header-logo header-logo

25 October 2013 / John McMullen
Issue: 7581 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Competing rights

John McMullen investigates the differing interpretations of collective bargaining

Under the European Union Acquired Rights Directive (2001/23), upon a transfer of an undertaking, all of the transferors’ rights and obligations arising from a contract of employment or from an employment relationship are transferred to the transferee (Art 3(1)). Furthermore, following the transfer, the transferee is obliged to continue to observe terms and conditions agreed in any collective agreement until the date of termination or expiry of the agreement or the entering into force or application of another collective agreement (Art 3(3)).

These provisions are transposed in the UK by the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) (TUPE) Regulations 2006 (SI 2006/246). Regulation 4 of TUPE 2006 (formerly reg 5 of TUPE 1981) provides for the transfer of the employment contract. Regulation 5 of TUPE 2006 (formerly reg 6 of TUPE 1981) provides for the transfer of collective agreements. However, that is without prejudice to the position in UK law that collective agreements are presumed to be unenforceable. But in the UK, terms from a collective agreement

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

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
back-to-top-scroll