Response to Consultation Paper on deduction of Trade Union subscriptions at source

Response to Consultation Paper on deduction of Trade Union subscriptions at source

28 October 1997

(Extract from letter to the UK Department of Trade and Industry)

BECTU strongly welcomes the Government's proposal to repeal the requirement on trade union members to reauthorise the deduction of their subscriptions every three years. We further welcome the proposal to repeal the obligation on employers to notify union members of increases in subscriptions.

However, we share the TUC's view that there is no necessity for the initial authorisation to include a notice informing workers of their right to withdraw from check-off. Members of all kinds of voluntary organisations are well aware of their ability to withdraw from membership payments at any time. Trade unions are, in our view, no different and there is no justification for singling out trade unions' check-off arrangements as requiring a statement of the right to withdraw.

Finally, and of most immediate concern, we share the strong reservations expressed by the TUC and others about the proposed arrangement for announcing the transition from the current three-year authorisation to an indefinite authorisation. The consultation paper proposes writing to all individuals on check-off proposing that the current 3 year authorisation should continue indefinitely unless the worker instructs otherwise.

We believe that this would result in a costly and time-consuming administrative exercise which could be achieved much more effectively by other means (e.g. a notice on company noticeboards). A number of employers operating check-off in our own sector have indicated to us their opposition to the imposition of such a requirement - which ironically adds a significant burden on business in the course of introducing measures precisely designed to remove such burdens (i.e. by repealing the 3-year authorisation). Having proposed to move away from the reauthorisation system it could in our view be totally counter-productive to require employers to write to every single employee on check-off merely to inform them of the change of policy.

We hope you will give careful consideration to the points. We would emphasise that our opposition on the latter proposal reflects not just our own view but those of major employers we deal with. We look forward to news of further progress of the consultation.