The Trades Union Congress has submitted a formal complaint to the United Nations’ labor standards body, alleging that the UK government has violated the watchdog’s directives regarding its recently enacted and perceived as “undemocratic” anti-strike legislation.
Paul Nowak, the general secretary of the organization representing trade unions in England and Wales, stated that they brought their case before the International Labour Organization (ILO) due to the belief that the strike act was not in compliance with international law.
This legislation mandates that essential service sectors, including emergency services, education, and rail, maintain minimum service levels during strikes.
In June, the ILO issued what the TUC described as a “humiliating” reprimand to the government concerning the anti-strike law, a month prior to its formal implementation. The labor watchdog urged the UK to ensure that any existing or forthcoming laws adhered to international standards regarding freedom of association and to seek guidance from ILO experts.
Additionally, the ILO advised that the government should limit its authority to prevent interference with the autonomy and operation of workers’ and employers’ organizations.
Paul Nowak asserted that the strike laws did not meet the ILO’s directives, and this led to the TUC’s submission of a case to the ILO regarding these new laws.
The government introduced these laws following a year marked by the most significant wave of industrial action in the UK in three decades. Various groups of workers, including rail workers, warehouse and port workers, Royal Mail employees, junior doctors, teachers, and barristers, went on strike to protest against pay and working conditions.
The ILO’s findings in June were the result of an initial complaint filed by the TUC nearly a year ago, amid concerns that the incoming laws would impact workers’ rights to strike.
“These laws haven’t been designed to resolve workplace conflicts; they’ve been designed to exacerbate them. They’re unworkable, undemocratic, and almost certainly in violation of international law,” Nowak remarked.
A government spokesperson countered, stating, “The purpose of this legislation is to safeguard the lives and livelihoods of the general public and ensure they can continue to access essential public services during strikes. The legislation does not eliminate the ability to strike, but people expect the government to act when their rights and freedoms are disproportionately affected, and that’s precisely what we are doing with this bill.”