header-logo header-logo

18 March 2010 / Sam Burnett
Issue: 7409 / Categories: Features , LexisPSL
printer mail-detail

A unilateral right?

Bateman highlights the broad rights of employers to alter terms & conditions unilaterally, says Sam Burnett

It is frequently the case that an employee will be issued with a relatively short statement of terms and conditions of employment, but also provided with a much more voluminous staff handbook. The contents of that handbook will often be very mixed:
• some of it will be very specific, concrete terms on subjects like entitlement to annual leave, parental leave, or sick pay
• some of it may consist of much vaguer material, such as broad policy documents, or even aspirational statements of corporate aims and goals

A question that often arises in this context is whether or not a particular part of the handbook is contractually enforceable. If the employer does wish the handbook (or sections of it) to have contractual force, it is advisable to have a term in the contract of employment which refers to the handbook, and expressly states which parts form part of the contract (Peninsula v Sweeney [2004] IRLR 49).

An employer has the right unilaterally to alter any part of a handbook which

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

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll