Notesale: Turn your study into money

Document Preview

Extracts from the notes are below, to see the PDF you'll receive please use the links above

---

Labour  Law  lecture  notes  
 
Lecture  1:  Perspectives  on  Labour  Law  
 
Collective  laissez-­‐faire  was  the  dominant  perspective  in  early  20th  century
...
   
Meaning  of  labour  law:  
• Defined  by  scope  &  aims  
• Also  called  employment  law  
• It  covers  individual  employment  relation  and  collective  employment  
relations  (individual  =  individual  and  employer
...
 A  
contract  is  a  prerequisite  of  the  employment  relationship
...
 
Contract  and  2
...
g
...
g
...
 Employers  
organization  is  the  equivalent  for  employers  e
...
 CBI  (confederation  of  British  
Industry),  UNITE
...
 
Aims:  
• Labour  law  has  been  introduced  to  reach  different  aims  e
...
 protection  of  
employees  
o Idea  that  individual  worker  is  in  a  less  powerful  position  that  
employer
...
 That  need  puts  the  worker  in  a  vulnerable  position
...
 If  no  
legislation,  employer  could  treat  worker  unfairly  or  injurious,  or  pay  
insufficiently  (arose  in  industrial  revolution)  
• Redistribution  of  wealth  –  state  view  that  wealth  given  to  workers  and  an  
attempt  at  better  equality
...
 Sometimes  workers  struggle  to  obtain  
employment  e
...
 parents  with  young  children    government  may  see  to  
provide  child  care
...
   
History  of  Labour  Law  
• Shifting  policies  and  aims  
Collective  laissez-­‐faire  
• Phrase  coined  by  Kahn  –  Freund  early  1950s  (German  academic)  
• He  had  a  background  of  german  law
...
   
• He  used  it  specifically  for  the  UK
...
 Key  difference  was  there  wasn’t  as  much  English  labour  law
...
   
Laissez-­‐faire  means  state  should  not  regulate
...
 
Particular  to  UK  in  50s
...
   
Regulatory  law  =  law  that  regulated  terms  and  conditions  of  employment
...
g
...
   
Self  regulation  of  industry  by  the  collective  parties
...
g
...
   
No  minimal  legal  regulation  of  collective  employment  relations
...
 Courts  
kept  out  of  industrial  revelations  until  1871,  trade  unions  and  collective  
bargaining  were  unlawful  either  criminal  or  by  torte/delict
...
   
 
Support  for  collective  laissez-­‐faire  
• Public  policy  to  support  unionization  before  WWI,  through  political  parties  
• Government  not  involved,  but  gave  support  by  encouraging  unionization  e
...
 
fair  wages  resolution  to  only  contract  with  business,  which  provided  workers  
with  payments  from  employers  whose  terms  and  conditions  had  been  agreed  
with  trade  unions
...
   
 
Lecture  2  
 
Anti-­‐union  conservative  government  1979-­‐1997  
• Concerns  about  the  power  of  trade  unions  –  ‘3  day  week’  1974  and  winter  of  
discontent  1978/79  in  Labour  government
...
 When  the  conservative  government  was  
elected  in  1979,  it  was  to  deal  with  excessive  union  power
...
   
• Free  market  ideology  with  individualism    thatcher  government  during  
80s/90s  saw  a  number  of  laws  restricting  freedom  to  strike  and  so  trade  

•
•
•

unions  too
...
 Stemmed  by  the  fact  there  was  the  
influence  of  the  EU  so  increase  in  health  and  safety  laws
...
   
Left  conservatives  free  to  introduce  capitalist  economy
...
   

 
1997  –  New  labour  elected  
• Quick  turn  around  in  time
...
 The  new  labour  government  did  not  repeal  the  laws  to  weaken  the  
restrictions  on  trade  unions
...
 Another  layer  introduced  –  increasing  
expansion  of  collective  rights  and  how  they  are  regulated
...
 Max  
48hours  working  per  week  but  in  Britain,  there  is  an  easy  way  to  opt  
out  by  employers  
o Substantial  improvements  to  maternity  rights  and  family  friendly  
laws  –  designed  to  ensure  working  women  were  able  to  continue  
being  productive    
 
The  coalition:  ‘pushmi-­‐pullyu  2010-­‐2015  
• Described  by  Hepply,  back  to  the  future  ILJ,  2013,  42(3)  
• Influence  of  Liberal  Democrats,  an  attempt  to  continue  with  some  new  labour  
initiatives  
• ‘gold-­‐plating’  EU  regulations  –  a  lot  of  the  labour  laws,  had  gone  further  than  
they  required  of  implementing  so  coalition  discussed  changing  the  individual  
rights  as  they  saw  they  were  set  at  minimums  in  correspondence  with  EU  
laws
...
 No  
obligation  and  limits  on  what  rights  you  can  trade  as  per  the  EU  regulations  
 
 

Further  demutualization  
• a  trend  to  transfer  economic  risks  from  the  employer  to  the  work  force  
• difficulty:  workers  on  0  hour  contracts  do  not  get  access  to  full  range  of  
employment  rights  
• flexicurity  –  attempt  to  deal  with  concerns  of  introduction  of  flexibility  falling  
harder  on  the  employee
...
   
 
Conservative  government:  back  to  a  free  market  future?  
• Suggestion  in  meifesto  when  national  minimum  wage  introduced,  
conservative  is  the  party  of  working  people  changing  it  from  national  
minimum  wage  to  national  living  wage
...
g
...
   
 
Lecture  3:  Sources  and  institutions  
 
Sources:  
1
...
 
Employment  Rights  Act  1996  –  core  statute  Alongside  that  TULR(C)A  1992  
during  conservative  government
...
Codes  of  practice  –  issued  under  statutory  authority  setting  out  standards  for  
employers
...
 ACAS,  if  tribunal  in  favour  
of  employee  includes  extent  code  of  practice  has  been  followed,  they  will  
receive  a  larger  compensation
...
Interaction  with  contract  of  employment  –  ref  to  statute  &  codes  of  practice
...
e
...
 While  contract  of  
employment  is  cornerstone,  law  of  contract  has  been  adapted  to  take  account  
of  inequality  e
...
 reasonable  notice  of  dismissal
...
 Supplemented  by  staff  
handbooks  as  well  as  employer  policies  and  custom  and  practice
...
Collective  agreement  –  purpose  –  decline  since  80s  in  number  of  how  
employees  covered  by  collective  agreements
...
 Enforceability  –  
TULR(C)A  s179  intended  not  to  be  a  legally  enforceable  contract,  but  a  
gentleman’s  agreement  (can  not  use  this  term  anymore),  but,  means  not  
enforceable
...
 E
...
 issue  in  some  cases  concerning  changes  in  British  airways
...
 Failed  in  court,  it  is  not  legally  binding  and  in  their  employment  
contract
...
EU  law  –  European  economic  community  so  a  number  of  years  and  social  
aspect  extended    employment  law  appeared
...
 Key  provisions  TFEU  Art  151,  153,  
154,  155  &  157
...
 Can  rely  directly  
on  direct  effect  directives  even  if  our  own  laws  do  not  directly  align  with  
these
...
 Can  rely  on  EU  right  even  if  domestic  laws  
aren’t  aligned  (Marshall  case  –  concerned  woman  unequal  retirement  age
...
 Challenged  using  EU  law  of  no  cap  on  
compensation
...
)  Can  
also  have  indirect  effect  –  relevant  when  interpreting  even  in  private  cases  
where  courts  will  rely  to  interpret  our  laws  in  line  with  EU  laws
...
   
6
...
 Where  there  is  a  breach  of  these  
rights…  
7
...
 Cannot  rely  on  
these  directly  in  court
...
 International  Human  Rights  instruments…  
 
Institutions:  
1
...
 Scotland  
also  has  employment  appeal  tribunal
...
   
2
...
 Increasingly  individual  represented  by  QC’s  and  
solicitors  rather  than  intention  to  represent  themselves
...
 Was  no  requirement  for  a  long  time,  but,  2013,  
coalition  government  brought  fees  (Hepple  article)
...
 
3
...
 Appeal  from  
employment  tribunal  on  point  of  law
...
Role  of  CJEU  –  significant  role  in  bridth  of  case  law  in  development  of  
principles
...
ACAS  (most  important  in  practice)  –  advisory  conciliation  and  arbitration  
service
...
 Deals  with  collective  disputes
...
 Statutory  obligation  to  settlement  
(Employment  tribunals  act  1996  s18)
...
 Resources  of  ACAS  have  been  increased
...
 Introduced  at  the  same  time  as  the  court  fees
...
   
6
...
 Each  
individual  will  have  a  contractual  relationship  with  their  employer
...
   
 Used  to  be  either  employed  or  self-­‐employed
...
 Used  to  never  find  the  term  worker,  now  we  have  a  group  of  
‘workers’
...
 Issue  is  that  people  don’t  
think  about  it  until  something  goes  wrong
...
 Important  to  know  who  you  
are  and  for  employers  to  know  who  they  are  employing  
 Self-­‐employed  is  not  subject  to  the  employers  power
...
g
...
 
 Vicarious  liability  –  employer  liable  for  employee,  but  not  the  worker  
 Look  at  the  scope  of  employment  legislation
...
g
...
 However,  maternity  rights  are  onerous  on  the  employers
...
 
• Control  –  made  a  contract  of  service
...
 Employee  would  be  part  of  the  service
...
 Who  takes  the  risk?  Elephant  
test  for  common  sense,  can  not  define  what  it  is  or  how  I  got  there  but  it  is  a  
matter  of  common  sense
...
 Are  these  people  employed  or  self-­‐
employed?  Paid  on  minimum  wage  and  commission
...
 Said  in  contract  they  were  
independent  contractors
...
 Court  of  
appeal  said  need  3  aspects  to  decide  is  a  contract  of  employment:  
 Wage/working  bargain  –  must  be  wage  obligation  and  
obligation  to  work  for  it  
 Control  element  –  sufficient  to  show  they  are  in  the  place  of  an  
employer
...
 
 Other  factors  point  towards  employment
...
 This  shouldn’t  guarantee  that  
they  are  not  an  employee
...
   
 
•

Self-­‐description  
o Ferguson  v  Dawson  -­‐  F  was  a  labourer  -­‐  agreement  with  site  manager  
 work  if  and  when  available  
 No  formal  contract  
 ‘Not  to  be  treated  as  an  employee’  –  ie  no  deductions  
 Site  agent  would  provide  all  the  necessary  tools  
 Site  agent  would  give  orders  as  to  work  to  be  done  
 Held:  cannot  change  the  fundamental  contract  by  calling  it  
something  else
...
 Increased  uses  of  people  not  intended  to  be  employees
...
g
...
 
Difference  in  personal  scope  
Different/inconsistent  definitions  
Increased  use  of  workers  –  more  people  hired  on  non  traditional  contracts
...
   
