Three unions are going to the High Court today in an attempt to block new regulations which will allow school governing bodies to make redundancies without consultation, writes Frances Rafferty.
The change means that employers who make fewer than 20 redundancies over 90 days do not have to consult with unions.
The unions - the National Association of Schoolmasters Union of Women Teachers, Unison and the GMB - expect to be told soon whether they will be granted a judicial review.
They argue that in the case of schools with a predominantly female workforce the law could be discriminatory and that it does not comply with the European directive upon which it is based.
The law came about after the European Court took the UK to task for failing to comply with two employment directives.
In response, the then Employment Secretary, Michael Portillo, decided to use another part of the 1975 Collective Redundancies Directive, which includes the threshold of 20 employees, in order to minimise union influence.
If the number of redundancies is more than 20 the employer will be given the choice of either consulting a recognised trade union or elected representatives of the employees affected.
Nigel de Gruchy, general secretary of the NASUWT, said governing bodies would be shooting themselves in the foot if they fail to consult. “We can usually come to some sort of agreement through negotiation, often avoiding compulsory redundancy by finding somebody prepared to go. We often discover during the negotiations that governors are not always following the correct procedures and we are able to advise them. But if we are not consulted and governors make mistakes we will have them before an industrial tribunal in a shot. And that could cost them dear.”
Industrial tribunals can award up to Pounds 20,000 for unfair dismissal against an employer.
The Labour party is hoping to force a debate on the issue with the Government, either in the House or before a committee before the end of the year.
