The dispute at British Airways over the introduction of new time recording procedures resolved after the threat of strikes in July this year, represents a change in the attitude of much of the UK’s workforce. Although the particular procedures proposed by British Airways can hardly be described as excessive or extreme, the reaction of the workforce represented an increasingly strong tide in the UK employee relations environment of a need for employers to prepare the ground before implementing change – in other words, to consult their workforce.
Some commentators have suggested that, if the draft Information and Consultation of Employees Regulations 2003 (ICER) had been in force – they are not applicable to employers with 150-plus employees until March 2005 – the result might have been different. The basis for this is that, although employers and employee representatives, including trade unions, can negotiate their own information and consultation (I&C) agreement, the ‘default’ I&C model requires there to be consultation with a view to reaching agreement on “decisions likely to lead to substantial changes in work organisation and contractual relations”. It is doubtful whether the introduction of a new time recording procedure should, of itself, be regarded as substantial. The real beef behind the employees’ concerns about the time recording procedures was over the use that would be made of the information. Arguably, although the decision to introduce time recording procedures is not itself substantial, it is one which could lead to changing shift arrangements – which could, arguably, be regarded as “substantial”.