Exploitation  

 
•

•

•

Who  is  an  employee?  ERA  1996,  s230(1)  
o ‘an  individual  who  has  entered  into  or  works  under  (or  …  worked  
under)  a  contract  of  employment  
Who  is  a  worker?  ERA  1996,  s230(3)  
o an  individual  who  has  entered  into  or  works  under  –  
o (b)  any  other  contract,  express  or  implied,  oral  or  in  writing,  whereby  
the  individual  undertakes  to  do  or  perform  personally  any  work  or  
services  for  another  party  to  the  contract  whose  status  is  not  by  virtue  
of  the  contract  that  of  a  client  or  customer  (when  distinguishing  from  
self-­‐employed,  key  part  is  personal  work
...
 In  between  periods  
of  employers
...
 E
...
 treatment
...
   
o Agency  Workers  Regulations  2010  (SI  2010/93)  
o McMeechan  v  S  of  S  
 A  question  of  fact  in  each  case  
 Court  of  session  said  it’s  a  question  of  fact  in  each  case
...
 Tended  to  say  no  mutual  obligatory  agency  as  no  
obligation  to  provide  work,  and  worker  no  obligation  to  accept
...
 In  
liquidation,  could  agency  workers  recover  holiday  pay  and  
other  outstanding  money?    
o Motorola  v  Davidson  &  Melville  Craig  
 Triangular  relationship  
 Up  until  now,  had  always  referred  to  worker  and  agency  
relationship
...
 At  one  time,  the  
company  thought  there  was  no  relationship  as  client  
relationship  was  with  the  agency
...
 D  went  
specifically  to  agency  as  he  saw  they  were  advertising  
Motorola  jobs
...
 He  worked  for  
Motorola  for  a  while  then  was  dismissed
...
 Court  said  there  could  be    an  implied  employment  by  
the  agency    Triangular  relationship
...
 You  can  only  
imply  a  contract  where  you  need  to  do  so  to  make  business  
sense  of  what  is  happening
...
 Leaves  the  question  of  exploitation
...
 Contracts  said  given  work  as  
required
...
 Tax  and  NI  
deducted
...
 Uniform  supplied  and  holiday  
pay,  and  given  bonus  scheme
...
 Question  of  whether  these  people  were  employed
...
 Started  work  in  1989
...
   
 Work  offered  on  ‘casual  as  required’  basis  
 Hourly  rate  –  tax  and  NI  deducted  
 Uniform,  training  and  company  vehicle  
 At  the  start  worked  3hours/wk  (1989)  –  at  the  end  worked  25  
hours/wk  (1995)  
 Had  been  working  for  6  years
...
   
 Held:  could  be  implied  contract,  but  only  if  no  existing  contract
...
”  
 Dacas  v  Brook  Street  Bureau,  per  Mummery  LJ  
Workers  
o Bates  von  Winkelhof  v  Clyde  &  Co  LLP  [2014]  UKSC  32;  [2014]  ICR  
730  
o “There  is  no  magic  test  other  than  the  words  of  the  statute  
themselves”  at  741  
o “As  the  case  of  the  controlling  shareholder  in  a  company  who  is  also  
employed  as  chief  executive  shows,  one  can  effectively  be  one’s  own  
boss  and  still  be  a  ‘worker’
...
 
o
o
o
o
o
o
o

•

 
Sham  contracts  
• Autoclenz  Ltd  v  Belcher  

o A  was  a  business  responsible  for  people  who  clean  cars
...
 Autoclenz  was  organized  and  individuals  had  clear  written  
agreements
...
 Clear  contract  said  only  
hired  on  an  as  required  basis
...
 Were  they  workers  or  self-­‐
employed  or  employees?  SC  said  employment  is  a  different  type  of  
contract
...
 Arguments  put  forward,  these  were  strictly  contractual
...
 Workers  either  
took  the  job  or  they  didn’t
...
 Opened  another  possibility  of  sham  contracts  where  
employer  is  trying  to  call  it  something  it  is  not
...
 
o “the  relative  bargaining  power  of  the  parties  must  be  taken  into  
account  in  deciding  whether  the  terms  of  any  written  agreement  in  
truth  represent  what  was  agreed  …  This  may  be  described  as  a  
purposive  approach  to  the  problem”  per  Lord  Clarke  
 
European  worker  
Case  C-­‐256/01  Allonby  v  Accrington  and  Rossendale  College  [2004[  ICR  1328  
• equal  pay  case
...
 He  could  make  his  own  choices  
as  to  the  work  he  did  and  when  and  where  he  did  it
...
”  Dept  of  
Constitutional  Affairs  v  O’Brien  2013  ICR  499  
 
The  subordinate  worker  
• Jivraj  v  Hashwani  [2011]  ICR  1004  
o Arbitrator  not  subordinate,  they  apply  a  service  
• Employment  Equality  (Religion  or  Belief)  Regulations  2003  
• EE  Regs  to  be  construed  in  light  of  EU  Directive  2000/78  

•
•

“employment  under”  
“[it]  is  not  to  say  that  the  question  of  purpose  is  irrelevant  but  the  focus  is  on  
the  contract  and  relationship  between  the  parties  rather  than  exclusively  on  
purpose”  Lord  Clarke  

 
Lecture  6  –  contract  of  employment  
 the  contract  is  the  starting  point
...
 Downside  is  they  tend  to  be  informal  and  not  
detailed
...
 It  is  of  
personal  significance
...
g
...
 Rather  than  implying  commercial  law,  it  is  the  idea  
someone  is  entering  a  contract,  it’s  intended  to  be  ongoing
...
   
The  context:  
• Consensual  contract  
o Written,  oral  or  implied  
• A  personal  contract  
o No  substitution  
o Relational?  
• Mutual  obligation  
o Wage/work  bargain  –  one  works,  other  pays
...
 
What  the  parties  want  out  of  the  agreement  is  very  different
...
   
• Indefinite  and  incomplete  –  it  is  openended
...
 A  written  contract  very  often  will  be  
incomplete  because  there  is  a  range  of  sources  of  terms
...
 Contract  of  employment  significantly  different  from  
commercial  contracts
...
 The  
employee  submits  to  the  manager
...
 They  are  really  signing  
up  to  be  subordinate  to  the  employer
...
 Important  because  they  
are  often  incomplete  or  agreed  hastily
...
 Standard  terms  implied  into  it
...
 Contract  does  not  specify
...
   
o Works  rules/handbooks/policies  
o Custom  and  practice  
• Imposed  under  the  contract  of  employment
...
   
What  is  required?  
• Employment  Rights  Act  1996,  Part  I  
o Written  statement  of  particulars  of  employment  –  s1  
o Statement  of  changes  –  s4  (entitled  to  writing
...
   
o Itemised  pay  statement  –  s8  
• Directive  91/533  on  an  employer’s  obligation  to  inform  employees  of  the  
conditions  applicable  to  the  employment  relationship  –  try  to  ensure  
employees  knew  what  their  terms  were
...
 –  
s2(2)  

g  
Terms  relating  to:  
• Hours  of  work  
• Holidays  and  holiday  pay  
• Incapacity  for  work  and  sick  pay  
• Pensions  and  pension  schemes  
 
A  single  document  
• s2(4):  “The  particulars  required  by  section  1(3)  and  (4)(a)  to  (c),  (d)(i),  (f)  
and  (h)  shall  be  included  in  a  single  document
...
”  
o Sick  leave  and  pay  
o Pensions  and  pension  schemes  
 
Reasonably  accessible  collective  agreements  

•

s2(3):  “A  statement  under  section  1  may  refer  the  employee  for  particulars  of  
either  of  the  matters  specified  in  subsection  (4)(e)  …  to  the  law  or  to  the  
provisions  of  any  collective  agreement  directly  affecting  the  terms  and  
conditions  of  the  employment  which  is  reasonably  accessible”  
o Notice  of  termination  which  the  employee  is  obliged  to  give  or  
entitled  to  receive  

 
Note  about  disciplinary  procedures  and  pensions  –  s3  
• Disciplinary  rules  (or  reference  to  r
...
 document)  
• Disciplinary  procedure  (or  reference  to  r
...
 document)  
• Person  to  whom  the  employee  can  appeal  in  respect  of  disciplinary  decision  
or  decision  to  dismiss  
• Person  to  whom  the  employee  can  apply  to  seek  redress  of  any  grievance  and  
details  of  the  application  process  
• Any  further  appropriate  steps  
 
Enforcement  
• ERA  s11(1):    
o “Where  an  employer  does  not  give  an  employee  a  statement  as  
required  by  section  1  …  the  employee  may  require  a  reference  to  be  
made  to  an  employment  tribunal  to  determine  what  particulars  ought  
to  have  been  included  or  referred  to  in  a  statement”  
 
Determination  of  references  
• ERA,  s12  
• (1)  Where  an  ET  “determines  particulars  as  being  those  which  ought  to  have  
been  included  …  the  employer  shall  be  deemed  to  have  given  to  the  employee  
a  statement  in  which  those  particulars  were  included”  
• (2)  An  ET  may  confirm,  amend  or  substitute  
 
Limits  of  tribunal  power  –  can  not  make  things  up,  the  role  is  to  find  out  what  is  
agreed
...
”  
• Mears  v  Safecar  Security  Ltd  [1982]  ICR  626  
o The  Act  “gives  the  industrial  tribunal  no  power  to  interpret  
particulars  which  have  been  given”  (obiter)  

  
Missing  terms  
• “The  wording  of  the  section  makes  it  perfectly  plain  …  that  there  may  be  no  
such  terms  and  there  is  nothing  in  any  section  of  the  Act  which  empowers  or  
requires  the  tribunal  to  impose  upon  the  parties  terms  which  have  not  been  
agreed  when  the  statute  recognises  that  it  may  be  the  case  that  no  such  terms  
have  been  agreed
...
”  
o Southern  Cross  Healthcare  Ltd  v  Perkins  [2011]  ICR  285  
 
Sanctions  
• No  general  monetary  sanction    
• Highly  unlikely  to  raise  an  action  for  statements,  but  there  is  potential  for  
additional  compensation,  up  to  4  weeks  if  the  party  claims  alongside  another  
claim
...
 Nor  are  the  statements  of  the  terms  
finally  conclusive:  at  most  they  place  a  heavy  burden  on  the  employer  to  
show  that  the  actual  terms  of  contract  are  different  from  those  which  he  has  
set  out  in  the  statutory  statement
...
 Tend  to  be  more  important  if  they  
are  implied
...
   
 Implied  





o In  fact,  in  law  or  legal  incidents?  
Incorporated  
o Collective  agreements  –  most  common  incorporated  terms
...
178  
o “collective  agreement”  means  any  agreement  or  arrangement  made  by  
or  on  behalf  of  one  or  more  trade  unions  and  one  or  more  employers  or  
employers’  associations  and  relating  to  one  or  more  of  the  matters  
specified  below;  and  “collective  bargaining”  means  negotiations  relating  
to  or  connected  with  one  or  more  of  those  matters
...
 It  is  specific  –  must  be  
an  agreement  between  a  trade  union  and  an  employer
...
g
...
 It  is  broad,  but  some  indication  
of  history  and  nature  of  how  it  came  about
...
 
 
 (A)terms  and  conditions  of  employment,  or  the  physical  conditions  in  which  any  
workers  are  required  to  work;  
 (B)engagement  or  non-­engagement,  or  termination  or  suspension  of  
employment  or  the  duties  of  employment,  of  one  or  more  workers;  
 (C)allocation  of  work  or  the  duties  of  employment  between  workers  or  groups  
of  workers;  
 (D)matters  of  discipline;  -­‐  this  relates  to  trade  unions  and  its  members,  e
...
 if  a  
trade  union  member  does  not  comply  with  industrial  action
...
179(1)  
o A  collective  agreement  shall  be  conclusively  presumed  not  to  have  been  
intended  by  the  parties  to  be  a  legally  enforceable  contract  unless  the  
agreement—  
o (a)is  in  writing,  and  
o (b)contains  a  provision  which  (however  expressed)  states  that  the  
parties  intend  that  the  agreement  shall  be  a  legally  enforceable  
contract
...
 No  
expectation  as  a  whole  that  agreements  will  be  incorporated
...
 
 S179  refers  to  the  status  of  collective  agreements
...
   trade  unions  go  through  months  of  
agreement  bargaining  and  are  not  legally  enforceable
...
 This  is  
fundamental  to  a  volunturous  system
...
 
 If  you  have  something  in  contract  with  a  direct  link  to  an  agreement,  that  
would  be  sufficient
...
 
Express  incorporation  is  more  clear  but  implied  is  more  common
...
”  
 Kahn-­‐Freund,  “Collective  Agreements”  (1941)  MLR  225  at  226  
 Express  incorporation  
o Robertson  v  British  Gas  Corporation  [1983]  ICR  351  
 Not  all  terms  of  a  collective  agreement  are  intended  to  be  
incorporated  into  individual  contracts  of  employment
...
   



Implied  incorporation  
o Courts  looked  at  lots  as  to  whether  you  can  imply  –  if  the  contract  says  
nothing  about  collective  agreements,  how?  
o “Where  it  is  not  a  case  of  express  incorporation,  but  a  matter  of  
inferring  the  contractual  intent,  the  character  of  the  document  and  the  
relevant  part  of  it  and  whether  it  is  apt  to  form  part  of  the  individual  
contract  is  central  to  the  decision  whether  or  not  the  inference  should  
be  drawn”  
o Alexander  v  Standard  Telephones  Ltd  (No2)  [1991]  IRLR  286  at  292  
 Held:  important  to  look  at  the  nature  of  the  agreement  and  the  
terms  themselves
...
   

 
Individual  enforcement  
 “It  is  true  that  collective  agreements  …  create  no  legally  enforceable  
obligation  between  the  trade  union  and  the  employers
...
 But  their  terms  are  in  this  case  incorporated  into  the  individual  
contracts  of  employment,  and  it  is  only  if  and  when  those  terms  are  varied  
collectively  by  agreement  that  the  individual  contracts  will  also  be  varied
...
 
o If  the  trade  union  and  the  employer  make  an  agreement  then  a  new  
agreement,  the  new  agreement  supersedes
...
   
 
Lecture  8  –  contract  of  employment  –  implied  terms  
 
Contractual  terms  and  the  employment  relationship  
 Unequal  bargaining  power  
 Managerial  discretion  
 Gap  between  contract  terms  and  expectations  
 Relational  contract?  
 Implied  terms  
 
Implied  terms  –  employer’s  duties  –  different  types  of  implied  terms
...
 In  fact,  in  law,  legal  tests,  legal  case  
where  implying  is  necessary,  or  bystander  test  where  it  is  so  obvious  a  bystander  
would  say  of  course  the  term  would  be  included
...
 
They  are  almost  automatic,  sometimes  referred  to  as  ‘legal  consequences’  as  they  
become  incidents  of  all  contracts
...
 
 
Implied  contract  terms  are  a  way  of  addressing  weakness’  in  statutory  
imbalances  and  protecting  employees
...
 May  be  
express  in  the  contract  or  implied
...
 Made  employment  law  
dynamic
...
   


 
Key  Implied  terms  –  employee’s  duties  
 Duty  to  obey  –  must  obey  employer’s  lawful  and  reasonable  orders  in  the  
contract  
 Duty  to  adapt  –  within  the  confines  of  the  contract
...
   
 Duty  of  care  –  arises  under  contract  similar  to  the  delictual  context
...
   
 
Turner  v  Sawdon    
 Duty  to  provide  work  
 Salesman  on  commission  basis
...
 But,  possibly  if  contract  involves  public  
appearance,  then  may  be  more  than  a  pay,  but  opportunity  to  build  a  
reputation  e
...
 an  actor
...
   
 “the  word  ‘employ’  is  capable  of  two  meanings  —  to  retain  in  service,  or  to  
give  actual  work  to  be  done  by  the  person  employed…Take  the  case  of  a  
medical  man  engaged  for  a  term  at  a  fixed  payment
...
 Should  look  again  at  the  duty  to  
provide  work
...
 Important  for  
own  skill  and  society  –  jist  of  lord  denning’s  opinion
...
 This  arose  in  the  1970s,  as  the  right  no  to  be  
unfairly  dismissed  arose
...
 If  he  had  held  
on  longer,  he  would’ve  been  able  to  claim  unfair  dismissal
...
   
 “In  these  days  an  employer,  when  employing  a  skilled  man,  is  bound  to  
provide  him  with  work  …  A  skilled  man  takes  a  pride  in  his  work
...
 He  does  it  so  as  to  make  his  contribution  to  the  
well-­‐being  of  all
...
 To  use  his  
skill,  and  to  improve  it
...
”  
[1974]  1WLR  185  at  192,per  Lord  Denning  
 
William  Hill  v  Tucker  -­‐    
 Proper  construction  of  the  contract  in  all  the  circumstances    
 post  of  senior  dealer  was  a  specific  and  unique  post
...
 Emerged  where  individual  and  solicitors  were  
going  back  to  implied  terms
...
 Expert  
in  spread  betting
...
 Said  they  
accept  his  notice,  but  don’t  want  him  to  work  for  6months  –  ‘garden-­‐leave’  as  
didn’t  want  him  to  hone  his  skill
...
 Opened  the  possibility  of  providing  work
...
 It  might  be  possible  until  the  contract  comes  to  an  end
...
 Constructive  
dismissal  –  contract  terminated  by  the  employee,  rather  than  the  
employer
...
 Can  
only  be  in  response  to  the  employer  breaking  the  contract
...
   
 Woods  v  WM  Car  services  (Peterborough)  Ltd  
o “the  employer  shall  not,  without  reasonable  and  proper  cause,  conduct  
itself  in  a  manner  calculated  as  likely  to  destroy  or  seriously  damage  the  
relationship  of  confidence  and  trust  between  employer  and  employee”  
[1981]  ICR  666  per  Browne-­Wilkinson  J  at  670  
o employee  who  wants  to  claim  constructive  dismissal  will  need  to  
point  to  a  breach,  but,  if  they  can’t,  they  need  to  prove  the  employer  
didn’t  treat  them  with  trust  and  respect
...
 Banking  commerce  collapsed  
due  to  fraud
...
 Mahmud  and  malik  raised  
compensation
...
 They  
were  honest  and  competent  employees  who  had  nothing  to  do  with  
the  fraud,  but,  due  to  the  high  profile  of  the  bank,  they  would  not  get  
another  job
...
 Wanted  
action  and  compensation  for  breach  of  contract  of  implied  duty  of  
trust  and  respect
...
 Seeking  compensation  for  the  breach  of  
contract  and  the  damage  to  the  reputation
...
 
o House  of  lords  tried  to  explore  the  social  context  and  relationship  
context
...
 Could  be  a  breach  of  implied  obligation  if  the  
conduct  is  likely  to  case  serious  damage  to  the  relationship  between  
the  employer  and  the  employee
...
   

 
Breach  of  mutual  trust  and  confidence  
 Mahmud  v  BCCI  (Malik)    
o “if  conduct  objectively  considered  is  likely  to  cause  serious  damage  to  
the  relationship  between  employer  and  employee  a  breach  of  the  
implied  obligation  may  arise”  
per  Lord  Steyn  
 Johnson  v  Unisys  
o “in  the  way  [the  duty  of  trust  and  confidence]  has  always  been  
formulated,  it  is  concerned  with  preserving  the  continuing  relationship  
which  should  subsist  between  employer  and  employee”  
per  Lord  Hoffman  
o senior  employee  dismissed  by  employer  without  investigation  in  a  
public  way
...
 Reputation  was  seriously  damaged
...
 Claimed  he  had  lost  more  –  his  
psychological  health  was  damaged  so  never  worked  again
...
 Said  
J  could  not  get  compensation  for  manner  of  dismissal
...
 Implied  terms  of  mutual  trust  
applied  to  the  ongoing  relationship  –  already  got  statutory  pay,  can’t  
have  contractual  too
...
 If  before  his  dismissal  …  an  employee  has  acquired  a  cause  
of  action  …  for  breach  of  contract  …  that  cause  of  action  remains  
unimpaired  by  his  subsequent  unfair  dismissal”  
per  Lord  Nicholls  
o House  of  Lords  attempted  to  define  the  ‘johnson  exclusion  zone’
...
 In  his  conduct  of  his  business,  and  in  his  treatment  of  
his  employees,  an  employer  must  act  responsibly  and  in  good  faith
...
 
 
Criticisms  
 Scope  of  protection  very  limited  
 need  to  show  good  faith  put  focus  on  the  motive  of  the  messenger  
o Street  v  Derbyshire  Unemployed  Workers  Centre    2004  IRLR  687  CA  
 Employer  not  vicariously  liable  for  victimisation  of  a  worker  by  colleagues  
o Fecitt  v  NHS  Manchester  2012  IRLR  64  CA  
 Complaints  about  breaches  to  private  contract  of  employment  covered  
o Parkins  v  Sodexho  2002  IRLR  109  EAT  
 Lack  of  supervision,  cleaner,  should  have  been  working  with  
nightshift  supervisor  in  contract
...
   
 
More  scandals  
 Harold  Shipman  Inquiry  recommendations  
 Activities  of  banks  and  newspapers  
 Mid-­‐Staffordshire  NHS  Inquiry  –  questions  about  the  standard  of  hospitals    
addressed  very  quickly
...
 Yesterday  sharps  were  left  lying  around”
...
 In  our  
view  this  would  be  an  allegation  not  information”
...
f
...
 
o Virgo  Fidelis  School  v  Boyle  2004  IRLR  268  EAT  
 Relevance  of  motive  
o Tribunals  have  the  power  to  deduct  a  maximum  of  25%  for  
disclosures  not  make  in  good  faith      
                   section  49(6A)  
 
Lecture  10  –  is  there  a  human  right  to  freedom  of  association?  
Constitutional  concept  –  the  right  to  join  with  others  for  any  reason  you  see  fit,  e
...
 
create  a  club,  BUT,  primarily  a  right  to  join  trade  unions  in  labour  law  (N
...
 Trade  
Union  Bill  2015)  
• Trade  unions  are  organisations  of  workers  which  exist  to  further  the  interest  
of  workers  through  collective  bargaining
...
 Trade  union  employees  have  fallen  since  1980’s
...
 Primarily  public  sector
...
 
What  is  freedom  of  association?  –  3  dimensions:  
1
...
ILO  Convention  87  Art  2  -­‐  Workers  and  employers,  without  distinction  
whatsoever,  shall  have  the  right  to  establish  and,  subject  only  to  the  
rules  of  the  organisation  concerned,  to  join  organisations  of  their  own  
choosing  without  previous  authorisation
...
International  labour  organisation  
ii
...
   
iii
...
Creates  standards  by  creating  conventions  –  key  convention  is  
87  on  trade  unions  in  labour  law
...
Doesn’t  matter  who  they  are  employed  by,  they  should  all  have  
the  right  to  establish  trade  union’s  
vi
...
 
2
...
ILO  Convention  87  Art  3  -­‐  Workers'  and  employers'  organisations  
shall  have  the  right  to  draw  up  their  constitutions  and  rules,  to  elect  
their  representatives  in  full  freedom,  to  organise  their  administration  
and  activities  and  to  formulate  their  programmes
...
Trade  unions  should  be  allowed  to  draw  up  their  own  rules  
ii
...
 
3
...
ILO  Convention  98  Art  4  -­‐  Measures  appropriate  to  national  
conditions  shall  be  taken,  where  necessary,  to  encourage  and  promote  
the  full  development  and  utilisation  of  machinery  for  voluntary  
negotiation    between  employers  or  employers’  organisations  and  
workers’  organisations,  with  a  view  to  the  regulation  of  terms  and  
conditions  of  employment  by  means  of  collective  agreement
...
Having  informed  the  union  they  should  be  free  to  act  e
...
 
collective  bargaining
...
N
...
 ILO  convention  does  not  say  they  should  be  free  to  bargain  
with  employers,  they  are  given  more
...
   
 
•
•
•

Collective  representation  =  have  a  right  to  have  a  trade  union  representative  
accompany  you  in  court
...
   
Trade  unions  may  be  involved  in  government  corporatism,  involved  in  
government  acknowledging  role  as  representatives  of  employers  in  policy  
formation
...
 Protects  right  of  the  union
...
 What  is  the  standing  
within  UK  law?  UK  ratified  law  in  conventions  87  and  98,  UK  is  bound  
by  them  due  to  public  international  law
...
   
 

Human  Rights  Act  1998  –  legally  binding  in  the  UK  
 Direct  Vertical  Effect,  Indirect  Horizontal  Effect  (See  CEM  409-­‐414):  
o s
...
 3  Interpretation  of  [UK]  Legislation  =  british  legislation  must  
comply  with  the  convention
...
 4  Declaration  of  Incompatibility    
o s
...
 7  Actions  by  individuals  against  Public  Authorities  
 
ECHR  Art  11  
• freedom  of  association  is  protected
...
 But,  don’t  know  much  about  the  extent
...
Everyone  has  the  right  to  freedom  of  peaceful  assembly  and  to  freedom  of  
association  with  others,  including  the  right  to  form  and  to  join  trade  unions  
for  the  protection  of  his  interests
...
No  restrictions  shall  be  placed  on  the  exercise  of  these  rights  other  than  such  
as  are  prescribed  by  law  and  are  necessary  in  a  democratic  society  …  
 
• To  what  extent  is  freedom  of  association  protected?  
o Up  until  2002,  court  interpreted  freedom  of  association  protected  by  
article  11  narrowly
...
 Said  explicitly  
article  11  did  not  include  the  right  to  bargaining  or  a  right  to  strike
...
 Context  where  this  arises,  is  a  closed  shop  
agreement  (e
...
 where  an  employer  will  only  employ  people  who  are  
members  of  trade  unions  or  will  hire  non  trade  union  members  and  it  
will  be  a  term  that  they  will  join  a  trade  union
...
   
 ECHR  said  where  a  worker  was  forced  to  join  a  trade  union,  it  
contravened  article  11,  so  rights  had  to  be  changed  
 
Case  Law  of  ECHR  to  2002  
 Narrow  interpretation  of  freedom  of  association  
 Art  11  did  not  guarantee  a  right  to  collective  bargaining  or  a  right  to  strike  
 Refusal  to  use  ESC  or  ILO  Conventions  to  interpret  freedom  of  association  
more  widely  
 Wilson  and  Palmer  1995  
o W  received  letter  from  employer  (Daily  Mail):    
 DM  would  not  renew  current  recognition  agreement  with  NUJ      
 Any  worker  who  signed  a  new  ‘personal  contract’  before  expiry  
of  collective  agreement  would  receive  wage  increase  
o Unlawful  discrimination?  

  





o Breach  of  right  NOT  to  have  action  short  of  dismissal  taken  against  
him  for  the  purpose  of  preventing  or  deterring  him  from  being  a  trade  
union  member?      
(Employment  Protection  Consolidation  Act  1978  s
...
 
o s
...
 Any  employee  who  signed  an  agreement  while  employer  
still  bound  by  the  agreement  would  get  a  wage  increase    if  
they  didn’t  use  the  right  to  use  the  union,  he  would  get  a  wage  
contract
...
 Wilson  appealed  to  ECHR
...
 Court  does  
not  go  as  far  to  say  collective  bargaining  protected
...
 
ASLEF  v  UK  2007  
o Lee  was  a  BNP  member  who  stood  as  a  BNP  candidate  in  local  
elections
...
   Lee  brought  claim  under  s
...
     
o ET:  Lee  dismissed  for  membership  of  BNP,  contrary  to  statute
...
     
o ECrtHR:    
 referred  to  ILO  Convention  87  
 under  Art
...
 11  
(2)  as  necessary  in  a  democratic  society    

Right  to  govern  themselves
...
 Held:  should  remit  
Lee,  but  union  did  not
...
   
Demir  and  Baykara  v  Turkey  2008  
 Agreement
...
 Looked  back  at  pre  2008  case  law
...
 Development  in  domestic  law  was  such  that  collective  
bargaining  had  become  one  of  the  essential  elements  of  article  
11
...
   
o CA  between  trade  union  and  town  council  
o Council  breached  CA  >>  legal  action  brought  by  Baykara  (union  
president)  
o Court  of  Cassation:  trade  unions  had  no  legal  capacity  to  enter  into  
collective  agreements  >>  CA  invalid  ex  tunc  
o 2006  Court  decision:  breach  of  Art
...
 How  would  a  
union  engage  effectively  in  collective  bargaining  if  there  was  no  right  to  
strike
...
 Without  strike,  it  is  ‘collective  
begging’
...
   
RMT  v  UK  2014  
o Representatives  for  all  raily  workers  and  London  underground  
workers
...
 
Courts  said  right  to  strike  is  clearly  protected  by  article  11
...
 UK  law  did  
breach  art  11  right  to  strike,  but  it  is  justified  under  para  2
...
   
 At  common  law,  industrial  action  is  unlawful  i
...
 it  involves  breaches  of  
contract  and  tortuous  delictual  acts
...
   
 Secondary  action  is  action  taken  against  an  employer  or  organisation  who  is  
not  your  employer
...
 Industrial  action  is  an  umbrella  
term
...
   
 
A  right  to  strike?  
 Fundamental  human  right?  -­‐  Conceptualise,  it  is  an  element  of  wider  right  of  
human  right  of  freedom  of  association
...
 Right  to  strike  gives  trade  unions  some  force  behind  the  demands  
it  makes
...
 Without  it,  no  force  
so  collective  bargaining  not  given  force
...
 
Can  it  be  exercised  only  when  the  dispute  arises  in  the  context  of  collective  
bargaining?  E
...
 employees  employed  in  a  factory  making  tin  cans  then  the  
employer  decided  to  make  land  mines  instead
...
 Taking  industrial  action  in  this  context  is  political,  rather  than  
collective  bargaining
...
 UK  
courts  now  drawn  to  recognise  the  right  to  strike  –  developing  line
...
   
 Metrobus  v  UNITE  [2009]  Maurice  Kay  LJ:  ‘not  much  more  than  a  slogan’  
o Maurice  Kay  LJ  –  right  to  strike  has  never  been  more  than  a  slogan  
o Been  lawful  since  1906,  but  complicated  law  –  it  is  unlawful  at  
common  law  to  take  industrial  action,  but,  under  statute  since  1906,  it  
is  lawful
...
   

  
Common  Law  liability  
 Breach  of  contract  of  employment  -­‐  Strike  is  a  breach  of  contract  of  
employment
...
   
 The  organisation  which  organises  industrial  action,  can  be  liable  in  delict  in  
the  way  it  has  induced  someone  to  breach  their  contract
...
   
o Taff  Vale  case  
 Courts  found  trade  unions  as  organisations  were  vicariously  
liable  for  delicts  committed
...
   
 Delictual  liability:  
o inducing  someone  to  breach  contract  (Lumley  v  Gye  (1853))  
o conspiracy  to  injure  (Quinn  v  Leatham)  
o South  Wales  Miners’  Federation  (1905)  
 Trade  unions  vicariously  liable  for  torts  of  servants  and  agents  (Taff  Vale)  
 
 By  1905  –  unions  couldn’t  organise  industrial  action  without  the  possibility  
of  being  sued
...
 In  order  
to  have  collective  bargaining  force,  they  brought  the  Trade  Disputes  Act  1906  
(law  has  changed,  but  wording  of  the  statute  similar,  same  concepts  used
...
)  
 
Trade  Disputes  Act  1906  
S1  and  s3  aimed  at  different  types  of  delictual  liability
...
 1  An  act  done  in  pursuance  of  an  agreement  or  combination  by  two  or  
more  persons  shall,  if  done  in  contemplation  or  furtherance  of  a  trade  
dispute,  not  be  actionable  unless  the  act,  if  done  without  any  such  agreement  
or  combination,  would  be  actionable  
...
 3  An  act  done  
...
 
 s
...
 So  50s  and  60s  discovered  new  types  not  discovered  before
...
 
Agreed
...
 Trade  union  
threatened  industrial  action  if  didn’t  dismiss  employee  (lawful)
...
 Statutory  
immunity,  but  union  liable  on  new  kind  of  delict  (tort  of  intimidation)
...
   
Stratford  v  Lindley  
o Tort  of  inducing  breach  of  a  commercial  contract  
o Significant  problem  for  trade  unions  where  parent  companies  but  
separate  legal  entities
...
 trade  
union  involved  with  company  A,  but  placed  an  embargo  on  company  
B
...
   
Basis  of  cases  in  50s  and  60s,  was  reform  of  the  law  so  unions  again  liable  for  
industrial  action
...
 in  contemplation  or  furtherance  of  a  trade  dispute  is  not  
actionable  in  tort  on  the  ground  only  -­‐  
o (a)  that  it  induces  another  person  to  break  a  contract  or  interferes  or  
induces  another  person  to  interfere  with  its  performance,  or  
o (b)  that  it  consists  in  his  threatening  that  a  contract  (whether  one  to  
which  he  is  a  party  or  not)  will  be  broken  or  its  performance  
interfered  with,  or  that  he  will  induce  another  person  to  break  a  
contract  or  interfere  with  its  performance
...
 
o Key  immunities  
o Same  wording  since  1906  –  means  industrial  action  can  only  be  taken  
lawfully  where  taken  in  trade  dispute  NOT  political  matter
...
 Still  not  blanket  immunity  from  all  
delictual  liability,  but,  immune  from  different  types  
 S1(a)  contract  
 S1(b)  –  Bernard  case  
 S1(2)  –  etc…  see  slides  
o Court  develops  new  kinds  of  delictual  liability
...
   
 BALPA  –  trade  union  representative  pilots  in  dispute  with  BA  
as  wanted  to  establish  a  new  company  in  Paris  and  would  
employ  pilots  in  france  to  pay  less  than  existing  pilots  in  
BALPA,  seen  as  weakening  terms  and  conditions
...
   

 
Trade  Dispute  
 s
...
in  contemplation  or  furtherance  of  a  trade  dispute
...
 
244(1)  
 
TULRCA  s244(1)  
 (a)  the  terms  and  conditions  of  employment  
 (b)  engagement  or  non-­‐engagement,  or  termination  or  suspension  of  
employment,  or  the  duties  of  employment,  of  one  or  more  workers  
 (c)  allocation  of  work  or  the  duties  of  employment  between  workers  
 
Trade  disputes  not  political  disputes  
 Express  Newspapers  Ltd  v  Keys  
o Held:  no  trade  dispute;  ‘an  avowed  political  strike’;  injunctions  
granted  -­‐  Not  dispute  with  employer  but  dispute  action  by  
government
...
   
 Mercury  Communications  v  Scott-­Garner  
o Government  policy  or  members’  job  security?  
o CoA:  ‘mainly’  government  policy  

o Happened  in  political  context
...
 Wanted  to  sell  off  british  telecom
...
 Not  
about  government  policy,  but  about  protecting  workers’  jobs
...
 244:  dispute  between  ‘workers  and  their  employer’  
 Problem:  as  matter  of  company  law,  each  company  is  distinct  legal  person  
 Willingness  of  courts  to  lift  the  corporate  veil?  
 Dimbleby  and  Sons  v  NUJ  
 
Prohibition  and  restriction  
 ie  prohibition  and  restriction  of  steps  that  union  might  take  to  put  pressure  
onto  employer  during  dispute:  
o Picketing  -­‐  dispute  where  workers  stand  at  the  dates  to  publicise  
dispute  or  persuade  other  workers  or  companies  not  to  do  any  
dealings
...
 2  
• ‘lawful’  –  in  contemplation  or  furtherance  of  a  trade  
dispute  –  ‘to  attend  at  or  near  a  house  or  place  where  a  
person  resides  or  works  or  carries  on  business  or  
happens  to  be,  if  [the  pickets]  so  attend  merely  for  the  
purpose  of  peacefully  obtaining  or  communicating  
information,  or  of  peacefully  persuading  any  person  to  
work  or  abstain  from  working’  
• made  rules  for  picketing
...
 
