header-logo header-logo

31 July 2015 / John McMullen
Issue: 7663 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Sticking together?

nlj_7663_mcmullen

The issues of information & consultation on collective redundancies have been revisited, observes John McMullen

Issues concerning the employer’s duty to inform and consult on collective redundancies continue to occupy the courts.

Usdaw & its sister litigation

In USDAW and Wilson v WW Realisation 1 Ltd (in liquidation), Ethel Austin Ltd and Secretary of State for Business Innovation an Skills (Case C-80/14), the European Court decided that, for the purposes of compulsory information and consultation on collective redundancies under the EU Collective Redundancies Directive 98/59 (and also s 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 (TULRe(C)A 1992)), where the obligation arises where 20 or more employees are to be dismissed at any one “establishment”, the word “establishment” means the unit which the workers made redundant are assigned to carry out their duties, rather than the organisation as a whole.

The court has confirmed this interpretation in two further cases, Lyttle v Bluebird UK Bidco 2 Limited (Case C-182/13) and Cañas v Nexea Gestión Documental SA, Fondo de Garantía Salarial (Case C-392/13)

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

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde Co strengthens energy transition and construction offering with hire of Suriya Ashok

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit appoints rare dual-qualified lawyer to expand Anglo-French private wealth expertise

NEWS
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

back-to-top-scroll