EXCLUSION IN RESPECT OF PROCEDURE AGREEMENT (Hansard, 3 August 1971)

§ Mr. R. Carr
I beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.
It has been the intention of everyone on both sides who has for some time now supported the concept of a statutory right of appeal in respect of unfair dismissal that we should at the same time encourage the continuation and, indeed, the spread of voluntary procedure agreements coping with dismissal, and that, provided that such voluntary agreements met the necessary standards, those who entered into them should be able to get them exempted from the statutory procedure.
I believe that to be common ground. As at present drafted, however, Clause 29(1) might permit an application for exemption of a voluntary dismissal procedure by an employer and a non-independent organisation of workers. This is not the Government's intention. The present Amendment, therefore, would provide that an employer could be joined in an application for exemption of a voluntary dismissal procedure only by a trade union or an independent organisation of workers. By the exclusion of non-independent organisations—house unions—as parties to a joint application, em- 1356 ployees would be safeguarded against removal of their statutory right of appeal in favour of a management-dominated voluntary procedure. I hope, therefore, that the Amendment will readily commend itself to both sides.
I take the opportunity afforded by the Amendment to add that I very much hope that the two sides of industry will make extensive use of the provision in Clause 29 for the exemption of voluntary procedure agreements in respect of dismissal. It is common ground on both sides of the House that it was high time we legislated, as other countries have done, to provide safeguards against unfair dismissal, but I feel that it would do great credit to our system of industrial relations if over a wide area of industry the safeguards were made in voluntary agreements jointly agreed, which must, of course, be up to the standard laid down in the statutory provisions.
Furthermore, if there is, as I hope, widespread exemption of voluntary procedures, this will relieve the burden of the case load falling on industrial tribunals and will enable me, therefore, to relax the various restrictions in respect of appeal tribunals—in particular, the two-year qualifying period—earlier than I might otherwise be able to do.
I know that many industries and firms, especially in the public sector, already include provisions regarding dismissal in their voluntary procedure agreements. It may be that these procedures will need some measure of alteration and improvement to bring them up to the standard to qualify for exemption, but I very much hope that the parties concerned in such 1357 procedures will seriously consider taking those steps.
I also hope that where hitherto there have been no voluntary procedure agreements relating to dismissal serious consideration will be given to introducing them, and that this introduction of statutory procedures will be an incentive to the formation of new and better voluntary ones rather than a hindrance. That is my belief, and it was also the belief of the Donovan Commission.

§ Mr. Eric S. Heffer (Liverpool, Walton)
We give the Amendment a limited welcome. We find that it is extremely reasonable in that, to quote Lord Jellicoe, '"It is our feeling that Clause 29(1) might therefore permit the exemption of a management-dominated dismissal procedure, in the kind of situation where an employer was joined in an application by his house union, possibly to the exclusion of a recognised trade union. This is not the Government's intention and we are concerned that the provision may not in these circumstances provide adequate safeguards for employees."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, House of Lords, 13th May, 1971; Vol. 318, c. 1511.] We are glad that it is not the Government's intention to allow a situation where a house union could have an arrangement with an employer and the bona fide trade union was excluded. We are very pleased that to that extent the Government have listened to the Opposition. But it is a limited concession, because in this Clause and Clause 30, dealing with the whole question of unfair dismissal under procedure agreements made between trade unions and employers, we are dealing with procedure agreements that have been approved by the Industrial Court, and unfortunately the House has not had an opportunity to discuss the rôle of the Court in relation to this type of agreement. Our view is that it should not be involved.
It would be wrong if procedure agreements between a firm and a company union meant that a worker who was dismissed under such agreements and was aggrieved felt that he was not being involved in proper representation because he was a member of a bona fide trade union. We are glad that that possibility has been recognised by the Government and eliminated.
1358 Whilst we support the Amendment, we want to make it absolutely clear that we are not entirely satisfied, because it involves the Industrial Court, which we should like not to be involved in any way. The voluntary system, which the right hon. Gentleman says he is so much in favour of, should be extended and developed, but without the involvement of the Industrial Court.
As I have said, we shall not oppose the Amendment, and we feel that the Government might have listened on other occasions to the Opposition as much as they have on this.

§ The Solicitor-General
I beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.
This is a small Amendment which the Government were pleased to accept when it was suggested by Lord Brown in another place to clarify the effect of subsection (2)(d), which enables exemption from the statutory procedure to be accorded when the Industrial Court is satisfied about the existence of an alternative agreement. As drafted, it suggested that to secure exemption under the procedure it was essential for independent arbitration or adjudication to exist at the end of the road. As my right hon. Friend has just said, everyone wishes to encourage voluntary settlements for the disposal of particular disputes, and no one wishes to discourage, where the parties think it appropriate, provision for independent arbitration or adjudication. But there was no desire in this context to make provision for arbitration or adjudication an obligatory and inescapable aspect of any procedure which was to secure exemption under these provisions.

§ Mr. Heffer
We shall not oppose this somewhat complicated Amendment. Lord Brown admitted that it was complicated when he moved it, and when I read the OFFICIAL REPORT of the debate it struck me that it became more complicated. The idea of hurdles being put in the way of workers using the appeals mechanism seemed to me to make matters unduly complicated, and I am not entirely happy that the Amendment should have been accepted. It was accepted with alacrity by the Government in the other place, with no argument about it. We feel that it does not make any serious inroad on the rights of workers. It makes things slightly more difficult, but we have no basic argument against it, and are therefore prepared to accept it.