The issues of information & consultation on collective redundancies have been revisited, observes John McMullen
Issues concerning the employer’s duty to inform and consult on collective redundancies continue to occupy the courts.
Usdaw & its sister litigation
In USDAW and Wilson v WW Realisation 1 Ltd (in liquidation), Ethel Austin Ltd and Secretary of State for Business Innovation an Skills (Case C-80/14), the European Court decided that, for the purposes of compulsory information and consultation on collective redundancies under the EU Collective Redundancies Directive 98/59 (and also s 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 (TULRe(C)A 1992)), where the obligation arises where 20 or more employees are to be dismissed at any one “establishment”, the word “establishment” means the unit which the workers made redundant are assigned to carry out their duties, rather than the organisation as a whole.
The court has confirmed this interpretation in two further cases, Lyttle v Bluebird UK Bidco 2 Limited (Case C-182/13) and Cañas v Nexea Gestión Documental SA, Fondo de Garantía Salarial (Case C-392/13) .
In Lyttle, Bon Marché operated stores in the
