header-logo header-logo

05 April 2012 / Charlotte Stern
Issue: 7509 / Categories: Features , Disciplinary&grievance procedures , TUPE , Employment
printer mail-detail

All change please

Charlotte Stern reports on the latest TUPE developments

Since the implementation of the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (SI 2006/246) (TUPE), service provision changes have been all the rage. They are very much in favour with the current government, which appears to see encouraging the transfer of services in and out of the public sector as its raison d’être. The reality is that after a transfer, the same employees end up providing the same services to the same client and the new contractor is saddled with the employees’ original contractual terms, unless they manage to show that the contractual changes are either unrelated to the transfer or are for economic, technical or organisational (ETO) reasons entailing changes in the workforce. Further, TUPE effectively arms employees by:
 

  • allowing an employee to treat his contract of employment as having been terminated, where the relevant transfer involves a substantial change in working conditions to his material detriment;
  • expressly permitting an employee to accept a repudiatory breach of contract by his employer and terminate his contract; and
  • allowing employees to claim unfair dismissal
If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll