Rustling Road trees are being felled right now

[The Joker]

True. If I was up a tree with a chainsaw and a group had gathered below with the sole purpose of stopping me doing my work, then I would certainly feel intimidated.

 

First it was Our Nige' and now you.

 

Is anybody out there brave enough to stand up to these placard-wielding pensioners, exercising their right to stage a peaceful protest?

 

This would never have happened if Our Maggie were still alive.

[Mouserat]

An Act to consolidate the enactments relating to collective labour relations, that is to say, to trade unions, employers’ associations, industrial relations and industrial action.

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1992/52/introduction

 

That's what the Trade Union and Labour Relations Act 1992 is described as. The whole act is concerned with trade disputes, strikes, industrial action and regulating labour relations between employer and employee. It is clear, reading section 241 within the context of the Act, that this is intended to regulate the behaviour of employees and members of trade unions or other labour organisations, and not the general public exercising the right to peaceful protest. I would be amazed if any court recognises this as a valid application of the law. It effectively outlaws any protest - all those anti-Trump protestors, well, that stopped bus drivers using their buses (true, bus drivers don't own their bus but neither, I would think, do Amey workers own their tools). Let's hope the Countryside Alliance don't prevent any street cleaners from emptying bins or traffic wardens from issuing tickets.

Edited February 6, 2017 by Mouserat
Misplaced comma

[Eater Sundae]

Yeah, let's have a police state where every minor act of rebellion is ruthlessly crushed in the courts. Alternatively let's leave that to countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran and North Korea.

 

---------- Post added 06-02-2017 at 18:53 ----------

 

 

I've read that pensioners being in the way is a major cause of PTSD. It was in the Lancet

 

Yeah, lets have a society where people are prevented from going about their legal business by self appointed "protectors" of the city.

[Penistone999]

The sad reality of all this is that these incompetent , mis-mangaging, liars will still be voted back into the town hall come the next local elections.

[Bob Arctor]

Yeah, lets have a society where people are prevented from going about their legal business by self appointed "protectors" of the city.

 

They'll have been paid, I bet they're crying into their beer

[Eater Sundae]

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1992/52/introduction

 

That's what the Trade Union and Labour Relations Act 1992 is described as. The whole act is concerned with trade disputes, strikes, industrial action and regulating labour relations between employer and employee. It is clear, reading section 241 within the context of the Act, that this is intended to regulate the behaviour of employees and members of trade unions or other labour organisations, and not the general public exercising the right to peaceful protest. I would be amazed if any court recognises this as a valid application of the law. It effectively outlaws any protest - all those anti-Trump protestors, well, that stopped bus drivers using their buses (true, bus drivers don't own their bus but neither, I would think, do Amey workers own their tools). Let's hope the Countryside Alliance don't prevent any street cleaners from emptying bins or traffic wardens from issuing tickets.

 

There's a difference between just protesting about something and actions which actually prevent something which is legal and could otherwise take place. Stopping someone from working safely (which would include, for example, standing below branches which are about to be felled) falls into the latter. Workers have a legal obligation to not put members of the public at risk. The HSE would be all over them if they carried on working while people were stood below.

[ANGELFIRE1]

The sad reality of all this is that these incompetent , mis-mangaging, liars will still be voted back into the town hall come the next local elections.

 

 

My Great Grandad, Grandad and Dad voted for them and I will vote the same.

 

Well then chummy, you deserve all you get would be my reply.

 

Angel1.

[taxman]

There's a difference between just protesting about something and actions which actually prevent something which is legal and could otherwise take place. Stopping someone from working safely (which would include, for example, standing below branches which are about to be felled) falls into the latter. Workers have a legal obligation to not put members of the public at risk. The HSE would be all over them if they carried on working while people were stood below.

 

Which is the whole point. The protesters are stood, non violent, non inflammatory, just peacefully stood.

 

If this law is used against protesters then you may as well just outlaw protest, because somewhere and sometime a protest prevents someone "doing their job" be that cutting down a tree, shooting a badger, fracking or exercising a Presidential Decree to ban people from certain countries.

 

All protest prevents someone, somewhere from doing their job. This law was intended to prevent intimidation, targeting a workers home and family, stalking them, hiding their tools...not peaceful protest.

 

There isn't a court in the land that will convict on this law and it's embarrassing to see this so called Labour council embracing Tory anti union laws so readily.

[WarPig]

Which is the whole point. The protesters are stood, non violent, non inflammatory, just peacefully stood.

 

But they were intentionally doing it in such a place to prevent the workers doing their job.

 

 

If this law is used against protesters then you may as well just outlaw protest,

 

I disagree. If they were stood to one side protesting whilst allowing the workers to do their job then they would be fine. Im sure they would even be laughing and joking with the cops. But they didn't, they willingly obstructed the workers to prevent them doing their job.

[Beligerence]

But they were intentionally doing it in such a place to prevent the workers doing their job.

 

 

 

 

I disagree. If they were stood to one side protesting whilst allowing the workers to do their job then they would be fine. Im sure they would even be laughing and joking with the cops. But they didn't, they willingly obstructed the workers to prevent them doing their job.

 

It's amusing how people are struggling to understand the difference between being peaceful and being obstructive. I'm glad a few of us get it.