Contents
Section 2 of the Act introduced a new requirement of 50% of union members to vote in a ballot for strike action. It amended TULRCA 1992 section 226(2). Section 3 requires that workers in important services (health, school education, fire, transport, nuclear decommissioning and border security) must gain at least 40% support of those entitled to vote in a workplace for a strike to be legal. It amended TULRCA by adding a new section 226(2A)-(2F). This 40% is a floor on the size of a pro-industrial-action majority relative to the size of the union: a normal union can strike with (for example) 50% turnout and 26% support for a strike, But certain unions for public-sector workers would require either higher turnout (e.g. 75% turnout, with 40% of the members voting in support, 35% voting in opposition and 25% not voting) or striking to win a landslide victory (e.g. 50% turnout, 40% voting Yes, 10% voting No and 50% not voting). Section 4 requires a review of electronic balloting. This was demanded by the House of Lords, during its passage through Parliament, since the existing law mandated the process of postal voting. Sections 5 to 7 requires more information about numbers of people voting and about results to be given to union members and to theSignificance
The requirement in Section 2 for a 50% turnout means, in certain circumstances, those members who are not in favour of industrial action are better off not voting than voting "No". Take for example the PCS Union pay ballot held in July 2018, which produced the following result: Yes 50,726 (85.6%) No 8,528 (14.4%) Turnout 41.6% Under previous legislation, this would have been sufficient for the union to call a strike, however there would have needed to be approximately 12,000 additional votes cast in this ballot to reach the 50% turnout threshold. As we can see from the landslide result, even if all 12,000 had voted "No", "Yes would still have had a significant majority. So, if at least 12k of those who didn't vote would have voted "No", they have successfully achieved their aim of preventing the union calling a strike by not voting whereas casting a "No" vote would have allowed "Yes" to act.See also
*Notes
{{reflist United Kingdom labour law United Kingdom Acts of Parliament 2016 British trade unions history Trade union legislation 2016 in labor relations