AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

T & G wins appeals

16th June 1972, Page 18
16th June 1972
Page 18
Page 19
Page 18, 16th June 1972 — T & G wins appeals
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

continued from page 13

the appeal. This means that each side pays its own share of the £50,000 costs.

Giving judgment, Lord Denning emphasized that the workers' group was the basis of the shop steward's power but he was also a representative of the trade union, responsible for seeing union policy carried Out. "But he is not paid by the union," said Lord Denning, "he is not an officer of' the union, only an official."

The question was whether the shop steward was acting within the authority of the union when calling upon his fellows to take industrial action. Lord Denning commented: "I think not — or not necessarily; he may be acting on behalf of his own work group and under pressure from them without any authority from the union at all.

"If he has to have authority from the union so as to make the union responsible for unlawful action by him, it must be found in the union rules, I have studied them with the greatest care." Lord Denning said he found no authority in a shop steward or committee to take his or their own initiative in undertaking industrial action without first putting the matter before the union's officers.

A principal was not liable for what was done by his agents unless the agent was carrying out a task or duty delegated to him.

Lord Justice Roskill emphasized that the case concerned only the TGWU and its shop stewards in Liverpool and Hull. The position of other shop stewards and other unions could be very different, he said. He thought it was clear that ever since the blacking policy had been in effect, those engaged had been guilty of an unfair industrial practice against the three companies.

The determination of the appeal, he said, did not depend on any provisions of the Industrial Relations Act; if the orders made by the NIRC were to be supported it had to be on the basis that the shop stewards had acted with implied union authority, and this • implication could not be read into the events at Liverpool or Hull.

On Wednesday Mr Robert Heaton Snr, managing director of Heatons Transport (St Helen's) Ltd told CM that he thought the• hauliers involved in the container dispute

would have to meet together very quickly to decide their attitude and the question of an appeal.

The Road Haulage Association told CM "Whether we take this thing any further is contingent upon examination of the complete judgment, which will be done in the next week or two. We declared our support recently and this support continues; there is no change in our policy."

NIRC arrest warning

• On Wednesday, when evidence of the continued picketing of the Chobham Farm depot (see page 12) was given to NIRC, the court ordered the arrest and detention of Mr B. Steer, Mr D. Turner and Mr A. Williams, representatives of the London Docks joint shop stewards committee, unless they explained their conduct to the court or appealed to the Court of Appeal.


comments powered by Disqus