 TULRCA,  s
...
 
Enacts  some  restrictions:  picketer  must  be  ‘at  or  near  his  own  
place  of  work’  
• picketer  must  be  ‘at  or  near  his  own  place  of  work’  
 Code  of  Practice:  6  or  fewer  pickets  in  a  place  (court  uses  
legally  binding)  
 Limited  protection:  
• eg:  no  right  to  stop  vehicles  
 Picketing  no  longer  used  ‘instrumentally’  -­‐  no  longer  used  to  
try  and  persuade  other  workers  or  make  industrial  action  
more  effective,  can  only  be  used  to  publicise  in  a  quiet  way
...
 224        
 
 
 

Lecture  12  –  The  right  to  strike  II  
 At  common  law  –  unlawful  as  involves  breach  of  contract
...
   
 Not  enough  that  a  worker  is  acting  in  compliance  with  s219  
o Union  must  comply  with  certain  procedural  requirements  e
...
 giving  
notice  to  employer  to  ballot  the  membership,  give  notice  to  employer  
of  industrial  action
...
 Where  the  employer  thinks  it  has  been  breaches,  it  grants  an  interim  
interdict  
o N
...
 when  an  employer  asks  the  court  to  grant  an  interim  interdict,  all  
it  has  to  show  is  that  1  has  been  breached,  does  not  have  to  show  it  
has  suffered  loss  as  a  result
...
B
...
exactly  as  that  –  begin  interpretation  from  basic  starting  
point  that  industrial  action  is  unlawful  at  common  law  
so  regard  immunity  as  exceptions  to  general  rule    
interpretation  is  strict/narrow
...
Not  to  begin  with  common  law,  but  idea  that  there  is  a  
human  right  to  strike  by  virtue  of  article  11  ECHR  and  
observe  in  human  rights  act
...
 
 Since  2009  there  has  been  a  litigation  pattern,  high  court/court  of  first  
instance  in  England  –  judge  tends  to  take  first  approach    strictly  so  granted  
injunctions
...
 No  supreme  court  overruled,  but  did  have  TULCR  
case  in  ECJ  where  it  argued  article  11
...
   
 
Procedural  requirements  
In  order  to  benefit  from  the  statutory  immunities  (s
...
give  notice  to  employer  of  intention  to  hold  an  industrial  action  ballot  
2
...
give  notice  to  employer  of  intention  to  take  industrial  action  
 
Before  the  ballot  
 Notice  of  intention  to  ballot  (s
...
 226A  trade  union  duty  to  provide  employer  with:  
 (a)  not  later  than  the  seventh  day  before  the  opening  day  of  the  
ballot,  the  notice  specified  in  subsection  (2)    

(b)  not  later  than  the  third  day  before  the  opening  day  of  the  
ballot,  the  sample  voting  paper  specified  in  subsection  (2F)  
o Provision  of  sample  ballot  paper  (s
...
 Current  
law  (s226),  majority  who  choose  to  vote  must  vote  in  favour
...
 Difficult  to  know  if  
some  workers  still  work  
• S232B  –  accidental  errors  to  be  disregarded  
o Provision  of  ‘lists’  and  ‘figures’  (s
...
 Also,  may  change  jobs  without  telling  
the  union
...
 
 s
...
 226(2D))  
 s
...
 
226A)  
o s
...
 226A(2)(c)(ii)  makes  different  provision,  see  Metrobus  v  UNITE  
[2009]  
RMT  and  ASLEF  2011  
o Union  mistakenly  referred  to  54  rather  than  52  workers  as  taking  part  
in  the  ballot
...
 Union  
mistakenly  referred  to  54  rather  than  52  workers  taking  part  on  a  






o

o
o
o

ballot  –  injunction  granted  on  this,  but  court  of  appeal  said  wrong  to  
do  so,  union  can  only  work  with  what  it  has
...
 Judge  said  
neither  adequate  or  accurate  so  granted  injunction
...
 (LJ  Aliace  para  103)  Vote  extended  2  
members  not  entitled
...
 
Court  of  Appeal:    
 Purpose  of  obligation  was  to  give  ‘some  idea  of  the  reliability  of  
the  union’s  figures’  
 Obligation  was  ‘not  onerous’    
 ‘the  description  of  the  process  undertaken  would  have  to  be  
positively  and  materially  misleading  before  the  explanation  
could  be  said  to  fall  short  of  the  statutory  requirement’  
Vote  extended  to  two  members  who  were  not  entitled  to  it
...
 232B  defence:  ‘accidental’  meant  
unintentional  and  unavoidable  
Court  of  Appeal:  s
...
 226  obligation  to  ballot:  no  statutory  immunity  unless:  
o Majority  of  those  voting  vote  in  favour  
o The  different  provisions  of  ss  226B,  227-­‐231  are  complied  with  -­‐  
S231A  –  notice  of  result  to  employer  and  all  voters
...
 299  voting  by  marking  of  ballot  paper  
o s
...
 226B(1)  independent  scrutineer  
o s
...
 232B  small  accidental  failures  to  be  disregarded    
 
After  the  ballot  
 Notice  of  ballot  result  
o Duty  to  inform  those  entitled  to  vote  (s
...
 231A)  
 Notice  of  industrial  action  
o Duty  to  give  7  days’  notice  (s
...
 234A)  
o Information  must  be  accurate  (s
...
 231  ‘all  persons  
...
 High  court  said  not  enough,  but  court  of  appeal  said  
text  and  email  was  sufficient
...
 [S]uch  strictness  
would  be  unrealistic’
...
 231  and  231A:  ‘As  soon  as  is  reasonably  practicable  after  the  
holding  of  the  ballot’  
o Metrobus  v  UNITE  [2009]  
 Court  of  Appeal:  in  situation  such  as  this,  employer  should  be  
informed  of  the  result  on  the  same  day  as  the  result  became  
known  
 
Notice  of  industrial  action  
 s
...
   
 s
...
   If  it  is  continuous,  it  must  state  the  
intended  date  of  the  commencement  of  the  action
...
 
 Milford  Haven  Port  Authority  v  UNITE  
o Notice  of  continuous  and  discontinuous  action  given  on  same  piece  of  
paper  -­‐  planning  2  types  of  industrial  action  –  a  day  of  strike  action  
discontinuous  and  some  other  actions  continuous
...
 High  court  said  should  have  used  2  pieces  
of  papr  so  granted  injunction
...
   
o High  Court:  injunction  granted
...
 
o Court  of  Appeal:  overruled!    
 
Right  to  strike  under  ECHR?  YES  
 Demir  and  Baykara  v  Turkey  [2008]  
 Enerji  Yapi-­Yol  Sen  v  Turkey  [2009]  
o Basis  of  this  case  that  court  of  appeal  said  in  ASLEF  there  was  a  right  
to  strike  under  UK  law  due  to  ECHR
...
 LJ  Aliace  –  strict  approach  is  interpretation  in  favour  of  
employer,  not  in  the  way  it  was  instructed  by  parliament/statute
...
   
 RMT  and  ASLEF  [2011]  Court  of  Appeal:  obligation  on  UK  Courts  to  interpret  
UK  statute  in  conformity  with  Article  11  as  interpreted  by  ECrtHR  

o RMT  v  UK  2014  
 EcrtHR:    
• The  right  to  strike  is  ‘clearly  protected’  under  Article  11  
• Complaint  regarding  pre-­‐strike  notice  provisions  
inadmissible  
• Secondary  action  ‘accessory’  freedom  but  complete  ban  
justified  under  Art  11(2)  
• Right  to  strike  clearly  protected  under  article  11  so  any  
restrictions  should  be  construed  narrowly
...
 EU  
court  said  inadmissible
...
 It  was  an  accessory  to  main  
rights  protected  under  art  11,  but,  a  complete  ban  could  
be  justified  under  art  11(2)    allowed  wide  margin  of  
appreciation
...
   
 3  clauses  in  bill  (see  slides)  –  2&3  raise  thresholds  a  union  must  meet  in  a  
ballot
...
   
 
 Clause  2:  in  all  ballots,  at  least  50%  of  members  entitled  to  vote  must  do  
so  
 Clause  3:  in  ‘important  public  services’,  40%  of  members  entitled  to  vote  
must  vote  yes    
 Clause  9:  any  picket  must  be  supervised  by  a  trade  union  appointed  
supervisor  –  present  at  all  times  or  readily  contactable  –  and  wearing  an  
arm-­‐band  or  badge  
 
Lecture  13  –  Employment  equality  
 
Equality  Act  2010  
 Key  Concepts:  Part  2  
o Protected  Characteristics:  Chapter  1  
o Prohibited  Conduct:  Chapter  2  
 Work:  Part  5  
o Employment:  Chapter  1  
o Equality  of  Terms:  Chapter  3  
 
Prohibited  conduct  
 Direct  discrimination  
 Indirect  discrimination  
 Harassment  s26  
o General  

Unwanted  conduct  related  to  a  protected  characteristic  which  
has  the  purpose  or  effect  of  either  violating  a  person’s  dignity  
or  of  creating  an  intimidating,  hostile,  degrading,  humiliating  
or  offensive  environment  
 All  PCs  except  marriage/civil  partnership  and  
pregnancy/maternity    
o Sexual  harassment  s26(2)  
 Unwanted  conduct  of  a  sexual  nature  
 Which  has  the  purpose  or  effect  of  creating  offensive  
environment  
 Eg  sexual  advances,  touching,  sexual  jokes  or  comments,  
display  of  pornographic  pictures,  sending  e-­‐mails  with  material  
of  a  sexual  nature    
o Reaction  to  harassment  s26(3)  
 A  person  who  has  experienced  unwanted  conduct  of  a  sexual  
nature;  or  related  to  sex  or  gender  reassignment  
 Who  is  treated  less  favourably  because  of  the  rejection  or  
submission  to  the  conduct    
 Can  also  claim  harassment      
 
 
 
 
   
Victimisation  s27  
o A  person  victimises  another  person  where:  
 they  subject  the  other  to  a  detriment  
 because  they  have  done  a  protected  act  
 or  that  person  believes  they  will  do/have  done  a  protected  act  
(even  if  they  have  not)  




 
The  protected  characteristics:  (s4)  
 Age  s5  
o Age  is  defined  by  reference  to  a  person’s  age  group  
o Where  people  fall  within  the  same  age  group,  they  share  the  protected  
characteristic  of  age  
 Disability  s6(1)  
o A  person  has  a  disability  if:  
 They  have  a  physical  or  mental  impairment,  and    
 The  impairment  has  a  substantial  and  long-­‐term  adverse  effect  
 On  their  ability  to  carry  out  day-­‐to-­‐day  activities    
o Schedule  1,  Part  1  “determination  of  disability”  
 Definitions    
• long-­‐term  effects  
• severe  disfigurement    
• progressive  illnesses  
 Cancer,  MS,  HIV  deemed  disabled  
o The  Equality  Act  2010  (Disability)  Regulations  2010  I  2010/2128  
 Excluded  impairments:  
• Addiction  to  alcohol,  nicotine  etc  

