IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/indlaw/v52y2023i1p1-33..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

We’re Miles Apart: Disproportionate Deductions from Wages, Industrial Action and Human Rights

Author

Listed:
  • David Mead

Abstract

This article sets out a human rights-based critique of one aspect of the common law wage/work bargain: the rule that entitles employers to deduct an entire week’s pay from those taking action short of strike, and who thereby perform most, but not all, of their contractual duties. It makes the case that that rule, established in Miles v Wakefield MDC and Wiluszynski v Tower Hamlets over 35 years ago, constitutes a disproportionate interference with an employee’s right to strike and to take industrial action, under Article 11 of the ECHR. The article shows how such cases might be brought, depending on whether an employee is in the public or private sector and iterates the argument for implying a duty of ‘rights-obedience’ into the contract—either as a free-standing duty or as part of an expansion of the duty of mutual trust and confidence—as a corrective.

Suggested Citation

  • David Mead, 2023. "We’re Miles Apart: Disproportionate Deductions from Wages, Industrial Action and Human Rights," Industrial Law Journal, Industrial Law Society, vol. 52(1), pages 1-33.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:indlaw:v:52:y:2023:i:1:p:1-33.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/indlaw/dwac037
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:indlaw:v:52:y:2023:i:1:p:1-33.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/ilj .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.