The Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that, where an employer offers an incentive to employees to secure agreement to variation of their contracts, it is reasonable not to offer that benefit as part of an offer of re-engagement following dismissals for failure to agree.
The employer in this case wanted to make a blanket variation to its workforce's contractual notice periods. However, the employer got itself into the difficult position of varying the claimant's notice period, while the rest of the workforce refused the change.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that, when considering whether or not a dismissal for refusing to take a pay cut was fair for "some other substantial reason", the employment tribunal should look at the reasonableness of the employer's decision to dismiss, not whether or not the employee was reasonable in refusing the reduction in wages.
Claire Benson is managing associate and Helen Corbett, Sinead Jones, Helen Ward and Tori O'Neil are associates at Addleshaw Goddard LLP. They round up the latest rulings.
This case demonstrates the importance of employers complying with the terms of contractual staff handbooks and dealing with grievance appeals properly.
This case is a good example of how the terms of a staff handbook that is stated to be non-contractual can still be incorporated into an employee's contract of employment.
In Malone and others v British Airways Plc [2011] IRLR 32 CA, the Court of Appeal held that the provisions of a collective agreement that purported to set "minimum" cabin crew numbers for different routes and types of aircraft were not incorporated into individual employees' contracts of employment. The provisions amounted to a collective undertaking to operate with minimum numbers so as to protect jobs and guard against excessive workloads, and were binding in honour only.
The Supreme Court has held that it was objectively justified to employ teachers on successive fixed-term contracts amounting to nine years in total, and that these contracts were not converted into permanent contracts.
In Lancaster University v University and College Union [2011] IRLR 4 EAT, the EAT held that the university failed to comply with its statutory obligations to consult collectively on the expiry of fixed-term contracts. The tribunal was also entitled to make a protective award of 60 days' pay.