An interesting case has arisen in the UK this week deriving from the resurfacing of blacklists of union workers in the construction industry. More than 40 major firms in the construction industry are facing legal action due to buying information to vet workers for potential employment.
The list was compiled by Ian Kerr first-floor office in the Worcestershire town of Droitwich in Worcester under the company name Consulting Association. He then sold the information to construction firms who were vetting workers before hirings.
Kerr argues that he did not tell these firms whether or not to hire workers, simply provided information on them that he had been compiling over 15 years; the list contained the names of 3213 workers and their political and union affiliations. The list contained names from all over the country.
The information commissioner, Richard Thomas (head of the watchdog that is appointed to keep on eye on data protection violations), has already closed down Kerr's firm and is bringing charges against him for the violation of data protection laws. Moreover, these companies are being accused of breaking data protection laws as well. The list of companies allegedly involved is quite impressive containing some of the biggest names in the construction industry http://www.guardian.co.uk/...
According to the Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/...\:
The Labour government has been criticised for passing a law banning the practice of so-called blacklists in 1999, but then, in a U-turn, deciding not to take the final step of implementing the law on the grounds that "there was no hard evidence that blacklisting was occurring". Technically, therefore, "blacklisting" is still legal.
Workers in the construction industry have been alleging for years that they were being blacklisted, but according to the Guardian, there were difficulties coming up with hard evidence proving their allegations and of course, the construction companies denied that this was occurring.
Well, the hard evidence now exists. When Kerr's business was raided, they found a database with personal information including: trade union membership, political sympathies and party membership(either sympathy or membership in the communist party or other left parties), workplace conduct and information about personal relationships http://www.guardian.co.uk/....
Thomas's people also confiscated invoices from companies in the construction firms who were paying Kerr for information. According to the Guardian, not only was this private detective watching people and compiling information on them, but companies would share information with him so that it could be spread throughout the construction industry. Moreover, companies paid Kerr an annual subscription and also paid for each use of his database. So not only were they literally sustaining him in that they provided him with additional information about workers to share in the industry, they financially ensured the existence of this company and the database.
Questions arise:
Where does this leave us and what does this say about freedom of expression and the right to organise and be a member of a trade union in the UK? Wasn't the Labour party originally created and established by trade unions; can they not even do something as simple as declaring blacklists illegal and follow this up?
How many workers were unable to get work because of this company wide blacklist? Since workers were unable to get work, do they have any recourse, can they possibly sue for lost income? Since the information was correct, they cannot sue for slander or libel. I've yet to see any discussion of whether it is even possible to sue for lost income against either the private detective or the involved companies.
Since the blacklist was compiled over the space of 15 years and the companies have denied that the blacklist existed, certainly the companies should be held liable. But blacklists are not illegal in the UK. As such, they are being charged with "data protection violations." At the same time, the British government has been arguing that blacklisting is a thing of the past, when this information comes out, they say they will investigate and that the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform said it "was prepared to review its position" according to the Guardian. As of yet, compiling a blacklist against workers is still legal.
The case is being treated as a violation of the Data Protection Act (http://www.opsi.gov.uk/...) and there have been calls for new privacy laws http://www.guardian.co.uk/.... Ian Kerr has even been named as civil liberties villain of the week in the Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/henryporter/2009/mar/06/unions-surveillance-data-protection
).
But to me, the case actually is an indication that there are problems even beyond the question of data protection, it actually goes straight to the right of trade union organising and the protection of people's rights to do so. These are rights guaranteed by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU (http://en.wikisource.org/...).