Tendency  to  set  fires,  steal,  physical  or  sexual  abuse  of  
others,  exhibitionism  and  voyeurism  
• Hayfever  
• Tattoos  and  piercings  not  to  be  treated  as  having  a  
substantial  adverse  effect  
 Deemed  disabled  if  certified  blind,  severely  sight  impaired,  
sight  impaired  or  partially  sighted  by  a  consultant  
opthalmologist  
Gender  reassignment  s7(1)  
Marriage  and  civil  partnership  s8  
o A  person  has  the  protected  characteristic  of  marriage  and  civil  
partnership  if  the  person  is  married  or  has  a  civil  partner  
o married  person/person  with  civil  partner  share  the  characteristic  
Pregnancy  and  maternity  s18  
Race  s9  
o Race  “includes”  colour,  nationality,  ethnic  or  national  origins  
o Person  of  a  particular  racial  group  
o A  racial  group  is  a  group  of  persons  defined  by  reference  to  race  –  two  
or  more  groups  
 
o Specific  racial  groups  protected  are  not  listed    
o Caste    
o “ethnic  origins”  
 Belonging  to  an  ethnic  group  with  a  long  shared  history  and  a  
cultural  tradition  of  its  own;  may  have  a  common  language,  
literature,  religion,  or  geographical  origin  etc  
 Includes  Sikhs  and  Jews  but  not  Muslims  or  Rastafarians  
 Mandla  v  Lee  1983  IRLR  209  HL  
Religion  or  belief  s10  
o Religion  means  any  religion  or  lack  of  religion  
o Belief  means  any  religious/philosophical  belief    and  includes  lack  of  
belief      
o a  person  who  has  a  particular  protected  characteristic  is  a  person  of  a  
particular  religion  or  belief  
o Persons  who  share  a  particular  protected  characteristic  have  the  same  
religion  or  belief  
o Religion:  Consistent  with  Art  9  EHRC:  
 Genuinely  held,  based  on  current  information;  relate  to  a  
weighty  and  substantial  aspect  of  human  behaviour;  attain  a  
certain  level  of  cogency,  seriousness,  cohesion  &  importance,  
be  worthy  of  respect  in  a  democratic  society,  and  compatible  
with  human  dignity  
o Belief:  Grainger  v  Nicholson  
 The  belief  must  be  genuinely  held  
 It  must  be  a  belief  and  not  …  an  opinion  or  viewpoint  based  on  
the  present  state  of  information  available  
•















It  must  be  a  belief  as  to  a  weighty  and  substantial  aspect  of  
human  life  and  behaviour  
It  must  attain  a  certain  level  of  cogency,  seriousness,  cohesion  
and  importance  
It  must  be  worthy  of  respect  in  a  democratic  society,  be  not  
incompatible  with  human  dignity  and  not  conflict  with  the  
fundamental  rights  of  others  

Sex  s11  
Sexual  orientation  s12  

 

   

 
Direct  Discrimination  s13(1)  
 “A  person  A  discriminates  against  another  B  if,    
 because  of  a  protected  characteristic,    
 A  treats  B  less  favourably  than  A  treats  
 or  would  treat  others”  
 
Indirect  discrimination  s19  
 Where  a  provision,  criterion  or  practice  
 Puts  or  would  put  persons  sharing  a  protected  characteristic  
 At  a  particular  disadvantage  compared  those  who  do  not  share  it    
 And  puts  or  would  put  the  claimant  at    that  disadvantage  
 And  cannot  be  shown  to  be  “a  proportionate  means  of  achieving  a  legitimate  
aim”    
 
 
   
 
Workplace  equality  
 Selection;  terms  of  offer;  refusal  to  offer  –  s39(1)  
 Terms  of  employment;  access  to  promotion;  training,  benefit  etc  –  s39(2)(a)  
and  (b)  
 Dismissal  or  other  detriment  –  s39(2)(c)  and  (d)  
 
Lecture  14  –  Work  and  Family  
 
Work  and  family  
 Maternity  rights  
 Discrimination  
 Family  friendly  rights  
 Paternity  and  parental  rights  
 Work  Patterns:  
o Working  Time  Regulations  1998  
o Part-­‐Time  Workers  (Prevention  of  Less  Favourable  Treatment  
Regulations  2000  
o Right  to  request  flexible  working  –  ERA  1996,  Part  8A  
 
Complexity  and  change:  
 Employment  Protection  Act  1975/ERA  1996  
 Pregnant  Workers  Directive  –  92/85/EC  






TURERA  1993;  Employment  Relations  Act  1999;  Employment  Act  2002;  
Work  and  Families  Act  2006;  Maternity  and  Parental  Leave  etc  Regulations  
1999  SI  1999/3312  
New  Labour  –  “Family  Friendly”  
Coalition  –  “Modern  Workplaces”  and  Private  Choices:  Children  and  Families  
Act  2014  
Leave  for  grandparents?  

 
Changing  attitudes?  
 “of  inordinate  complexity  exceeding  the  worst  excesses  of  a  taxing  statute”  
per  Browne-­‐Wilkinson  J  in  Lavery  v  Plessey  Telecommunications  Ltd  
[1982]  IRLR  180  at  182  
 “Family-­friendly  workplace  policies  simultaneously  support  working  families  
and  economic  growth”  
 
Jo  Swinson  MP,  Modern  Workplaces  Consultation,  2013  
 “Current  workplace  arrangements  are  old-­fashioned  and  rigid
...
”    
Jo  Swinson,  2014  
 
Pregnancy  and  Maternity  
 equal  treatment?  
o EU  Equality  Directives  
o Sex  Discrimination  Act  1975  
o ECJ  decisions  –  Dekker  [1990]  ECR  I-­‐3941  
o Equality  Act  2010    
 Special  treatment?  
o UK  maternity  rights  
 Ante-­‐natal  care  
• Right  to  reasonable  time  off  (paid)  
o ERA  1996,  ss55-­‐57  
• Right  to  accompany  (unpaid)  
o ERA,  ss57ZE  and  57ZF  
• Equivalent  rights  for  agency  workers  
o ERA,  ss57ZA  –  57ZD  and  57ZG  –  57ZI  
• Equivalent  rights  for  adoption  
o ERA,  ss57ZJ  –  57ZS  
 Maternity  leave  
• ERA,  ss71  -­‐  73  
• 52  weeks  
• No  continuity  requirement  
• Commencement  –  not  earlier  than  11th  week  before  
EWC/not  later  than  date  of  childbirth/automatic  
commencement  within  4  weeks  of  EWC  
• 2  weeks  of  compulsory  leave  
• Notice  







• Right  to  return  
• Early  ‘curtailment’  –  shared  parental  leave  
SMP  
• Social  Security  Contributions  and  Benefits  Act  1992    
• 26  weeks’  continuity  at  ‘qualifying  week’  
• Above  NI  lower  limit  
• 39  weeks  entitlement  
• 6  weeks  at  90%  
• Remaining  period  at  fixed  rate  
Dismissal  and  detriment  &  Suspension  on  maternity  grounds  
• Automatically  unfair  –  ERA,  s99  
• Dismissal  relating  to  pregnancy,  childbirth,  maternity  
and  maternity  leave  
• Suspension  on  maternity  grounds  –  ERA,  ss66  -­‐  70  
Move  towards  shared  care  
• Other  family  leave  
o Parental  leave  –  ERA,  ss  76  -­‐  80  -­‐  Maternity  and  
Parental  Leave  etc  Regulations  1999  
 Default  or  employer’s  scheme  –  collective  
or  workforce  agreement  
 One  year’s  continuous  employment  
 Has  or  expects  to  have  ‘parental  
responsibility’  
 Child  up  to  5  (18  if  disabled)  
 18  weeks’  leave  –  weekly  blocks  –  unpaid  
• Rodway  v  South  Central  Trains  Ltd  
[2005]  IRLR  253  
 Protection  against  dismissal/detriment  
o Paternity  leave  -­‐  ERA,  s80A  -­‐  Paternity  and  
Adoption  Leave  Regulations  2002  
 Qualifications:  
• 26  weeks’  continuous  employment  
• Father  /  spouse  or  civil  partner  
• Have  or  expect  to  have  parental  
responsibility  
 Entitlement:  
• 2  weeks  within  first  56  days  of  
birth    
• Paid  at  basic  SMP  rate  
o Adoption  leave  -­‐  ERA,  ss75A  and  B  -­‐  Paternity  
and  Adoption  Leave  Regulations  2002  
o Time  off  for  dependants/  family  emergencies  –  
ERA,  1996,  s57A  
 ERA  1996,  s57A  
 Reasonable  and  necessary  

Qua  v  John  Ford  Morrison  Solicitors  
[2003]  IRLR  184  
• Royal  Bank  of  Scotland  v  Harrison  
[2009]  ICR  116  
 Communication  
• Truelove  v  Safeway  Stores  plc  
[2005]  ICR  589  
 “Dependant”-­‐  “spouse,  partner,  child,  
parent  or  a  person  living  in  the  same  
house  other  than  a  lodger,  or  any  other  
person  who  reasonably  relies  upon  the  
employee  in  an  emergency”    
o Shared  parental  leave  –  ERA  ss75E  –  75K  
o Pregnancy  Directive  –  92/85/EC  
o Employment  Rights  Act  1996  
•

 
Lecture  15  –  Wrongful  Dismissal  
 
Dismissal  
 Dismissal  by  notice    
 
ERA  1996,  s86  
 Summary  dismissal/  instant  dismissal/dismissal  for  cause  
 Wrongful  dismissal    
-­‐ dismissal  in  breach  of  contract  
-­‐ “At  common  law  a  master  is  not  bound  to  hear  his  servant  before  
he  dismisses  him
...
 The  servant  has  no  remedy  
unless  the  dismissal  is  in  breach  of  contract  and  then  the  
servant’s  only  remedy  is  damages  for  breach  of  contract
...
”  
 
Mutual  trust  and  respect  
 Mahmud  and  Malik  v  BCCI  [1998]  AC  20  
 Johnson  v  Unisys  [2003]  1AC  518  
o “an  insuperable  obstacle”  
o “a  common  law  right  embracing  the  manner  in  which  an  employee  is  
dismissed  cannot  coexist  with  the  statutory  right  not  to  be  unfairly  
dismissed”  
 
The  Johnson  exclusion  area  
 “Identifying  the  boundary  of  the  ‘Johnson  exclusion  area’  …  is  comparatively  
straightforward
...
 An  employee’s  remedy  for  unfair  
dismissal  …  is  the  remedy  provided  by  statute
...
”  
o Eastwood  v  Magnox  Electric  plc  [2005]  1AC  503  
Lord  Nicholls  
 
Contractual  procedure  
 Edwards  v  Chesterfield  Royal  Hospital  NHS  Foundation  Trust  [2012]  ICR  201  
o “unless  they  otherwise  agree,  the  parties  to  an  employment  contract  do  
not  intend  that  a  failure  to  comply  with  contractually  binding  
disciplinary  procedures  will  give  rise  to  a  common  law  claim  for  
damages”  
Lord  Dyson  
 
Interdict/  Injunction  
 Hill  v  Parsons  [1972]  Ch  305  
o  trust  and  respect  
 Irani  v  Southampton  Health  Board  [1985]  ICR  590  
o disciplinary  procedure  
 Anderson  v  Pringle  [1998]  IRLR  64  
o selection  for  redundancy  
 Edwards  

o “an  injunction  to  prevent  a  threatened  unfair  dismissal  does  not  cut  
across  the  statutory  scheme  for  compensation  for  unfair  dismissal”  
(Lord  Dyson)  
 
Lecture  16  –  unfair  dismissal  
 
Statutory  context  
 Industrial  Relations  Act  1971:  
o Introduced  unfair  dismissal  as  part  of  a  radical  restructuring  and  
‘legalisation’  of  employment  regulation  
 Trade  Union  and  Labour  Relations  Act  1974:  
o repealed  1971  Act  but  re-­‐enacted  unfair  dismissal  
 Employment  Rights  Act  1996,  Pt  X  
 
Recent  changes  
 Employment  Law  Review  
 Resolving  Workplace  Disputes  Consultation:  January  2012  
 Government  Response  –  January  2013  
 Continuity,  compensation,  settlement,  tribunal  fees  
 
The  government’s  objectives  
 “Businesses  tell  us  that  unfair  dismissal  rules  are  a  major  barrier  to  taking  on  
more  people”  
Vince  Cable  
 “The  Government  is  committed  to  maintaining  and  building  on  the  flexibility  of  
the  UK’s  labour  market,  ensuring  that  businesses  feel  able  to  create  new  jobs,  
whilst  protecting  a  strong  system  of  employee  rights
...
2%  of  unfair  dismissal  claims  
achieve  an  award  of  compensation,  reinstatement  or  re-­engagement  would  
surely  deter  a  significant  proportion  of  unfair  dismissal  claims  without  any  
change  to  the  law
...
”  
ERA  1996,  s94  
 Qualifications  /  Exclusions  
o Only  “employees”  
o two  years’  continuous  employment  –  s108(1)  
o exceptions  to  continuity  requirement  –  s108(3)  
 Has  there  been  a  Dismissal?:  ERA  1996,  s95  
o contract  terminated  by  employer  
o fixed  term  contract  expires  
o constructive  dismissal  




Contract  test    or  Unreasonableness  test?  
Western  Excavating  Ltd  v  Sharp  [1978]  ICR  221  
o The  test  of  “unreasonable  conduct  …  is  too  indefinite  by  far  …  It  has  
led  to  findings  of  constructive  dismissal  on  the  most  whimsical  
grounds  …  It  is  better  to  have  the  contract  test  of  the  common  law
...
”  
 Ability  
 Competence  





 Health  
 Qualifications    
Capability  
o Usually  a  pattern  of  incompetence  but  -­‐    
 
 “There  are  activities  in  which  the  degree  of    professional  skill  
which  must  be  required  is  so  high,     and  the  potential  
consequences  of  the  smallest    
departure  from  that  high  
standard  are  so  serious,    
that  one  failure  …  is  enough  to  
justify  the  dismissal
...
 Secondly,  that  the  employer  had  
in  his  mind  reasonable  grounds  upon  which  to  sustain  that  belief
...
”  EAT  
 
Lecture  17  –  unfair  dismissal  II  
 
Test  of  fairness  –  ERA  1996,  s98  
 Employer  must  show  reason  for  dismissal  





A  potentially  fair  reason?    
o Capability  or  qualifications  
o Conduct  
o Redundancy  
o Statutory  restriction  
Or  
o Some  other  substantial  reason  
 Criticisms  made  of  the  very  wide  range  of  reasons  found  to  be  
fair  
 But  most  commonly  where  employer  changes  terms  and  
conditions  in  circumstances  where  it  is  necessary  
 Where  a  reorganisation  takes  place  in  circumstances  which  
don’t  match  the  definition  of  redundancy  
 When  a  major  customer  pressurises  an  employer  to  dismiss  
someone  
Did  the  employer  act  reasonably  by  treating  the  potentially  fair  reason  as  
sufficient  reason  for  dismissal  

 
Conduct  
 Conduct  within  employment  
o British  Homes  Stores  v  Burchell  [1980]  ICR  303  
o Was  there  a  genuine  belief  that  the  employee  was  guilty?  
o Was  it  reasonably  founded?  
o Would  a  reasonable  employer  have  dismissed?  
 Conduct  outwith  employment  
o Nature  of  employment?  Nature  of  incident?  Effect  on  employment?  
o Securicor  Guarding  Ltd  v  R  [1994]  IRLR  164  
o Criminal  behaviour?  
o Alternative  responses?  
 
The  “Bruchell”  test  
 Did  the  employer  genuinely  believe  that  the  claimant  was  guilty  of  
misconduct?  
 Were  there  reasonable  grounds  in  the  employer’s  mind  on  which  to  sustain  
that  belief?  
 When  the  belief  was  formed,  had  the  employer  carried  out  as  much  
investigation  into  the  matter  as  was  reasonable?  
 Employer  genuinely  and  honestly  believed  that  the  employee  was  guilty  of  
misconduct  
 
Redundancy  
 Separate  right  to  redundancy  compensation  
o Redundancy  defined  in  s139,  ERA  
o Where  employer  ceases  to  carry  on  business  
o Diminished  need  for  employees  to  carry  out  work  of  a  particular  kind  
o Statutory  redundancy  payment  –  s162,  ERA  




Dismissal  for  redundancy  may  also  be  unfair  
Redundancy  dismissal  may  be  automatically  unfair  –  s105  

 
Automatically  unfair  redundancy  
 s105  
o 1
...
“the  circumstances  constituting  the  redundancy  applied  equally  to  
one  or  more  other  employees  in  the  same  undertaking  who  held  
positions  similar  to  that  held  by  the  employee  and  who  have  not  been  
dismissed  by  the  employer
...
Any  of  subsections  (2A)  to  (7N)  apply  
 
The  third  stage:  reasonableness  
 s98(4)  –  “whether  in  the  circumstances  (including  the  size  and  
administrative  resources  of  the  employer’s  undertaking)  the  employer  acted  
reasonably  or  unreasonably  in  treating  [the  reason]  as  a  sufficient  reason  for  
dismissing  the  employee”  
 Reasonableness  not  fairness  
 Range  of  reasonable  responses  
o Iceland  Frozen  Foods  v  Jones  [1982]  IRLR  439  
o Starting  point  should  be  the  statute  
o Reasonableness  of  employer’s  conduct  
o Tribunal  must  not  substitute  its  own  view  
o Usually  there  is  a  band  of  reasonable  responses  
o Function  of  tribunal  to  decide  whether  the  employer’s  response  falls  
within  that  band  
Procedural  Fairness  
 ERA,  s98(4)  
 Polkey  v  A  E  Dayton  Services  ltd  [1988]  ICR  347  
o “If  an  employer  has  failed  to  take  the  appropriate  procedural  steps  …  
the  one  question  the  tribunal  is  not  permitted  to  ask  …  is  the  
hypothetical  question  whether  it  would  have  made  any  difference  to  
the  outcome”  
 ACAS  Code  of  Practice  
o Investigation  –  written  notice  of  allegation  –  meeting  –  accompanied  –  
formal  warning  –  opportunity  to  appeal  
 ERA  1996,  s124A  
o Additional  compensation    
 
Remedies  
 Re-­‐employment    
o Employee  request  –  ss112  and  113  
o Reinstatement  –  s114  
o Re-­‐engagement  –  s115  
 Intended  to  be  primary  remedy  But  very  rarely  sought  by  
employees  

And  employers  can  argue  that  it  would  be  impracticable  to  
reinstate  or  re-­‐engage  
o Additional  award  –  s117  
 If  employer  refuses,  then  the  remedy  is  limited  to  additional  
compensation  (s117  ERA)  
Compensation  
o Basic  award  –  s119  
 Calculated  in  same  way  as  redundancy  payment  depending  on  
age  and  length  of  service  
 Maximum  £475  pw  and  20  years  (£14,250)  
o Compensatory  award  –  s123  –  statutory  limit  
 To  compensate  for  financial  losses  
 But  not  punish  the  employer  
 Subject  to  a  maximum    
 Lower  of  £78,335)  or  12  months  gross  salary  
 Subject  to  mitigation  of  losses  
 And  may  be  reduced  for  contributory  fault  




 
ERA,  s203  
 Enterprise  and  Regulatory  Reform  Act  2013  
 Acas  Code  of  Practice  –  Settlement  Agreements  –  July  2013  
 s203(1)  –  an  agreement  to  exclude  or  limit  the  operation  of  any  provision  of  
the  Act  or  to  preclude  a  person  from  bringing  ET  proceedings  is  void  
 s203(3)    
o ACAS  supervised  settlement  –  s203(2)(e)  
o Settlement  agreement  –  s203(3)  
 (a)  agreement  in  writing  
 (b)  must  relate  to  particular  proceedings  
 (c)  employee  must  have  received  advice  from  a  relevant  
independent  adviser  (see  s303(3A)  as  to  terms  and  effect  of  
the  proposed  agreement  and,  in  particular,  its  effect  on  his  
ability  to  pursue  his  rights  before  an  employment  tribunal  
 (d)  adviser  must  have  appropriate  indemnity  insurance  
 (e)  agreement  must  identify  the  adviser  
 (f)  agreement  must  state  that  the  settlement  agreement  
conditions  are  met  
 
Lecture  18  –  Redundancy  
 
The  focus  here  is  on  the  statutory  right  to  an  individual  redundancy  payment
...
 
Note  that  the  definition  of  redundancy  in  terms  of  the  collective  redundancies  
legislation  is  different  and  slightly  broader
...
 Remember  that  redundancy  is  only  a  
potentially  fair  reason  for  dismissal  –  the  employer  still  has  to  act  reasonably  
in  dismissing  for  that  potentially  fair  reason
...
 This  obligation  to  
consult  is  separate  from  the  obligation  to  consult  in  respect  of  collective  
redundancies
...
 It  is  quite  specific  and  detailed  and  it  has  given  rise  to  
a  number  of  important  cases
...
Cessation  of  business  –  either  total  or  partial  (ie  the  whole  business  
or  the  business  at  the  particular  place  where  the  employee  was  
employed)  
o 2
...
 
 
Place  of  work  –  ERA  s139(1)(a)  
 “employer  has  ceased    or  intends  to  cease  –  
o (i)  to  carry  on  the  business  for  the  purposes  of  which  the  employee  was  
employed  by  him,  or  
o (ii)  to  carry  on  that  business  in  the  place  where  the  employee  was  
employed”    
 Contractual  test  
o UK  Atomic  Energy  v  Claydon  [1974]  IRLR  6  
 “The  [employers]  reserve  the  right  to  require  any  member  of  
their  staff  to  work  at  any  of  their  establishments  in  Great  
Britain”    

“Many  men  and  women  are  employed  under  contracts  of  
employment  which  provide  for  transfers  over  a  wide  area
...
”    
Factual  approach  
o Bass  Leisure  v  Thomas  [1994]  IRLR  104  
 The  place  where  the  employee  was  employed:  “is  to  be  
established  by  a  factual  enquiry,  taking  into  account  the  
employee’s  fixed  or  changing  place  or  places  of  work  and  
contractual  terms  which  go  to  evidence  or  define  the  place  of  
employment  …  but  not  those  (if  any)  which  make  provision  for  
the  employee  to  be  transferred  to  another”  
o High  Table  Ltd  v  Horst  [1998]  ICR  409  
 “The  question  …  where  was  an  employee  employed  …  is  one  to  
be  answered  primarily  by  a  consideration  of  the  factual  
circumstances  
...
’  But  it  cannot  
be  the  sole  determinant,  regardless  of  where  the  employee  
actually  worked  for  his  employer
...
 Broadly  a  distinction  can  be  drawn  between  a  contractual  
approach  –  ie  what  does  the  contract  say  –  and  a  factual  approach  –  ie  
regardless  of  what  the  contract  specifies,  what  happens  in  practice?  The  
three  cases  cited  demonstrate  these  different  approaches
...
 In  other  situations  they  may  be  challenging  the  
employer’s  assertion  that  the  reason  for  the  dismissal  is  redundancy  –  eg  
because  they  are  pursuing  a  claim  for  unfair  dismissal  and  int  hat  context  
they  are  questioning  the  potentially  fair  reason  that  the  employer  has  put  
forward  (ie  redundancy)
...
 The  terms  of  the  contract  of  
employment  were  not  relevant  to  those  questions
...
139]  is  …  simplicity  itself
...
 The  first  is  …  whether  the  requirements  of  the  business  for  
employees  to  carry  out  work  of  a  particular  kind  have  diminished
...
”  
o As  with  unfair  dismissal,  the  House  of  Lords  in  Murray  has  
emphasised  the  importance  of  looking  at  what  the  statute  says
...
 A  key  
point  to  note  is  that  the  person  who  has  been  dismissed  does  not  
necessarily  need  to  show  that  he/she  was  employed  to  do  the  
particular  kind  of  work  for  which  the  employer  has  a  diminished  
need
...
 
 The  diminished  requirements  aspect  of  redundancy  has  given  rise  to  
significant  case  law
...
 The  three  cases  cited  should  help  to  explain  some  
of  the  issues  that  might  arise
...
 
