Trade Unions and Equal Pay
The trade unions have got their knickers in a terrible twist over some very critical remarks from the Law Society - about their handling of equal pay claims.
The president of the Law Society (for England, Wales and Northern Ireland) - Robert Heslett - has written to Dominic Grieve MP, Shadow Justice Secretary, and is calling upon him, if elected to government, to repeal new regulations which came into force on 6 April 2010.
The Law Society fought to prevent these regulations coming into force - and says it will continue to lobby to have them overturned.
The Law Society says it is "extremely concerned that the restriction in the level of damages for consumers with employment matters, that are complex or which are meritorious but uncertain of success, may well be unable to find solicitors able to take on their cases them because the solicitor cannot meet the financial risk of covering their costs."
The Law Society president went on to say: "This is a cavalier move by the government which is not only damaging to the citizen but wrong in principle.
Professor Moorhead, on whose research the government relied, has written to Parliament to indicate that his research should not be taken as providing evidence to support this limitation. It is outrageous that government should seek to twist his research in order to use it as a basis for these regulations.
The regulations may well remove from citizens the choice of representation and force them to rely on services provided by trade unions. It is difficult to see anyone other than Trade Unions benefiting from these hasty changes.
Experience in respect of equal pay deals, suggests that unions may not be in the best position to deliver appropriate results for their clients and those wishing to challenge such deals may well find it impossible to do so."
In plain language, the Law Society is effectively accusing the government of striking a cosy deal before the general election - to benefit of Labour's trade union paymasters.
But this hasty and unjustified decision will end up restricting the choice of ordinary union members (and non-union members) who require proper legal representation.
The president of the Law Society (for England, Wales and Northern Ireland) - Robert Heslett - has written to Dominic Grieve MP, Shadow Justice Secretary, and is calling upon him, if elected to government, to repeal new regulations which came into force on 6 April 2010.
The Law Society fought to prevent these regulations coming into force - and says it will continue to lobby to have them overturned.
The Law Society says it is "extremely concerned that the restriction in the level of damages for consumers with employment matters, that are complex or which are meritorious but uncertain of success, may well be unable to find solicitors able to take on their cases them because the solicitor cannot meet the financial risk of covering their costs."
The Law Society president went on to say: "This is a cavalier move by the government which is not only damaging to the citizen but wrong in principle.
Professor Moorhead, on whose research the government relied, has written to Parliament to indicate that his research should not be taken as providing evidence to support this limitation. It is outrageous that government should seek to twist his research in order to use it as a basis for these regulations.
The regulations may well remove from citizens the choice of representation and force them to rely on services provided by trade unions. It is difficult to see anyone other than Trade Unions benefiting from these hasty changes.
Experience in respect of equal pay deals, suggests that unions may not be in the best position to deliver appropriate results for their clients and those wishing to challenge such deals may well find it impossible to do so."
In plain language, the Law Society is effectively accusing the government of striking a cosy deal before the general election - to benefit of Labour's trade union paymasters.
But this hasty and unjustified decision will end up restricting the choice of ordinary union members (and non-union members) who require proper legal representation.
