On 8th June the House of Lords debated Commons amendments to the Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Bill. Votes were held on further amendments to the bill, in which a bishop took part:
Division 3:
The Bishop of Manchester took part in a vote on a motion tabled by Lord Fox that would introduce conditions on when a secretary of state could make minimum service regulations:
Lord Fox moved Motion B1, as an amendment to Motion B, at end to insert “and do propose Amendment 2B in lieu—
2B Page 3, line 31, at end insert—
“(5) Minimum service regulations may only be made if—
(a) the Secretary of State has published draft regulations;
(b) the Secretary of State has conducted an impact assessment of the effect of the draft regulations on the services to which the draft regulations relate, addressing, in particular, the effect—
(i) on the general public,
(ii) on the conduct of these services, and
(iii) on the conduct and effectiveness of the exercise of the right to strike in those services;
(c) the Secretary of State has conducted a consultation with the representatives of trade unions, employers and any other interested party on the draft regulations and on the effect of the draft regulations on the services to which they relate, and in particular on the effect—
(i) on the general public,
(ii) on the conduct of those services, and
(iii) on the conduct and effectiveness of the exercise of the right to strike in those services,
and has laid before Parliament a report on that consultation;
(d) the Secretary of State has placed before a Joint Committee of both Houses of Parliament convened for the purpose of reviewing them the impact assessment under paragraph (b) and the report under paragraph (c) and the Joint Committee’s review has been published in a report to Parliament.””
The motion was agreed. Content: 182 / Not Content 150.
The Bishop of Manchester voted Content.
Division 4:
The Bishop of Manchester took part in a vote on a motion tabled by Baroness O’Grady of Upper Holloway to add an amendment which would secure employee protections when receiving work notices under the terms of the bill.
Baroness O’Grady of Upper Holloway moved Motion C1, as an amendment to Motion C, at end to insert “and do propose Amendment 4B in lieu—
4B Page 4, line 40, at end insert—
“234CA Protection of employees
(1) A person is not subject to a work notice if they have not received a copy of it in accordance with the time limits specified in section 234C(3).
(2) It is for the employer to prove that the work notice was received in conformity with subsection (1).
(3) An employee may not be dismissed or subjected to any detriment for failing to comply with a work notice and any such dismissal shall be treated as a dismissal to which section 152 applies and any such detriment shall be treated as a detriment to which section 146 applies.
(4) A work notice does not place a contractual obligation on an employee to comply with it.””
The motion was agreed. Content: 180 / Not Content: 150
The Bishop of Manchester voted Content.
Division 5:
The Bishop of Manchester took part in a vote on a motion tabled by Lord Collins of Highbury that would allow unions to determine the advice given to workers affected by the bill, and protect unions from liability relating to this:
Lord Collins of Highbury moved Motion D1, as an amendment to Motion D, at end to insert “and do propose Amendment 5B as an amendment in lieu and Amendments 5C and 5D as consequential amendments—
5B Page 5, line 11, leave out from “strike,” to end of line 22 and insert “it is a matter for the union to determine what advice, if any, it gives to members of the union who are identified in the work notice, and any actions or inactions of the union in this regard shall not result in any tortious liability or the loss of any protection to which the union would otherwise be entitled pursuant to section 219.”
5C Page 6, leave out lines 19 and 20
5D Page 7, line 28, leave out “, 234A and 234E” and insert “and 234A””
The motion was agreed. Content: 179 / Not Content: 148
The Bishop of Manchester voted Content.
The Church of England in Parliament 
You must be logged in to post a comment.