header-logo header-logo

04 November 2010 / John McMullen
Issue: 7440 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

TUPE or not TUPE

new_image_16_4

Part 2: Collective issues on Tupe Transfers by Dr John McMullen

Under reg 6 of TUPE the transferee must continue the recognition of any independent trade union previously recognised by the transferor in respect of that undertaking or part. That obligation, however, is dependent upon the undertaking or part being transferred retaining a separate identity in the hands of a transferee. The first point to note is reg 6, requiring retention of a separate identity of the undertaking for the purposes of the transfer of representation of employees has different wording from the Acquired Rights Directive.

In contrast with reg 6, Art 6 of the Directive provides for the preservation of representation of employees where the undertaking or business or part of an undertaking or business preserves its autonomy. At first glance it might be thought that the word “identity” in reg 6 should be easily construed in line with “autonomy” but, as the Court of Justice of the European Communities has pointed out in Federación de Servicios Públicos de la UGT (FSP)

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

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers drives further growth in its UK immigration team with new partner Sophie Barrett-Brown

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal invests in next generation of legal talent as specialist litigation practice grows

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips continues momentum in London with arrival of Catrina Smith

NEWS
Restrictions on workplace non-disclosure agreements could make settlements slower, more complex and more expensive when reforms expected in 2027 take effect
Private prosecutors face closer scrutiny under Crown Prosecution Service guidance designed to strengthen accountability and consistency when intervention is requested
Foreign states cannot necessarily claim immunity for cyber operations launched abroad against computers in Britain, following a divided Supreme Court ruling
Defendants who make unsupported complaints about their lawyers risk losing legal aid while confiscation proceedings continue without representation
Lawyers advising Russian clients face different sanctions restrictions across the UK, EU and US, despite their shared objective of increasing pressure on Russia
back-to-top-scroll