Unions will be given the right to expel members for belonging to a political party under proposed new laws. It comes after train drivers union Aslef defeated the UK government in the European Court of Human Rights over the expulsion of a member of the BNP.
The UK government argued the union could not exclude someone for belonging to a legitimate political organisation. But the European court said Aslef had the right to expel members whose views were incompatible with its stated aims.
The case centred around Virgin train driver Jay Lee, who was expelled by Aslef after standing unsuccessfully as a BNP candidate in 2002. Mr Lee won the right to remain a member of Aslef at two employment tribunals, which both said that a union could expel someone because of their conduct, but not because they were a member of a particular political party. But the European Court over-ruled the tribunals, saying Mr Lee would not suffer financially as a result of being expelled, as Aslef did not operate a closed shop and he was free to join another union.
In background documents issued with the Queen's Speech, the government said its new Employment Bill would amend trade union membership laws "in the light of the European court judgement in Aslef v UK".
Under proposed new legislation, unions will be able to "expel members on the basis of their membership of a political party," it added.
BBC
November 06, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Excellent news!!!
And who are the Fascists, more members for solidarity then.
And who are the Fascists, more members for solidarity then.
Don't forget 5 times "bugger all" is still "Bugger all"
So, harrington and co, who would want to join a poxy and ineffectual criminal organisation called solidarity run by a criminal and overseen by an even bigger criminal called Griffin eh?
Solidarity is nothing more than a BNP front. It is certainly not an 'independent union' as promoted by it and Griffin.
Anonymous said...
So, harrington and co, who would want to join a poxy and ineffectual criminal organisation called solidarity run by a criminal and overseen by an even bigger criminal called Griffin eh?
Solidarity is nothing more than a BNP front. It is certainly not an 'independent union' as promoted by it and Griffin.
A number of unsupported claims.
First, that Solidartiy is 'ineffectual'. So far it has not lost a single case and it has been involved with quite a lot.
Second, terms like 'poxy' and 'criminal' just show that the writer is frustrated that despite all efforts to disrupt our Union and mount a coup against our GS we continue our work.
Third, Nick Griffin is a member of Solidarity (he was recruited by Clive Potter and Tim Hawke!). He is not an official.
Lastly, our Union is independent. We are currently holding elections to our Executive which are independently scrutinised. The malcontents had a chance to stand (they have not been expelled from Solidarity) but bottled it. Their appeal is to outside agencies. They have never sought to appeal to the membership as I suspect they already know what the outcome would be. Increasingly they are seen merely as would-be spoilers making 'noises off'.
I expect that Solidarity will pick up members as a result of the new powers outlined in your article. There is really little point in a member of any Nationalist Party belonging to any establishment Union. They will not provide services when needed. Nationalists will provide a base of activists from which Solidarity will expand.
"First, that Solidartiy is 'ineffectual'. So far it has not lost a single case and it has been involved with quite a lot."
Let's have a list of cases then, so they can be checked on.
"Second, terms like 'poxy' and 'criminal' just show that the writer is frustrated that despite all efforts to disrupt our Union and mount a coup against our GS we continue our work."
We all know that's a lie. It doesn't matter how many times you say it, it's still a lie.
"Third, Nick Griffin is a member of Solidarity (he was recruited by Clive Potter and Tim Hawke!). He is not an official."
He's still a crook though.
"Lastly, our Union is independent. We are currently holding elections to our Executive which are independently scrutinised..."
How can it be independent when a coup was engineered by Griffin and Harrington? How exactly are the elections 'independently scrutinised'? Who are these 'independent scrutineers?'
Post a Comment