header-logo header-logo

Where next for ‘fire & rehire’?

07 June 2024 / Clare Fletcher
Issue: 8074 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Employment , Tribunals
printer mail-detail
176263
Clare Fletcher looks into the Tesco ‘retained pay’ case & ponders how Labour in government might treat the issue
  • The Tesco ‘retained pay’ case could have significant implications for employees at Tesco, and employers who seek to harmonise their employees’ contractual terms.
  • The new code of practice for fire and rehire may have changed the scenario in the Tesco case in various ways.
  • Looks beyond 4 July, and considers how a Labour government might overhaul the law surrounding fire and rehire.

‘Fire and rehire’ is a contractual mechanism for implementing contentious changes to employees’ terms and conditions. It has been recognised and utilised in various scenarios for many years, but has come under greater scrutiny following a number of recent high-profile instances. This has resulted in both a legal challenge which reached the UK’s highest court in April, and a new statutory code of practice due to come into force in July. This article considers the implications of these developments, and what the future holds for fire and rehire.

In court

On

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

Bloomsbury Square Employment Law—Donna Clancy

Bloomsbury Square Employment Law—Donna Clancy

Employment law team strengthened with partner appointment

mfg Solicitors—Matt Smith

mfg Solicitors—Matt Smith

Corporate solicitor joins as partner in Birmingham

Freeths—Joe Lythgoe

Freeths—Joe Lythgoe

Corporate director with expertise in creative industries joins mergers and acquisitions team

NEWS
The High Court’s decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys has thrown the careers of experienced CILEX litigators into jeopardy, warns Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers in NLJ this week
Sir Brian Leveson’s claim that there is ‘no right to jury trial’ erects a constitutional straw man, argues Professor Graham Zellick KC in NLJ this week. He argues that Leveson dismantles a position almost no-one truly holds, and thereby obscures the deeper issue: the jury’s place within the UK’s constitutional tradition
Why have private prosecutions surged despite limited data? Niall Hearty of Rahman Ravelli explores their rise in this week's NLJ 
The public law team at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer surveys significant recent human rights and judicial review rulings in this week's NLJ
In this week's NLJ, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley examines how debarring orders, while attractive to claimants seeking swift resolution, can complicate trials—most notably in fraud cases requiring ‘particularly cogent’ proof
back-to-top-scroll