Employment Bill [HL]

First, I assure my noble friend Lord Hoyle that I am delighted to be here today to carry on the work that we started in the House. I am off again banging the drum for Britain on Friday, and all next week I shall be in six different states of the United States selling the stuff that British companies sell all over the world. It will come as no surprise to hear that I oppose the amendment. I assure the noble Baroness, Lady Gardner, in direct response to her question, that the amendment would serve to oblige ACAS to promote agreements between an independent trade union and an employer even where it would not be appropriate so to do. It would also restrict the ability of ACAS to conclude voluntary union recognition agreements. The current operational policy of ACAS implements its general duty, "““to promote the improvement of industrial relations””." Where asked for advice or help in establishing or revising procedures for the resolution of disputes at work, ACAS encourages employers to involve their employees and their representatives fully, particularly, where appropriate, any recognised independent trade union. As well as providing that general advice, ACAS offers to chair joint working parties of management and employee representatives to draw up procedures and guidance, and offers to undertake joint training of management and employee representatives in the fair and effective operation of such procedures. In my former life as director-general of the CBI, I was involved in the work of ACAS in many ways and I share what I think those on all sides of the Committee feel, which is that we should say ““well done”” for the good work that is done. I saw it at first hand and it was excellent. ACAS stresses to both parties its experience. Without such involvement of employees and their representatives, procedures are likely to be regarded with suspicion by those employees and therefore in danger of not operating effectively to prevent or resolve disputes at work. I agree with my noble friends when they say that the best way to resolve a dispute is at the workplace on the day or very shortly thereafter. There will of course be circumstances in which promoting negotiations between an employer and an independent trade union will not be appropriate. Those could include, for example, when no employee belongs to a union or where some other organisation is trusted by staff and employers to carry out such discussions. Requiring ACAS to promote negotiations between an employer and an independent trade union, which this amendment would do, would reduce ACAS’s flexibility to offer help based on the particular characteristics of an individual dispute in an individual workplace. It would take the individualism and therefore the application out of ACAS’s present remit. In addition, where an employer does not recognise the trade union, the negotiation of agreements such as those proposed in the amendment could be viewed as a limited form of recognition of the trade union by the employer. That would be in direct conflict with the factual happening on the ground. For ACAS to have a specific duty to promote such agreements could put it in the position of being seen to encourage the recognition of trade unions in organisations where they currently do not exist. That is not the role of ACAS, nor would ACAS want that role. We believe that this might make it even more difficult for ACAS to help both parties in dispute to conclude a voluntary recognition agreement. It would be unhelpful for ACAS to be seen as partisan in such discussions. I remind noble Lords that in 2006-07, ACAS conciliated in 147 such disputes and provided in-depth advice in a further 22. I hope that in the light of what I have said the noble Baroness will withdraw her amendment.