Billingsgate and the porters' dispute - FAQ

7 April 2011

What’s all this about byelaws and fish porters at Billingsgate?

The current byelaws, some of which date from 1876, have been overtaken by national or EU legislation on food hygiene, health & safety, environmental protection, or employment law, or can be covered in the tenants’ leases.
There have been no prosecutions under the byelaws at any of the three Markets for decades, and we believe that they are now irrelevant and out-of-date. The City has, therefore, launched a formal Consultation period, which lasts until 22 September, on its proposal to revoke the byelaws at all three of its Markets (Billingsgate, New Spitalfields, and Smithfield).

Are you trying to get rid of the porters by taking away their licences? What is the problem with the porter byelaws, and why is the licensing system “broke”?

The City of London Corporation is the landlord of Billingsgate Market and does NOT employ any porters. The porters are employed by individual fish merchants, who are represented by the London Fish Merchants’ Association, to whom employment-related questions should be addressed.
The City welcomes the fish merchants' recent initiative to commence talks with the porters’ Trade Union with the aim of modernising staff working practices, creating a more flexible workplace, opening up wider job opportunities and ensuring the long-term success of the Market. Other staff at the Market are not affected.
The byelaws relevant to porters relate to employment matters which should be part and parcel of an employment contract between employer and porter employee. The porters make up about 20% of the Billingsgate workforce, the remaining workforce (80%) are not licensed. The continued existence of these byelaws interferes with a normal employer/employee relationship for this 20% portion of the workforce.
The licence is only a permit to work, and is neither a guarantee of a job nor a way of maintaining standards. The City can grant licences to anyone “of good character and fit” and would willingly do so.
The fish merchants want to see the portering byelaws revoked and an end to the licensing regime, and they have told us that their businesses are being adversely affected by the current portering arrangements. The LFMA have issued a press release supporting revocation of the byelaws.
The City is opening up opportunities for wider employment, not doing away with anyone’s job, and this is fully supported by the fish merchants. There will always be a need for people to be employed by the fish merchants to move fish around the market. Revoking the licencing byelaws will not change that or jeopardise the future of the market in any way.
Billingsgate has vacant premises and it is known that a number of fish businesses have decided not to take up tenancies because of the current portering arrangements.

Won’t Billingsgate lose its valuable history if the fish porters disappear from the market?

Everyone likes tradition and history and there’s plenty of that at the Market - but to thrive, the market needs to move with the times and there is no reason to assume that the Market will lose any of its good traditions or history. It’s the future that counts. It is therefore important that the fish merchants have a sound Billingsgate base to allow them to compete successfully with the off-market competition.

But surely, the porters bring ‘character’ to the Market and provide a valuable role?

The porters make up 20% of the Billingsgate workforce and, as is also the case with other Billingsgate worker groups, there are certainly colourful ‘characters’ amongst them but that is not, by itself, a recipe for a successful market. Other markets with character (such as Smithfield) are driven by very entrepreneurial stall holders who have room to adapt and change to meet their customers’ needs, while still maintaining traditions and character.
Fish merchants will always need to employ staff to move fish, but they should be free, without restrictions or third party involvement, to select the staff of their choice, decide what skills those staff require, what duties are to be undertaken and how many staff are needed for the tasks, and to have standard employment contracts with these staff.

It is true porters often have second jobs, on top of up to £50k a year from Billingsgate?

The porters can earn between £22,000 and £50,000 a year, sometimes for about a four-hour working day, and it is reported that a number of them have second jobs, such as driving taxis. Their employers tell us they would like more flexibility about hours and working practices.

Is it true that the merchants are trying to ‘buy out’ the porters?

Although we have been told that the merchants have commenced talks with the Trade Union, the porters are employed by the individual fish merchants, not the City of London Corporation, so this question should be addressed to the London Fish Merchants’ Association.

Is the City of London Corporation using this dispute to close down the Market to re-develop the site?

Absolutely not! The City of London Corporation wants the Market to flourish – it has a lease on the site until September 2080 and there are no plans to relocate the market.
The City has a long and proud history of running, supporting, and investing in the markets of London and simply wants Billingsgate to be as successful as possible.

Does the City of London Corporation expect to see a happy outcome to this dispute?

We are absolutely focused on an outcome that has the best interests of a modern Market at its heart.

Legal notices | Privacy statement | Email this page | Download help | Back to top