Industrial action deductions

Case 5: The facts

James Scott, a firefighter, took industrial action against his employer, the Strathclyde Fire Board. It responded by making a deduction from his pay. Scott believed this to be unlawful, and brought a claim of unlawful deduction of wages in a tribunal under the Employment Rights Act 1996.

On appeal, the EAT reviewed all case law covering deductions arising from industrial action.

The ruling

The EAT noted that a 1992 decision (Home Office v Ayres) had suggested that claims could be pursued under the Wages Act 1986 (now incorporated into the 1996 Act). However, two later EAT decisions contradicted this, holding that industrial action cases were excluded from the wages provisions of the 1996 Act.

The EAT held that, regardless of whether a deduction was “lawful”, there was no right for the tribunal to rule on deductions of wages resulting from industrial action. Anyone who loses pay as a result of any form of industrial action can only pursue it through the normal civil courts.

Scott v Strathclyde EATS/0050/03