Business
Gatwick second runway plan given go-ahead by Government
Gatwick Airport’s £2.2 billion second runway plan has been given the go-ahead by Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander.
In the privately-financed project, the West Sussex airport will move its emergency runway 12 metres north, enabling it to be used for departures of narrow-bodied planes such as Airbus A320s and Boeing 737s.
This will enable it to be used for about 100,000 more flights a year.
Ms Alexander backed the scheme as a “no-brainer” for economic growth, a Government source said, suggesting flights could take off from the new full runway before 2029.
The Cabinet minister is satisfied with adjustments made, covering issues such as noise mitigation and the proportion of passengers who would travel to and from the airport by public transport.
It comes after the Planning Inspectorate initially rejected the airport’s application and earlier this year recommended Ms Alexander should approve the project if the changes were made.
New commitments include Gatwick’s management setting its own targets for the proportion of passengers who travel to the airport by public transport, rather than a legally binding target.
Residents affected by more noise will be able to ask Gatwick to cover the costs for triple-glazed windows.
Homeowners living directly beneath the new flight routes who choose to sell could have their stamp duty and reasonable moving costs paid, as well as estate agent fees of up to 1% of the purchase price.
Gatwick says its plans will create £1 billion per year in economic benefits, and generate an additional 14,000 jobs.
A Government source told the PA news agency: “The Transport Secretary has cleared Gatwick expansion for take-off.
“With capacity constraints holding back business, trade and tourism, this is a no-brainer for growth.
“This Government has taken unprecedented steps to get this done, navigating a needlessly complex planning system, which our reforms will simplify in future.
“It is possible that planes could be taking off from a new full runway at Gatwick before the next general election.
“Any airport expansion must be delivered in line with our legally binding climate change commitments and meet strict environmental requirements.”
Local campaigners opposed to expansion are concerned about the impact on surface transport, noise, housing provision and wastewater treatment, but the airport insists it has conducted “full and thorough assessments” of those issues.
CAGNE, an umbrella aviation community and environment group for Sussex, Surrey and Kent, said it stands ready to serve a judicial review funded by residents and environmental bodies.
The group said: “We know this Government cares little for the environmental impact aviation is having on our planet and Gatwick’s neighbours, but not to demand that Gatwick pays for the infrastructure, the onsite wastewater treatment plant, and noise impact is unlawful in our book.”
The Labour Government’s backing of a third runway at Heathrow Airport in its bid to grow the economy has also drawn criticism from environmental groups and opposition politicians.
Green Party leader Zack Polanski described ministers’ support of a second Gatwick runway as a “disaster”.
He said in a statement: “It ignores basic climate science and risks undermining efforts to tackle the climate crisis.
“Labour keeps wheeling out the same nonsense about growth, but at what cost? What this really means is more pollution, more noise for local communities, and no real economic benefit.”
Stewart Wingate, Vinci Airports managing director for the UK and former Gatwick chief executive, said: “After a lengthy and rigorous planning process, we welcome the Government’s approval of plans to bring our Northern Runway into routine use, ahead of the expected deadline.
“This is another important gateway in the planning process for this £2.2bn investment, which is fully funded by our shareholders and will unlock significant growth, tourism and trade benefits for London Gatwick and the UK and create thousands of jobs.
“As we’ve said previously, it is essential that any planning conditions enable us to realise the full benefits of the project and do not impose unnecessary constraints that make it uneconomic to invest in.
“We now need to carefully examine the details of the planning consent. Once we have done that, we will be able to comment further.”
Liv McMahon and
Chris Vallance,Technology reporters
Getty ImagesGrand Theft Auto (GTA) maker Rockstar Games has been accused by a trade union of sacking staff in the UK to stop them from unionising.
The Independent Workers’ Union of Great Britain (IWGB), which represents people working in the gaming sector, said 31 workers were fired from Rockstar’s UK studios on 30 October.
The union led rallies outside the company’s offices in Edinburgh and London on Thursday to protest what it described as “the most blatant and ruthless act of union busting in the history of the games industry”.
The BBC has approached Rockstar’s parent company, Take-Two Interactive, for comment, which has reportedly claimed staff were sacked for sharing confidential information.
IWGB“Last week, we took action against a small number of individuals who were found to be distributing and discussing confidential information in a public forum, a violation of our company policies,” a Rockstar spokesperson told Bloomberg in a statement.
“This was in no way related to people’s right to join a union or engage in union activities.”
At large video game studios, information about game development is tightly controlled – with employees often signing agreements not to share confidential information.
Rockstar’s upcoming GTA 6 is expected to be one of the best-selling games of all time, with fans clamouring for any news ahead of its May 2026 release date – meaning security around any information will be heightened at the studio.
But union president Alex Marshall accused Rockstar of deflecting from the “real reason” for firing staff – which the IWGB believes is their union involvement.
“They are afraid of hard working staff privately discussing exercising their rights for a fairer workplace and a collective voice,” he said.
“Management are showing they don’t care about delays to GTA 6, and that they’re prioritising union busting by targeting the very people who make the game.”
According to the IWGB, the UK workers fired at the end of October were part of a group discussing forming a union at the company.
Mr Marshall said its only non-Rockstar employees were union organisers.
“We refute that confidential information was shared publicly,” IWGB said in a statement.
Dr Paolo Ruffino, senior lecturer in digital curation and computational creativity at Kings College London, said it was a “textbook” case of non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) being used by gaming firms.
“They’re used at every level in gaming, creating a culture of secrecy that makes investigating working conditions nearly impossible,” he said.
“The real question is whether these dismissals were about leaked information or protected union activity – a distinction UK employment law requires but which NDA allegations make difficult to prove.”
‘Equalising the scales’
Speaking to the BBC at a picket outside the Rockstar North office in Edinburgh, organiser Fred Carter said he was standing alongside staff who had been sacked “without warning” and “without reason”.
“They’ve been fired, we believe, because they’re union members – which is a protected activity in the UK,” he said.
“We’re asking people to come out and support us, to demand their jobs back and demand accountability from Rockstar.”
A former employee speaking at the Edinburgh rally said there was a “power imbalance” at play in conversations with management.
“Not everyone is comfortable speaking up, and even when you do you can get shut down because you’re just one person,” they said.
Workers at BAE Systems in Lancashire have been cleared to proceed with planned industrial action after the High Court dismissed the company’s last-minute bid to block strikes.
The aerospace giant had sought an injunction against Unite the Union members at its Warton and Samlesbury sites, arguing their planned walkout was unlawful.
However, Mr Justice Soole refused to grant the injunction on Thursday, stating: “Having considered the evidence, the application is dismissed. I will give my reasons later.”
The ruling paves the way for strikes, which the union said were due to begin on Wednesday and continue until 25 November, following the rejection of a 2025 pay offer.
In written submissions, Bruce Carr KC, representing BAE, contended that Unite had invalidated the strike’s lawfulness by instructing members not to train managers in aircraft testing after giving notice to ballot on 24 September.
The barrister added: “It is the claimant’s case that the evidence clearly demonstrates that at that meeting and thereafter, Unite called on its members employed as quality professionals, to take industrial action in the form of refusing to undertake the training of managers employed by the claimant.”
Mr Carr said that in mid-September BAE wanted the training after “a number of absences” and while it was “considering business continuity plans in the event of possible industrial action”.
This training occurred between 22 September and 10 October, after which the quality professionals refused to continue following instructions from the union, Mr Carr said.
These workers breached their duty to BAE because they are “required to act in the best interests of the company to carry out such duties in respect of their appointment as they may reasonably be called upon to undertake”, the barrister added.
Oliver Segal KC, for Unite, said the training was a “request”, not an “instruction” and therefore workers who refused were not in breach of their contract.
He described managers being trained for the testing role as “unprecedented” and that union representatives had asked workers to get the “request” in writing while they seek legal advice.
In written submissions, he said: “The evidence in this case is that the defendant never even suggested, let alone ‘called’ on, its members who are quality professionals to refuse to comply with a management instruction to provide training to management executives.”
Mr Segal said BAE was “ludicrously interpreting” emails between union representatives discussing the training as instructions for union members not to comply.
The barrister also said there was no refusal to train the managers after 10 October and that one of the quality professionals gave a statement saying his team never stopped providing training.
He continued: “The reality is that this application is a last-minute, desperate attempt by the claimant to neuter the industrial action, which is both factually mis-premised and legally misconceived.”
Mr Carr said on Thursday that BAE is considering an appeal.
A BAE spokesperson said: “We note the ruling by the High Court. We believe we had good grounds for the legal challenge and will consider the court’s judgment.
“We respect the right of employees to engage in industrial action and remain committed to a partnership approach with all our trade union groups.”
The PA news agency understands that less than 70 employees out of 12,000 are involved in the strike action while production lines are continuing to operate.
Speaking after the decision, Unite general secretary Sharon Graham said: “This unsuccessful attempt by BAE to prevent a lawful strike will have severely damaged the goodwill it has with its workforce.
“BAE is a multibillion-pound company making record profits.
“It now needs to come back to the negotiating table with an acceptable offer for striking workers in its Air division, rather than wasting money on pointless legal threats.
“Otherwise, our members will be taking strike action throughout November in their fight for fair pay.”
Rachel Halliday of Thompsons Solicitors, which represented Unite, added: “This is a clear win for Unite and for workers everywhere.
“The High Court has confirmed that the union acted lawfully at every stage, and that BAE’s attempt to block strike action had no basis.
“Today’s decision will send a strong message to employers that the courts cannot be used to silence workers standing up for fair pay and respect.
“Unite acted responsibly throughout, adhering to all statutory requirements, and this important decision reinforces the union’s members’ right to strike.
“Thompsons is proud to have stood with Unite in defending this principle. Working people have the right to be heard – and to take lawful industrial action when negotiations fail.”
Workers at BAE Systems in Lancashire can continue to strike following the dismissal of a bid for a High Court injunction aimed at blocking industrial action.
The company asked a judge to order Unite the Union members at the Warton and Samlesbury sites to cease their planned action in a last-minute hearing on Tuesday.
Strikes were due to start on Wednesday and last until November 25, according to the union.
But Mr Justice Soole refused to grant the injunction on Thursday.
He said: “Having considered the evidence, the application is dismissed. I will give my reasons later.”
Bruce Carr KC, for BAE, said in written submissions for the hearing on Tuesday that Unite had given notice to ballot on September 24 after rejecting the 2025 pay offer.
He said that following this, union representatives told members not to train managers in aircraft testing and that this amounted to a call to industrial action, therefore invalidating the lawfulness of the upcoming strike.
The barrister added: “It is the claimant’s case that the evidence clearly demonstrates that at that meeting and thereafter, Unite called on its members employed as quality professionals, to take industrial action in the form of refusing to undertake the training of managers employed by the claimant.”
Mr Carr said that in mid-September BAE wanted the training after “a number of absences” and while it was “considering business continuity plans in the event of possible industrial action”.
This training occurred between September 22 and October 10, after which the quality professionals refused to continue following instructions from the union, Mr Carr said.
These workers breached their duty to BAE because they are “required to act in the best interests of the company to carry out such duties in respect of their appointment as they may reasonably be called upon to undertake”, the barrister added.
Oliver Segal KC, for Unite, said the training was a “request”, not an “instruction” and therefore workers who refused were not in breach of their contract.
He described managers being trained for the testing role as “unprecedented” and that union representatives had asked workers to get the “request” in writing while they seek legal advice.
In written submissions, he said: “The evidence in this case is that the defendant never even suggested, let alone ‘called’ on, its members who are quality professionals to refuse to comply with a management instruction to provide training to management executives.”
Mr Segal said BAE was “ludicrously interpreting” emails between union representatives discussing the training as instructions for union members not to comply.
The barrister also said there was no refusal to train the managers after October 10 and that one of the quality professionals gave a statement saying his team never stopped providing training.
He continued: “The reality is that this application is a last-minute, desperate attempt by the claimant to neuter the industrial action, which is both factually mis-premised and legally misconceived.”
Mr Carr said on Thursday that BAE is considering an appeal.
A BAE spokesperson said: “We note the ruling by the High Court. We believe we had good grounds for the legal challenge and will consider the court’s judgment.
“We respect the right of employees to engage in industrial action and remain committed to a partnership approach with all our trade union groups.”
The PA news agency understands that less than 70 employees out of 12,000 are involved in the strike action while production lines are continuing to operate.
Speaking after the decision, Unite general secretary Sharon Graham said: “This unsuccessful attempt by BAE to prevent a lawful strike will have severely damaged the goodwill it has with its workforce.
“BAE is a multibillion-pound company making record profits.
“It now needs to come back to the negotiating table with an acceptable offer for striking workers in its Air division, rather than wasting money on pointless legal threats.
“Otherwise, our members will be taking strike action throughout November in their fight for fair pay.”
Rachel Halliday of Thompsons Solicitors, which represented Unite, added: “This is a clear win for Unite and for workers everywhere.
“The High Court has confirmed that the union acted lawfully at every stage, and that BAE’s attempt to block strike action had no basis.
“Today’s decision will send a strong message to employers that the courts cannot be used to silence workers standing up for fair pay and respect.
“Unite acted responsibly throughout, adhering to all statutory requirements, and this important decision reinforces the union’s members’ right to strike.
“Thompsons is proud to have stood with Unite in defending this principle. Working people have the right to be heard – and to take lawful industrial action when negotiations fail.”
Researchers propose a new model for legible, modular software
Clarks Cloudsteppers concept stores opening in Asia, US; plans apparel, athleisure and men’s lines
Prince William waves at crowd as he comes out of public toilet in Rio de Janiro
-
Tech1 week agoUS Ralph Lauren partners with Microsoft for AI shopping experience
-
Tech1 week agoOpenAI says a million ChatGPT users talk about suicide
-
Tech1 week agoHow digital technologies can support a circular economy
-
Tech1 week agoAI chatbots are becoming everyday tools for mundane tasks, use data shows
-
Sports1 week agoBilly Bob Thornton dishes on Cowboys owner Jerry Jones’ acting prowess after ‘Landman’ cameo
-
Fashion1 week agoCalvin Klein launches Re-Calvin take-back programme across the US
-
Business1 week agoTransfer test: Children from Belfast low income families to be given free tuition
-
Tech1 week agoNvidia, Cisco look to deepen AI innovation across 6G, telecoms | Computer Weekly