header-logo header-logo

Contracting-out

12 January 2012 / Roderick Ramage
Issue: 7496 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Employment
printer mail-detail

Roderick Ramage provides a rough guide to TUPE, pensions & contracting-out

Some employees’ pension protection rights, even though linked to TUPE, are not subject to restriction on contracting out.

Changing contract terms

Unless the contract expressly provides for it, no party can alter it unilaterally, but the parties can alter it consensually. Alterations of contracts are themselves made by contract. Employment contracts are no different from other contracts, but, because of the respective bargaining strengths of the parties, employers, if they stay successfully on the right side of the boundary between business justification and unfair dismissal, can vary employment contracts unilaterally by a process of an offer of new terms, consultation, warning, and eventually dismissal, coupled with an offer of reengagement on new terms: technically, if this process runs its course, what starts as a proposal to vary the contract ends as a rescission and new contract.

The contracting-out restriction

Normal contract rules do not apply to statutory employment protection rights. Employers and employees may not contract out of the latter’s statutory employment

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll