Blacklisting and its legacy in the UK construction industry: employment relations in the aftermath of exposure of the Consulting Association

• Published date: 01 May 2016
• Date: 01 May 2016
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/irj.12139

Blacklisting and its legacy in the UK

construction industry: employment relations

in the aftermath of exposure of the

Consulting Association

Janet Druker

ABSTRACT

This paper explores responses to the exposure of blacklisting in the UK construction

industry in the period following the closure of the Consulting Association (CA) in

2009. It asks whether employer collusion to blacklist in this way has been terminated

and concludes that it is now largely of historical interest although other forms of anti-

union activity continue. It highlights particularly the historic and continuing impor-

tance of ‘double breasting’and reports on divergent employer paths in the aftermath

of the exposure and subsequent closure of the activities of the CA.

1 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW

This paper explores responses to the exposure of blacklisting in the UK construction

industry in the period following the closure of the Consulting Association (CA) in

2009. First, it asks whether the historical practice of blacklisting has been terminated?

Is blacklisting a thing of the past? Second, it reports on divergent employer paths in

the aftermath of the exposure and subsequent closure of the activities of the CA. It

considers the possibility that other anti-trade union tactics are deployed in place of

blacklisting and asks if there is evidence of a shift in attitudes toward trade union or-

ganisation. Third, it considers union positioning and implications for the future.

Blacklisting—the attempt by employers or employment agencies to avoid

employing a known trade union activist by compiling or referring to an information

database—has a long history within the UK construction industry, where it is partic-

ularly difficult to bring about effective trade union organisation (McIvor, 1988).

Through collusion between employers, workers have been denied employment or

engagement and union organisation has been undermined. It has been a part of the

approach to construction workforce management in the UK because of the challenge

of sustaining direct supervision and effective line management in a workplace or work

situations that vary daily and where employer control is difficult to sustain.

Blacklisting is not exclusive to construction of course and is certainly not exclusive

to the UK because dismissal of union members was a significant feature of mid-20th

century anti-Communist activities in the USA (Filippelli and McColloch, 1995: 155).

The activities of the UK construction employer alliance, the CA were terminated in

❒Correspondence should be addressed to Janet Druker, University of Westminster Business School, 35

Marylebone Road, London NW1 5LS, UK; email: drukerj@westminster.ac.uk

Industrial Relations Journal 47:3, 220–237

ISSN 0019-8692

© 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd

2009 amid a flurry of publicity that tarnished the reputation of the companies who

had been associated with it. The CA staff had monitored individuals, especially those

from the construction industry, whose names had been associated with trade union,

environmental or socialist activities and provided information about them, through

a subscription service supported by major construction contractors and employers.

They were able to access information and use it as a basis for decisions about employ-

ment. The Office of the Information Commissioner closed down the CA in 2009

(Institute of Employment Rights, 2013).

The House of Commons Scottish Affairs Committee (SAC) exposed the activities

of the CA with hearings taking place between 2012 and 2015 (House of Commons

(HoC) SAC, 2013; HoC SAC, 2014; HoC SAC, 2015). The evidence before the

Committee and publicity concerning blacklisting at the time of the hearings aroused

outrage amongst those who had been denied work and widespread concerns amongst

the communities of trade unionists, academics and HR and employment profes-

sionals who saw the activities of the CA as both undermining collective employment

rights and also prejudicing individual employment opportunities. At the time of

writing a legal hearing is pending, initiated by blacklisted workers against McAlpine

who enjoined other construction companies associated with the CA, who now defend

the case with them (Building Magazine, 09.08.2013: 13). Some blacklisting victims

have already been awarded substantial compensation and further cases are under

consideration (Union of Construction Allied Trades and Technicians, 2016).

This paper argues that blacklisting in the form in which it appeared via the CA is a

historic phenomenon unlikely to return. Employers have grouped together in their

legal defence against compensation for blacklisted workers and have, together,

admitted liability and offered an apology (Syal, 2015). At the time of writing a Court

case is pending. Yet the ending of this form of blacklisting may not bring an end to

anti-union initiatives. There is evidence that paths diverge in enterprise practice with

research pointing to some positive initiatives where client requirements and the influ-

ence of parent companies are brought to bear. However, contextual factors impact

on management behaviours in different ways. A legacy of low trust remains, together

with a belief, not confined to trade union representatives, that anti-union behaviour

will be continued in some form. The short-term and peripatetic nature of construction

work, the effects of sub-contracting, the use of self-employed labour through agencies

and umbrella companies as well as the number of non-English speakers on some sites

continue to make it difficult for trade unions to organise effectively at site level.

The paper is structured as follows. First we discuss the literature that deals with

employer resistance to trade unions and offer a brief overview of the history of

blacklisting in construction. We explain the research design and methodology under-

lying this paper and then report on findings. Finally, we comment on the questions

posed.

2 EMPLOYER RESISTANCE TO TRADE UNIONS

Whilst there are studies that address the challenges of trade union organisation at an

industry level (e.g. Heery et al., 2004) interest in employer resistance to trade unions

in the UK has largely focused on the question of trade union recognition within the

enterprise, particularly following the creation of the statutory mechanism for trade

union recognition (e.g. Dundon, 2002; Gall, 2004). An employer alliance such as

the CA, co-existing with the structures of national collective agreements and

221Blacklisting and its legacy in UK construction

© 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd