RMT v Midland Mainline [2001] IRLR 813
Judgement for the case RMT v Midland Mainline
Table Of Contents
RMT held a ballot for a strike but hadn’t balloted a large proportion of the staff because the union had misclassified their pay grades, sent ballot papers to the wrong address, or wrongly suspected that they were in arrears.
CA granted an injunction against the strike, holding that the duty in s.230(2) TULRCA that every person entitled to vote in a ballot should "so far as [was] reasonably practicable" have a voting paper sent to him, was not complied with: the union should have kept an updated record of members’ levels of seniority and addresses.
Schiemann LJ
The broad aim of the legislation is to secure a situation in which those who will actually be induced to take industrial action have the opportunity to take part in the ballot which authorises that action.
For Further Study on RMT v Midland Mainline
Labour Law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambridge...
Need instant answers? Our AI exam tutor is here to help.
Ask questions 🙋 Get answers 📔 It's simple 👁️👄👁️
Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.
Get StartedSimilar Cases
Related Product Samples
These product samples contain the same concepts we cover in this case.
| Labour Law | Economic Restructuring Redundancy+ Transfers Of Undertakings Notes (42 pages) |
| Labour Law | Industrial Action Notes (19 pages) |
Labour Law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambridge...
Since 2010, Oxbridge Notes has been a trusted education marketplace, supplying high-quality materials from top achievers at universities like Oxford, Cambridge, LSE, Harvard, and Yale.