COURT REJECTS THATCHER'S BAN ON TRADE UNION AT TOP-SECRET FACILITY

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP90-00552R000302750005-1
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 1
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 6, 2010
• Sequence Number: 5
• Publication Date: July 17, 1984
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/06 :CIA-RDP90-005528000302750005-1
- ~ - ~ ~ I~JASH 1 NGTON POST
17 July 1984
STAT
court Rejects Thatcher's Ban on 'T'rade
Union at 'f'op-S~eret Facility
By Michael Getlgr
Wash+ngbn Post Tbrelgn Se[vlce
LONDON, July 16-British Prime
Minister Margaret Thatcher, beset
with problems from striking coal min-
and dockers, today'suffered anoth-
er labor setback when a court ruled
that she acted illegally in January in
binning trade unions from the govern-
arent's super-secret electronic inter
~ 6gence gathering center.
The government communications
center at Cheltenham, known as
;GCHQ, is similar to the top-secret
U;S. National Security Agency head-
; quartered in Maryland. The two cen-
~ lets, which manage electronic eaves-
~ d~iopping installations around the
+ world, work closely together.
~ +Although the United States has de-
e hied that it exerted pressure on the.
~ British government to keep unions out
of;Cheltenham, it was widely reported
] h~rre in January that U.S. security au-
thorities feared security leaks and
$ winted British authorities to be able
to;use lie detector tests on employes,
so~riething that the unions were sure
to oppose, . .
.Commentators here already are
~ speculating that. today's decision by
`L~-don high court judge Iain Glide-
w4ll could lead to reluctance on the
r part of the Americans to share some
sepsitive intelligence.
~Tbe government said tonight that
it will appeal the court ruling Tues-
~ da~, Reuter reported.]
~ Amid considerable popular, political
r aril labor opposition, Thatcher im-
r pci~ed a ban on civil service union
:membership at the center on Jan. 25.
;She argued that the center's vital in-
telligence role demanded that its work
be protected against interruption by
~ strikes or labor disputes. At the time,
1 the government offered workers at
the center the choice of resigning
+their union membership in return for
~E1,300, being sent elsewhere to an-
other job or facing dismissal
~ Today's court ruling in effect up-
held the government's contention that
it has power to exclude civil servants
~ from union membership in some
cases, but the court found that the
sway the government Went about it in
;the Cheltenham case was unlawful.
The judge said that thg' government's
failure to consult the unions and the
CHGQ staff first had breached the
'"rules of natural justice" and taken
away their fundamental rights.
The decision, which came as a sur-
prise, was an embarrassment to
Thatcher. The leader of the opposi-
tion Social Democratic Party, David
Owen, said "never in our history has a
British Prime Minister been found
guilty in a British court of law and
been placed in the dock in this way."
However, even if the appeal fails,
today's decision appears to leave open
the possibility that the government
can maintain the union ban by simply
consulting the center's staff and
unions first before reimposing it.
The ban reportedly will remain in
effect pending the appeal.
Meanwhile, Thatcher appears to be
headed for another challenge over the
activities of the former chief of British
counterintelligence from 1956-1965,
_ Sir Roger Hollis. In 1981, Thatcher
told Parliament that no conclusive ev-
idence had been developed that Hollis,
who died in 1973, had been a Russian
spy.
But in a television program to be
broadcast tonight, Peter Wright, the
former government intelligence offi-
cial who investigated the Hollis case
for four years, says that "it was 99
percent certain that he was a spy."
Wright calls the government stance
"a masterly piece of Whitehall decep-
tion, because there were three inde-
pendent inquiries in succession .
and all concluded that there was se-
rious penetration." .
But at another point he claims that
no prime minister had ever been given
the full details of what really hap-
pened.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/06 :CIA-RDP90-005528000302750005-1