header-logo header-logo

TUPE or not TUPE

14 August 2008
Issue: 7334 / Categories: Legal News , Employment
printer mail-detail

Employment

Employers could be liable for up to six years of unequal pay claims following an employment appeals tribunal ruling.

In Sodexho v Gutridge it was ruled that in cases of unequal pay when an employee is employed by the transferor organisation, the right to equal pay transfers under TUPE to the organisation taking on the member of staff .

Emma Burrows, a partner at Trowers & Hamlin, says: “Employers will need to consider this ruling whenever they take over the provision of a service previously provided by another organisation. It will obviously be very difficult for employers facing such claims taking on employees under TUPE to determine the pay levels of employees who remained at the transferor’s organisation.” She continues: “Employees are able to claim up to six years worth of back payments to make amends for any pay inequality. This could prove to be very expensive.”

Issue: 7334 / Categories: Legal News , Employment
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll