header-logo header-logo

Union redundancy victory

13 May 2010
Issue: 7417 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

The government acted unlawfully when it introduced a new civil service redundancy scheme without consulting trade unions, the high court has ruled.

The Public and Commercial Services union (PCS) launched a judicial review after the government revised the Civil Service Compensation Scheme (CSCS) with a view to saving £500m over three years. The changes, which affected payments and pensions, were due to come into force on 1 April 2010.

Delivering judgment in R (on the application of PCS) v Minister for the Civil Service, Sales J quashed the amended CSCS on the grounds the government failed to obtain the union’s consent, as required by the Superannuation Act 1972, s 2(3).

The PCS claimed the amendments deprived its members of accrued rights in respect of redundancy and early retirement. Its members took industrial action.

The background to the changes, Sales J said, was the “growing cost of pension provision as life expectation increases...constraints upon the public finances in current circumstances and a desire on the part of the government to reduce the costs of redundancy through restructuring of government departments”.

Richard Arthur, head of trade union law at Thompsons Solicitors, says: “The law says that the government can’t change redundancy rights which have already accrued for civil servants unless the unions agree...PCS did not agree to the new scheme and so it was found to be unlawful.”
 

Issue: 7417 / Categories: Legal News
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
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
In NLJ this week, Bea Rossetto of the National Pro Bono Centre marks Pro Bono Week by urging lawyers to recognise the emotional toll of pro bono work
Can a lease legally last only days—or even hours? Professor Mark Pawlowski of the University of Greenwich explores the question in this week's NLJ
RFC Seraing v FIFA, in which the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) reaffirmed that awards by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) may be reviewed by EU courts on public-policy grounds, is under examination in this week's NLJ by Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law, Zurich
back-to-top-scroll