Turn on thread page Beta

B1334 - (GCHQ) Trade Union Bill 2018 watch

    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    What is this?/I'm confused
    Hi there. If you're confused as to what is going on here then you are probably new to this section of TSR. This is a Model House of Commons, a forum where we emulate the structure of the Real Life House of Commons as an excuse to debate politics.

    If you are seeing this and you want to get involved in the debate, please feel free. You do not need to join a party, get approval or join any group to get stuck in right away. If you enjoy it and you do want to join a party then you can do so here. If you have any questions or need any help please message me. I am the current speaker of the house and part of my role involves offering impartial advice to new members so I will always be happy to answer what questions you have. Alternatively, you can read the new members guide to get advice on a wide range of issues.

    Note: Please refrain from making comments about how we spend our free time. It is our free time to spend.


    B1334 - (GCHQ) Trade Union Bill 2018, TSR Government




    A

    BILL

    TO

    prohibit GCHQ employees from joining trade unions and create a representative institution where GCHQ employees can settle disputes through arbitration, without unrest.




    BE IT ENACTED by The Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Commons in this present Parliament assembled, in accordance with the provisions of the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949, and by the authority of the same, as follows:-

    1 - Definitions
    (1) Employee: a person employed for wages or salary.
    (2) Trade union: an organised association of workers in a trade, group of trades, or profession, formed to protect and further their rights and interests.
    (3) Federation: a group of organisations that have joined to form a larger organisation.
    (4) Arbitration: the use of an independent person or body officially appointed to settle a dispute.
    (5) Employer: a person or organisation that employs people.
    (6) Industrial action: action taken by employees as a protest, especially striking or working to rule.

    2 - GCHQ Employees Trade Union Membership
    (1) By 31st March 2018, all GCHQ employees are prohibited from joining a trade union.
    (2) By 31st March 2018, all current GCHQ employees currently a member of a trade union must leave or face dismissal.

    3 - GCHQ Representative Institutions
    (1) By 31st March 2018, the Intelligence and Security Federation will form.
    (2) All current GCHQ employees that are not members of a trade union are members of the Intelligence and Security Federation by default.
    (3) Any new GCHQ employees can opt-in to membership of the Intelligence and Security Federation.
    (4) The Intelligence and Security Federation’s purpose is to represent GCHQ employees and settle disputes through arbitration as long as the employer bargains in good faith.
    (5) The Intelligence and Security Federation must not:
    (a) take industrial action,
    (b) ballot for industrial action and,
    (c) ignore requests under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.
    (6) The Intelligence and Security Federation must set up a constitution which must contain the following:
    (a) the various roles needed in order to allow the federation to function,
    (b) rules for members and,
    (c) benefits of being a member of the federation.
    (7) Membership fees are decided by the Intelligence and Security Federation. Membership fees must be reviewed every year by the Intelligence and Security Federation.
    (8) Members of the Intelligence and Security Federation may choose to opt-out of paying membership fees. If they do this, they will not receive the following:
    (a) legal representation,
    (b) have the right to vote in a ballot,
    (c) any other benefits paying members receive.
    (6) Independent reviews can be carried out at the sole discretion of the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs.
    (7) Ballots will only be valid if:
    (a) the turnout is more than 50% and,
    (b) if two-thirds vote in favour.

    4 - Commencement, short title and extent
    (1) This Act may be cited as the Trade Union Act 2018.
    (2) This Act extends to the whole of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
    (3) This Act is to come into effect on the 30th March 2018.

    Notes:
    Spoiler:
    Show




    GCHQ is one of the most important intelligence and security organisation in the country. It provides the government and the armed forces with necessary information and provides signals intelligence. The fact that employees are allowed to strike could pose a national security risk and possible unrest. To prevent this from occurring, this bill prohibits employees from joining trade unions but they automatically become members of a federation which will allow them to express their concerns through arbitration. In this federation, they will not be able to strike or ballot to strike, nor will they be able to ignore any requests to see information from the press, which means that this federation will also be transparent.

    To be explicit, this federation will not be publicly funded. Any funding will come from the money the federation raises through membership fees.

    In more recent times, we have been close to seeing strike action from GCHQ employees. Evidence of that is here.


