Skip to main content

Edge's News: UK Trade Union Chief Slams 'No Jab, No Job' Policy as 'a Recipe for Disaster

UK Transport Secretary Grant Shapps said it was a "good idea" for companies to insist staff are completely vaccinated, but pledged that legislation would not be passed to make it mandatory.


The British government is under growing pressure to outlaw so-called "no jab, no job" policies by companies, amid reports of possible legal actions against firms' efforts to make sure staff are double-vaccinated.


The government is facing criticism over encouraging the idea of mandatory vaccination for office staff after Transport Secretary Grant Shapps described companies' drive to prod staff to be double-jabbed as a "good idea".

The UK professional association Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) was quick to warn that mandatory vaccination would be "an intrusion on an employee's body and may discriminate on the basis of disability, or religious or philosophical belief".


In advice to its over 160,000 members, CIPD insisted that businesses "cannot forcibly vaccinate employees or potential employees" unless the move is legally required. According to the group, people being forced to get vaccinated could amount to a criminal offence against the person and claims of assault and battery.


The organisation was echoed by the British equalities watchdog, the Equality and Human Rights Commission, which called on companies to avoid applying a blanket "no jab, no job" policy. The watchdog argued that firms' approaches should be "proportionate, non-discriminatory, and make provision for those who cannot be vaccinated for medical reasons".


The UK dispute resolution group - the Advisory, Conciliation, and Arbitration Service – in turn said that if staff signalled a reluctance to get vaccinated, bosses should heed employees' concerns, show sensitiveness towards personal situations, and be wary of shunning discrimination.


The standpoint was supported by Christina McAnea, general secretary of the largest UK trade union Unison, who said "the [COVID-19] vaccine has saved thousands of lives", but that "only with widespread take-up can the virus be defeated".


"Achieving this requires persuasion and encouragement, not compulsion and coercion. Forcing people can only lead to needless confrontation at work and legal cases that could drag on for years. And that's in no one's interest", McAnea warned.


Susan Harris, legal director of the general trade union GMB, for her part, asserted that "the way to increase vaccine take-up among workers is to educate and reassure them". According to her, "bullying workers into taking a vaccine they are unsure about is cruel, unfair, and a recipe for disaster".


The union Unite slammed any "no jab, no job" demand as "a disgraceful attempt to create a divisive narrative around workers and the vaccine".


Subscribing to the viewpoint was Tory MP Will Wragg who insisted that companies should encourage staff to get vaccinated rather than threaten them. He added that ministers should "stop encouraging this kind of coercion, which will prove deeply damaging to the fabric of society".


Another influential Conservative backbencher Charles Walker said he will "exercise" his "purchasing power to avoid any company that implements such a loathsome policy", adding, "what a sad and pitiful state of affairs".


The remarks come after Transport Secretary Shapps told Sky News that even though some companies may require their staff to receive both doses of a COVID vaccine "due to the nature of their business", the government isn't considering passing legislation to this effect.


Shapps comments follow Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab suggesting that it would be "smart" for businesses to insist staff were fully vaccinated, adding he understands firms' drive to take a tough stance on the issue.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The FCT Minister–Soldier Standoff: A Test of Civil Authority and the Rule of Law

On November 11, 2025, Nigerians watched in disbelief as a video surfaced showing a tense confrontation between the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike, and a group of armed soldiers who blocked his convoy from accessing a disputed piece of land in Gaduwa, Abuja. The incident, brief but dramatic, was more than a moment of political theatre. It struck at the heart of a much bigger issue — the place of the military in a democracy, and the sanctity of civilian authority under the Nigerian Constitution. The Legal Position: Who Was Right? The Minister’s Authority Under Section 302 of the 1999 Constitution and the FCT Act , the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory exercises the executive powers of the President within Abuja. That means the Minister is not just a political appointee — he represents federal executive authority . His duties include overseeing land allocation, urban planning, and the enforcement of development control through the Federal Capital T...

Nigeria: On the Right of Self-Defence and Protection of National Sovereignty

The Federal Republic of Nigeria reaffirms its unwavering commitment to the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, in particular the maintenance of international peace and security, the respect for the sovereignty and political independence of all States, and the peaceful settlement of disputes. Nigeria is a sovereign and independent nation. Our Constitution vests sovereignty in the people of Nigeria and mandates the Government to protect the territorial integrity and independence of our country. This sovereignty—recognised under international law and reaffirmed by our membership in the United Nations, the African Union, and the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS)—is inviolable. The Government of Nigeria has observed with grave concern recent statements and actions that amount to a threat of aggression and possible violation of our territorial integrity. We remind all States that any such threat or use of force contravenes Article 2(4) of the Ch...

Kebbi’s 3 a.m. Withdrawal Shows Why President Tinubu’s Security Reforms Can’t Wait

When Governor Nasir Idris of Kebbi State revealed that security personnel deployed to vulnerable communities were withdrawn at 3:00 a.m.—just 45 minutes before an attack—Nigerians reacted with shock, anger, and a single question that refuses to disappear: Who gave the withdrawal order? It is a fair question. It is also one that may take time, investigation, and institutional honesty to answer. But the Kebbi incident exposes a deeper truth about security management in Nigeria: our command structure is too fragmented for a country battling multi-layered threats. And this, more than anything, validates President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s push for a centralised, technology-driven, and accountable security coordination model. Nigeria’s security agencies—military, police, DSS, civil defence, intelligence units—operate in parallel lanes with overlapping mandates. State governors, despite bearing the title “Chief Security Officer,” have no legal authority over federal forces. This incoheren...