You  should  remember  that  at  the  time  of  this  decision,  there  was  no  
protection  against  unfair  dismissal  or  sex  discrimination  both  of  which  could  
have  provided  remedies  for  the  claimant
...
 
 
Redundancy  –  2  key  aspects:  
1
...
A  dismissal  for  redundancy  gives  rise  to  entitlement  to  statutory  redundancy  
payment  –  ERA  s162  
 
 There  must  be  a  dismissal  –  ERA  s136  
 Must  be  an  employee  with  minimum  2  years’  continuous  employment  –  ERA  
s155  
 Suitable  alternative  employment?  
o ERA  s138    
o Notice  of  dismissal  
o Offer  of  renewed  employment  or  alternative  employment  
o 4  week  trial  period  if  terms  are  different  
o Refusal  to  accept  =  no  redundancy  –  s141  
o An  employer  is  not  obliged  to  create  alternative  employment  but  
he/she  must  offer  it  if  it  is  available
...
 If  the  terms  are  different  from  the  original  employment  
then  there  is  a  4  week  trial  period
...
 This  is  subject  to  the  provisions  relating  to  
“suitable  alternative  employment”
...
5  x  week’s  pay  
 22  –  40  –  1  week’s  pay  
 Below  22  –  0
...
 The  limit  on  “a  week’s  pay”  is  
currently  £450  –  this  increases  periodically  (usually  annually)
...
 
 to  another  person    
 of  an  economic  entity  
o what  is  an  economic  entity?  
 “an  organised  grouping  of  resources  which  has  the  objective  of  
pursuing  an  economic  activity,  whether  or  not  that  activity  is  
central  or  ancillary”  reg  3(2)  
 Must  be  transfer  as  a  going  concern    
 As  opposed  to  a  sale  of  an  asset  
 Need  not  be  transfer  of  property,  so  may  include  eg  lease,  
franchise  
 which  retains  its  identity”    
o Test  from  Spijkers  1986  ECJ  
 Type  of  business?  
 tangible  assets  tranferred?  
 Value  of  intangible  assests?  
 Are  the  majority  of  staff  taken  over?  
 Do  the  customers  transfer?  
 Degree  of  similarity  between  activities?  
 Duration  of  any  interruption  of  those  activities?  
 Is  contracting  out  covered?  –  the  EU  approach  
o Rask  v  ISS  Kantineservice  1993  ECJ  
 Directive  applies  where  private  co  contracts  out    the  running  of  
staff  canteen  
o Schmidt    1994  ECJ  
 Directive  applies    when  a  bank  contracted  out  cleaning  done  by  
sole  cleaner      
o Süzen  1997  ECJ  
 depends  whether  assets  and/or  a  significant  part  of  the  
workforce  were  transferred  
 
Relevant  transfer  (2):  service  provision  changes  –  UK  approach  
 Extended  by  2006  Regulations  reg3(1)(b)  
 Applies  to  re-­‐tendering  and  contracting  back  in  or  ‘insourcing’  






Where,  prior  to  the  transfer,  there  is  an  organised  grouping  of  employees  
assigned  to  carry  out  activities  with  that  principal  purpose      
ignoring  minor  differences,  the  activities  carried  out  by  subsequent  
contractor  are  essentially  or  fundamentally  the  same  
Unless  it  is  a  one-­‐off  or  the  contract  is  mainly  for  the  supply  of  goods  
What  is  transferred?  
o employment  contracts  reg  4(1)  
 All  rights  (except  pensions)  are  transferred  as  if  the  transferee  
employer  had  signed  the  employment  contract  
o ‘all  the  transferor’s  rights,  powers,  duties  and  liabilities’  reg  4(2)  
 All  claims  and  liabilities  of  the  employer  to  the  employees  
o Variation  of  contract  because  of  the  transfer  void  unless  ETO    reg  4(4)  

 
Protection  against  dismissal  
 If  the  sole  or  principal  reason  for  dismissal  is  the  transfer      
 automatic  unfair  dismissal    -­‐reg  7  
 Claim  only  with  two  years’  service  
 Unless  there  is  an  economic  technical  or  organisational  reason  entailing  
changes  in  the  workforce  (ETO)  –  reg  7(2)  
o What  is  an  ETO  reason?  
 Economic:  relating  to  the  profitability  or  market  performance  
of  the  new  employer’s  business  
 Technical:  relating  to  the  nature  of  the  equipment  or  
production  processes  which  the  new  employer  operates  
 Organisational:  relating  to  the  management  or  organisational  
structure  of  the  new  employer’s  business  
o ETO  exception:  “entailing  changes  to  the  workforce”  
 Narrowly  defined  
 means  changes  to  the  composition  of  the  workforce    
 changes  in  the  numbers  employed    
 or  functions  performed  
 See  Delabole  Slate  v  Berriman  1985  IRLR  305  CA  
 But  now  include  a  change  to  the  place  of  work    -­‐  reg  7(3A)  
 When  it  will  be  potentially  fair  (SOSR)  
 
Who  is  transferred?  
 Those  dismissed  before  transfer?  
o Litster  v  Forth  Dry  Dock  1989  HL  
o those  employed  immediately  before  the  transfer  or  who  would  have  
been  employed  but  for  a  dismissal  –  reg  4(3)  
 Part  of  an  undertaking?  –  Reg  4(1)  
o Those  assigned  to  grouping  of  resources  
 Employees  who  don’t  want  to  transfer?  
o Limited  right  to  object  where  material  detriment  (regs  4(7)  –  (10)  
 
 

Information  and  consultation  
 Transferors  duty  to  provide  employee  liability  information  –  reg  11  
 At  least  28  days  prior  to  transfer  
 Including  identity  and  ages  of  employees;  particulars  of  employment;  
outstanding  disciplinaries,  grievance  and    tribunal  complaints  
 Complaint  to  ET  by  transferee  for  failure  –  reg  12  
 Duty  to  inform  and  consult  the  workforce  –  regs  13  –  16    
 on  both  transferor  and  transferee  
 Appropriate  representatives  ie  TU  and  elected  representative  (c
...
 <  10)  
 Any  employees  who  may  be  affected  by  the  transfer  
 Complaint  to  ET  for  failure  (protective  award  up  to  13  weeks’  pay)  
 
Transfers  on  insolvency  
 Transferors  subject  to  relevant  insolvency  proceedings  
 Transfers  free  from  certain  liabilities    reg  8  
 To  facilitate  “rescue  culture”  and  allow  transferee  to  acquire  without  debt      
 variations  to  terms  and  conditions  can  be  agreed  with  insolvency  
practitioner  –  reg  9  
 Now  clear  this  exception  does  not  apply  to  Pre-­‐pack  administration  (because  
company  sold  as  a  going  concern)  
 See  K2Law  v  De’Antiquis  2012  CA  
 
Lecture  20  –  Dealing  with  disputes  
 
Employment  disputes  
 Regulating  the  employment  relationship  
 Access  to  employment  tribunals  
o Including  judicial  mediation  
 Conciliation/Arbitration  through  ACAS  
o Pre-­‐claim  conciliation  (PCC)  
 Settlement  of  disputes  
o Settlement  agreements  
 Appeals    
 
The  regulatory  revolution  
 Total  transformation  of  the  extent  to  which  the  employment  relationship  is  
regulated  over  the  past  40  years  
 From  collective  laissez  faire  
 To  tight  regulations  
 And  overburden  of  red  tape?  
o Reducing  the  regulatory  “burden”  
o Scaling  down  employment  and  equality  rights,  eg  
o Introduction  of  fees  for  Employment  Tribunals  
o Reducing  unfair  dismissal  protection  and  compensation  
o Employee  owner  status    
o  

Arguments  in  favour  of  employment  regulation  
 Social  justice  and  human  rights  
o To  protect  vulnerable  workers  from  unjust,  inequitable  or  negligent  
employers    
 Positive  economic  benefits  
o Long-­‐term  competitiveness  enhanced  because  skills  shortages  are  
avoided  
o We  can  only  compete  on  quality  not  costs  
o Levels  of  productivity  are  increased  
 
Arguments  against  employment  regulation  
 Costs  burden/costs  of  compliance  
o Regulation  reduces  competitiveness  
o Makes  job  creation  harder  
 Negative  impact  on  employees  
o Avoidance  mechanisms  (eg  refusing  to  employ  younger  women)  
o Centralisation  and  standardisation  of  policies  works  against  local  
flexibility  and  informal  practices  
 
Employment  tribunals  
 Regulating  and  adjudicating  on  employment  disputes  
 Industrial  tribunals  set  up  in  1964  to  hear  appeals  against  training  levy  
following  Donovan  Commission  Report  
o “an  easily  accessible,  speedy,  informal  and  inexpensive  procedure  for  
the  settlement  of  …  disputes”  
 Now  regulated  by  Employment  Tribunals  Act  1996  
 Jurisdiction  (remit)  expanded  and  approach  altered  beyond  all  recognition  
from  introduction  
 Composition  
o Three  member  panel  
o One  legally  qualified  judge    
o Two  “lay”  members  
 One  with  experience  from  employee  perspective  (claimant),  
other  from  employer  perspective  (respondent)  
o Increasingly  cases  can  be  determined  by  a  judge  sitting  alone  (JSA)    
o Access  to  employment  tribunals  
 Employment  status  
• Only  employees  can  access  certain  rights;  rights  of  
workers  are  more  limited  
 Strict  time  limits  
• Three  months  from  EDT    
 Service  requirements  to  access  rights  
• Now  two  years  for  unfair  dismissal  
• Other  egs  notice  (one  month);  parental  leave  (one  
year);  redundancy  pay  (two  yrs)  
 

Expanding  jurisdiction  
 As  a  “creature  of  statute”  ETs  can  only  hear  specified  claims  
 Claims  in  the  employment  law  statutes  
 Eg  unfair  dismissal,  redundancy,  family  friendly,  discrimination  and  equal  
pay,  trade  union  rights,  working  time  
 And  since  1994  some  contract  claims  
 But  only  on  termination  of  employment  
o Employment  Tribunals  Extension  of  Jurisdiction  (Scotland)  Order  
1994  
 
Comprehensive  review  
 New  rules  
o Employment  Tribunals  (Constitution  and  Rules  of  Procedure)  
Regulations  2013  
 Introduction  of  fees  
o Employment  Tribunals  and  the  Employment  Appeal  Tribunal  Fees  
Order  2013  
 Introduction  of  early  conciliation  
o Employment  Tribunals  Act  1996  s18A    
 Employment  tribunal  rules  
o Employment  Tribunals  (Constitution  and  Rules  of  Procedure)  
Regulations  2013  
o Claim  form  (ET1)  and  response  form  (ET3)  
o Preliminary  hearings  
 On  case  management  issues  –  orders  issued  
 On  jurisdictional  issues  
o Final  hearings  –  witnesses  and  documents  
o Expenses/costs  orders  
 Fees  –  limiting  access  to  justice?  
• Challenge  to  tribunal  fees  
• By  Unison  in  England  unsuccessful  
o New  challenge  launched  on  basis  of  latest  
statistics  
o Unsuccessful  at  Court  of  Appeal  
• By  Fox  and  Partners,  Solicitors  in  Scotland  
o Sisted  pending  outcome  of  Judicial  Review  in  
England  
 
Early  conciliation  
 From  6  April  2014  claimants  require  to  submit  an  early  conciliation  form  
including  basic  details  about  their  claim  
 ACAS  conciliation  officer  has  one  month  to  seek  to  settle  the  dispute  
 If  conciliation  is  refused  or  not  effective,  ACAS  will  issue  an  early  conciliation  
certificate  
 ET  claim  forms  lodged  without  early  conciliation  certificates  rejected      



Time  limits  are  extended  to  facilitate  conciliation  before  institution  of  
proceedings

---