LRD guides and handbook May 2017

Law at Work 2017

Chapter 6

Location of the picket


[ch 6: pages 204-205]

If workers are not able to picket immediately in front of their workplace, the requirement in section 220A, TULRCA, that the picket must be “at or near” their place of work allows some leeway:


Workers dismissed by a company sited on a trading estate were unable to picket their own workplace so they mounted a picket on the entrance to the estate. The Court of Appeal ruled that this was “at or near” their place of work since it was the nearest the pickets could get to their place of work without committing a trespass.



Rayware v TGWU [1989] IRLR 134



The Picketing Code suggests that “at or near” means “at, or near an entrance to or exit from the factory site or office at which the picket works” and that “picketing should be confined to a location, or locations, as near as practicable to the place of work” (Code, para 22).


Union officials who are elected or appointed to represent the striking members can also picket their members’ place of work.


Members who normally work from a number of different locations (for example mobile workers like lorry drivers or field engineers) can lawfully picket any place from which they work, or the place from which their work is “administered” – normally their work head office – (section 220(2), TULRCA). A picket supervisor who is “readily contactable” by the police and who meets the other requirements set out above will be needed.


Merely “occasional ports of call” were not regarded as the individual’s place of work, according to the court in Union Traffic v TGWU [1989] IRLR 127.


Workers who are not in employment who were dismissed while on strike have a continuing right to picket lawfully at their former place of work (section 220(3), TULRCA).



The law does not protect anyone who pickets without permission on or inside any part of premises (including in the open air) which are private property. This would be trespass, and can result in civil court claims.


Secondary picketing (picketing at a workplace which is not the member’s place of work) is not protected by the immunities. Secondary picketing is unlawful, and workers who engage in it are not protected from unfair dismissal. It is not allowed even If those working at the other place of work share the same employer, or are covered by the same collective bargaining agreement.


The law does not state how many can picket. It is up to the police to decide whether to place a limit on the number of pickets in any one place where they have reasonable concern that there could be a breach of the peace.


Often police try to limit the number on a picket line to six, but they should issue a warning to this effect. This figure comes from the Picketing Code of Practice, repeated in the updated Code, which states: “Pickets and their organisers should ensure that in general, the number of pickets does not exceed six at any entrance to, or exit from, a workplace; frequently a smaller number will be appropriate.” (section E, para 56, Picketing Code).


Although the Code is non-statutory, a 1985 case gave police additional support in attempts to reduce numbers to six: 



During the 1984-85 miners’ strike, pickets were posted at a pit in South Wales. Although six pickets stood outside the colliery gates, about 60 demonstrated across the road. The court ruled that the mass demonstration was a common law nuisance.



Thomas v South Wales NUM [1985] IRLR 136



In the 2005 Gate Gourmet dispute, the court granted an injunction to limit pickets outside the company’s offices, but not at other locations:


The High Court granted an injunction limiting the number of pickets outside Gate Gourmet’s Heathrow offices to six and limiting picketing so that the workers could not approach employees going to and from work. However, it refused a request to limit the number of pickets near the entrance to the nearby Gate Gourmet plant at Beacon Hill. 



The injunction was made against the union as well as individuals because although there had been no ballot, union officials were present at the pickets and aware of what was going on, and the union had not repudiated (disowned) the action.



Gate Gourmet London Ltd v TGWU [2005] IRLR 881



www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2005/1889.html

During consultation, the government originally said that the updated Picketing Code would include guidance on misuse of social media during strikes. In the end, the revised Code said nothing on this topic.