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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll