header-logo header-logo

20 September 2013 / John McMullen
Issue: 7576 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Trigger movements

istock_000001422490medium

John McMullen investigates the changing landscape of collective redundancy law

As it is currently drafted, the obligation to inform and consult under s 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 (TULR(C)A) is engaged when 20 or more redundancies are proposed “at one establishment” within a period of 90 days or less. The question is whether this threshold applies to 20 or more redundancies across the entire business, or within a smaller unit within the business, for the obligation to be triggered. If it is the latter, workers in those smaller business units may lose out on information and consultation rights.

EU law

To understand this provision it is necessary to outline the options available to member states when implementing the Collective Redundancies Directive (98/59/EC). Under Art 1(1)(a) of the Directive, member states can chose from one of two definitions of “collective redundancy”. These are as follows.

Option one

The dismissal, over a period of at least 30 days of:

  • 10 workers in an establishment with 21 to 99 workers;
  • 10%
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’

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
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
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
back-to-top-scroll