    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    DayneD89 the title should be (GCHQ) Trade Union Bill 2018.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by CoffeeGeek)
    DayneD89 the title should be (GCHQ) Trade Union Bill 2018.
    Np, I'll edit that. I thought that bit was for internal use
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    National security is of utmost importance. Aye.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    No. Trade unions need further democratisation and strong restrictions to their power, but no employee should be forbidden by law from voluntarily associating with other people.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by Saunders16)
    No. Trade unions need further democratisation and strong restrictions to their power, but no employee should be forbidden by law from voluntarily associating with other people.
    This bill does not forbid people from voluntarily associating with others, just not in a trade union but in a federation to ensure disputes are settled through arbitration.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CoffeeGeek)
    National security is of utmost importance. Aye.
    And what evidence can you provide to show that it’s compromised with trade union membership for these people? Actual evidence rather than just an assertion.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    And what evidence can you provide to show that it’s compromised with trade union membership for these people? Actual evidence rather than just an assertion.
    Reading something called the notes might help before assuming assertion.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by CoffeeGeek)
    This bill does not forbid people from voluntarily associating with others, just not in a trade union
    That is an oxymoron.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CoffeeGeek)
    Reading something called the notes might help before assuming assertion.
    Your evidence doesn’t say that national security would be affected, so yes it is an assertion.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by Saunders16)
    That is an oxymoron.
    The Federation works similarly to the Police Federation IRL so that must be an oxymoron to then...

    (Original post by joecphillips)
    Your evidence doesn’t say that national security would be affected, so yes it is an assertion.
    Inference.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CoffeeGeek)
    The Federation works similarly to the Police Federation IRL so that must be an oxymoron to then...



    Inference.
    Except your article doesn’t say that national security would be affected, so what evidence do you have that it would?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    I do not see how forcing organisations linked to security services to provide information to all Freedom of Information requests strengthens national security.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    It has been justified about as well as the bill introducing indoctrination into most schools. It is also worth noting that the 1984-97 ban was found to be in contravention of International Labour Law which we are party to as only the police and armed forces are exempt from the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention,
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by Jacob E)
    I do not see how forcing organisations linked to security services to provide information to all Freedom of Information requests strengthens national security.
    It makes the Federation transparent. Can you prove how that wouldn't help with national security?...

    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    It has been justified about as well as the bill introducing indoctrination into most schools. It is also worth noting that the 1984-97 ban was found to be in contravention of International Labour Law which we are party to as only the police and armed forces are exempt from the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention,
    This isn't like the 1984-97 ban.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by CoffeeGeek)
    The Federation works similarly to the Police Federation IRL so that must be an oxymoron to then...
    If workers at GCHQ cannot join a trade union, they are forbidding from joining a voluntary association. It is an oxymoron to say that they are free to join in association with other people; your point is nonsensical. I cannot support people being forbidden from associating with other people. If this government wishes to properly tackle trade unions, it should take the sensible route and restrict their power rather then just looking at one area and taking away people's freedom.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    This will be a good test of how liberal the “Liberals” are the last time a Tory Government with the liberals tried to push out something similar actual liberal MPs opposed it, are there any of these left in the party?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Mr Speaker,

    With respect, I strongly disagree with this bill and will be voting against it, and I urge all of my parliamentary colleagues that respect this country’s liberal, freedom-centric traditions to do likewise.

    The right to freedom of association, mostly commonly expressed by workers in the form of joining a trade union, should be an accessible option for all people, this bill limits that right, which should be cherished.

    I also share Jammy’s concerns regarding international law.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    Aye. It is imperative that our national security is protected and that our digital defense systems remain online, regardless of internal disputes.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by Saunders16)
    If workers at GCHQ cannot join a trade union, they are forbidding from joining a voluntary association. It is an oxymoron to say that they are free to join in association with other people; your point is nonsensical. I cannot support people being forbidden from associating with other people. If this government wishes to properly tackle trade unions, it should take the sensible route and restrict their power rather then just looking at one area and taking away people's freedom.
    A voluntary association does not have to be a trade union. So it's not an oxymoron and my point is not nonsensical, your definition of voluntary association is a narrow one.

    Restrict their power sounds quite vague, do you mind elaborating this "sensible" route? And why do this arbitrarily on all trade unions?
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: February 15, 2018
The home of Results and Clearing

2,102

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
How are you feeling about GCSE results day?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.