Managing employees/workers
In Mackie v Aberdeen City Council [2006] CSIH 36, the Court of Session holds that there was no TUPE transfer when a private-sector employee working on a project for a local authority was subsequently offered a job in-house, despite a letter from the local authority indicating that a transfer had taken place.
In Bolton School v Evans [2007] IRLR 140 CA, the Court of Appeal has held that protection against a detriment for making a protected disclosure does not extend to dismissal for conduct that is designed to demonstrate that the belief in the wrongdoing is reasonable.
In Adeneler and others v Ellinikos Organismos Galaktos [2006] IRLR 716 the European Court of Justice has held that the objective reasons justifying the use of successive fixed-term contracts must relate to the particular employment in question.
In The Print Factory (London) 1991 Ltd v Millam EAT/0253/06, the Employment Appeal Tribunal holds that a TUPE transfer could not be inferred from the fact that, after an acquisition of shares, the holding company exercised management control of the subsidiary.
In McLean v Rainbow Homeloans Ltd [2007] IRLR 14 EAT, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has held that an employee was unfairly dismissed for asserting a statutory right when he refused to work extra hours that would have been a breach of the Working Time Regulations 1998.
On 7 September 2006, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled that government guidelines accompanying the UK's Working Time Regulations are liable to render the right of workers to daily and weekly rest periods meaningless because they do not oblige employers to ensure that workers actually take the minimum rest periods.
In G4S Justice Services (UK) Ltd v Anstey and others [2006] IRLR 588 EAT, the Employment Appeal Tribunal holds that employees dismissed for gross misconduct prior to a TUPE transfer, but whose appeals were subsequently upheld, were employed "immediately before" the transfer, with the result that their employment transferred.
In Mohmed v West Coast Trains Ltd EAT/0682/06, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has given the first appellate decision on religious discrimination.
In ABC News Intercontinental Inc v Gizbert EAT/0160/06, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has held that there was sufficient mutuality of obligation for a contract of employment to exist where an individual had an implied duty to consider in good faith whether to accept or refuse work.
Legislation protecting whistleblowers was introduced seven years ago. This article reviews the legislation and considers some of the substantial body of case law arising out of it. It also looks at the components of an effective whistleblowing policy.
Employment law cases: HR and legal information and guidance relating to managing employees/workers.