1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208 
NIRC 'given no reason for blacking'
Page 39
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• The National Industrial Relations Court will give judgment today (Friday) on contempt of court charges levelled against the TGWU.
The union, which has already paid £55,000 in fines for contempt, faces allegations that it is in contempt again, because dockers at Liverpool have continued to "black" hauliers in defiance of a ban imposed by the Court.
The allegations were made by Heatons Transport (St Helens) Ltd, and Craddock Bros of Wolverhampton.
Mr Peter Pain, QC, for the TGWU, submitted during the two-day hearing which ended on Wednesday that there were a number of errors in law in the way the Court had dealt with the original contempt allegations. "If the full facts had been known there could have been no question of contempt because we had in fact obeyed the Court's order," he declared.
Sir John Donaldson, president of the Court, said that because of a recent "rethinkby the union toward the Court it would not be useful or helpful to industrial relations for any disobedience to Court orders during the last few days to attract penalties.
Sir John added: "The real issue is whether there is responsibility or accountability by the union for the activities of the shop stewards.
"If we affirm the view we have already
expressed it will follow that the union will be obliged to comply with the orders hereafter very much more than it has/lone up to now.
He said counsel for the union was not concerned with immediate contempt proceedings nor with whether there had been a contempt of court up to now.
But Sir John made clear that any question of compensation by the union was a different matter.
He warned that a very serious issue would arise if the union now failed to comply with a modified or reaffirmed order.
Mr Andrew Yorke, QC, for the two transport firms, told the Court that Mr Jack Jones, general secretary of the union, had failed to take action other than to advise Liverpool shop stewards that they were defying the Court's order by continuing to "black" container lorries.
"He has failed to deprive the shop stewards of authority and he has failed to repudiate their action", counsel said.
Mr Yorke said that there had been no explanation by the union as to why Heatons and Craddock were "blacked". On the union's own evidence they ought not to be.
There was a possible inference that the firms were being "blacked" solely because they had brought these proceedings. Mr Pain, replying, said a trade union was a voluntary association often with a very large membership and the difficulties of getting that membership to follow a particular line and to accept a particular discipline were very considerable.