regulations unlawful first appeared on the UNISON National site.

Court permits UNISON challenge on law allowing strike-breaking

The High Court has granted permission for UNISON to bring a legal challenge against the government to protect the right to strike.

UNISON is challenging government regulations that undermine the right to strike by allowing companies to hire agency workers to cover for those taking industrial action. The union argues that this is unlawful and violates fundamental trade union rights.

Describing the regulations as “impractical and dangerous”, UNISON director of legal services Adam Creme said: “These regulations have been made without any consultation since 2015. They allow employers to bus in people who are not qualified with the sole intention of breaking legitimate industrial action. 

“The government would do better to concentrate on entering into proper negotiations with unions to settle disputes.” 

UNISON’s case will be heard alongside two separate cases, brought by the NASUWT and the TUC, whose case is on behalf of eleven unions.

UNISON general secretary Christina McAnea said: “Government failures and a cost of living crisis have led to waves of industrial action across the UK.

“Every day, UNISON hears from public sector workers who are taking the difficult decision to strike because they cannot survive, or provide for their children, on their current wages. Striking is always done as a last resort, and with a heavy heart.

“Yet, rather than fixing the problems, the government appears determined to further turn its back on hard-working people.

“Breaking strikes with unqualified and ill-experienced agency workers doesn’t address the root causes of why people are striking, and it only puts the public in danger.”

The High Court hearing will be held from March 2023 onwards.

The article Court permits UNISON challenge on law allowing strike-breaking first appeared on the UNISON National site.

UNISON secures £29m in personal injury settlements for members

UNISON has secured a huge £29m in compensation for members and members’ families this year, settling just under 2,000 claims between November 2021 and November 2022. This is an increase on the £27m won on behalf of members last year.

The vast majority of these cases were work-related personal injury claims, involving accidents and injuries such as assaults at work, manual handling claims, trips and falls and needlestick injuries.

Legal officer Helen Buczynsky, who coordinates the union’s external personal injury legal service, says: “Everyone should be able to do their job safely, without risk of injury. If a UNISON member suffers harm at work, our lawyers are by their side every step of the way, giving them specialist support to seek the compensation they’re entitled to”.

Pursuing legal claims is a key part of the union’s strategy to create safer working conditions for all public sector workers.

Ms Buczynsky said: “When our members pursue a legal claim, they hold negligent employers to account and this often results in wider workplace change afterwards, making workplaces safer for everyone. The threat of legal claims is one of the most effective ways to make employers listen and make changes.”

A UNISON survey has found 65% of members who pursued a personal injury claim saw improvements made to their workplaces as a result.

The union’s lawyers provide support to thousands of members through the union’s  extensive legal assistance scheme. This year, the union also supported many members with work related disease cases, members who again suffered injury through no fault of their own including work-related stress and bullying claims, upper limb disorder cases and asbestos-related claims.

This legal support from UNISON is completely free, whether cases are won or lost. This also means that, if members are successful in their claim, they keep 100% of their damages.

On top of personal injury claims, UNISON’s legal scheme supports members with a range of legal issues, from defending themselves against work-related criminal allegations to helping members and their families with requests for wills.

UNISON general secretary Christina McAnea said: “Workers should never have to suffer workplace injuries. But when things do go wrong, UNISON is on their side, making sure they get the compensation they deserve.

“Every year we win millions of pounds for our members, but we also continue to campaign for safer working conditions to protect our members from harm.”

The article UNISON secures £29m in personal injury settlements for members first appeared on the UNISON National site.

Workers’ protections at risk as EU Law bill moves through Parliament

Last week, the government’s Retained EU Law bill passed its second reading in the House of Commons.

The bill, introduced by former business secretary Jacob Rees-Mogg, has set a fast-moving conveyor belt in motion, which will see essential protections for workers automatically vanish in December 2023, unless the government decides to produce new and equivalent UK laws.

UNISON is horrified by the measures included in the Retained EU Law bill. Many core workplace protections – including holiday pay, maternity/paternity leave, protections for part-time workers and equal pay for women and men – come from the European Union.

EU protections

For decades, EU laws have ensured decent working standards in the UK, shielding workers from exploitation and discrimination. Without this shield, workers in the UK will be exposed to an Americanised, hire-and-fire culture that makes work more insecure and dangerous – especially for women.

UNISON general secretary Christina McAnea describes the bill as “an attack on all working women”.

Protections for working women have been developed over decades through a mixture of EU legislation, UK legislation and case law. Separating out those decisions will reverse years of progress for women, including:

?  equal pay: being able to challenge your employer if a member of the opposite sex gets paid more for doing the same job;

?  family friendly policies: being paid for maternity, paternity and parental leave along with any protections against unfair treatment, such as being sacked or being overlooked for promotion, when taking such leave;

?  pregnancy protections: protections against discrimination for pregnant women and women on maternity leave, and the right to suitable alternative work on no less favourable terms.

The bill now moves to committee stage, where a select group of MPs will examine it in detail and review evidence from expert organisations. UNISON will be submitting evidence in this process.

Cruel and outmoded

Since the bill was announced, UNISON has heard from hundreds of concerned members, who described what life was like at work before improvements to maternity, paternity and parental leave.

UNISON member Joe Walinets said: “I am old enough to remember the time when many women were routinely sacked for becoming pregnant, until the late 1970s.

“I remember female family members, colleagues and friends continuing to suffer harsh discrimination in the workplace, until 1993 [when the European Commission directive came into force].

“I was lucky enough to be among the first men to benefit from paternity leave, when my first child was born in 2004. Even then, I remember how my employer tried to get me back after 8 days instead of the statutory 10. The law was my greatest ally in telling them where to go with that, coupled with my union membership.”

Member, Pauline McSorley, said: “I had my child in 1996 before parental leave was established. I felt very much alone with the responsibility. My husband would have benefited from time to get used to parenthood.

“My council employer reduced my maternity leave from full pay to half after 12 weeks, therefore I had to return to work when my baby was 10 weeks. We should never return to these very basic standards. On reflection they were cruel and outmoded, even then.”

Another member said: “I was sacked from a part-time job in the early 1970s because I was pregnant. The excuse was that it could be slippery and I could fall!”

“Bonfire of workers’ rights”

Now that Jacob Rees-Mogg has resigned as business secretary, there has been speculation that new prime minister Rishi Sunak will extend the bill’s deadline from December 2023 to December 2026.

This comes in response to reports that critics, including legal experts and the government lawyer who designed the concept of retained EU law, say the timetable of reviewing 2,400 laws in little more than a year is unrealistic.

Last week, the Financial Times reported that the prime minister had been told it would take 400 staff in the business department alone to review 300 pieces of legislation that resulted from directives, decisions and EU rules over the past 50 years and that, given the cost of living crisis, this was impractical.

UNISON general secretary Christina McAnea said: “At a time when working people are experiencing huge financial pressures and uncertainties, we need certainty, stability and support – not a bonfire of workers’ rights.

“This government doesn’t have any mandate to strip away paid holidays, health and safety protections or to roll back rights that support working parents.”

UNISON’s head of legal services Shantha David, said: “UK citizens are entitled to expect basic employment rights in the 21st century. Yet the government’s plan to strip away essential protections around equal pay, maternity, paternity and holiday pay, and protections for outsourced workers, will leave working people open to exploitation, and without any access to justice.”

UNISON remains determined to fight back against the threats to workers’ protections in the Retained EU Law Bill.

The article Workers’ protections at risk as EU Law bill moves through Parliament first appeared on the UNISON National site.