Human rights court's ruling demands major legal reform

Proposed changed to the law extending unions' rights to choose their members do not go far enough, the Institute of Employment Rights (IER) has claimed.

In February, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that UK law had contravened rail union ASLEF's rights by preventing it from expelling a member who belonged to the British National Party (see Labour Research, April 2007).

Following the ruling, the government must amend the relevant law - section 174 of the Trade Unions and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, as amended by the Employment Relations Act 2004. It is now consulting on the changes that should be made, and has made two proposals: either to remove the special treatment of political party membership from section 174, so that it can be used as a reason for expelling a union member on grounds of conduct; or to permit expulsion or exclusion only if membership of a party is incompatible with the union's rules or objectives.

But a new IER briefing paper has criticised both proposals, pointing out that the court's ruling has wider implications which should be reflected in UK law: it gives unions the right to decide their own fundamental values and objectives, and to exclude those who oppose these values and objectives.

The consultation document, to which responses must be submitted by 8 August, can be downloaded from www.berr.gov.uk/files/file39440.pdf

The IER briefing is available at www.ier.org.uk/node/178