-
- Type:
- Employment law cases
Helen Samuel, associate solicitor and Anna Bridges, associate solicitor, at Addleshaw Goddard, detail the latest rulings.
-
- Date:
- 1 June 2010
- Type:
- Employment law cases
In Malone and others v British Airways plc [2010] IRLR 431 HC, the High Court held that the provisions of a collective agreement purporting to set "minimum" cabin crew numbers for different routes and types of craft were not incorporated into individual employees' contracts of employment. In any event, an injunction would not be granted to restrain the employer from reducing cabin crew numbers below the levels specified, and, even if there had been a breach of contract, any award for damages would be for a nominal amount only.
-
- Date:
- 13 April 2010
- Type:
- Employment law cases
In Bateman and others v Asda Stores Ltd EAT/0221/09, the EAT held that the employer was entitled to change its employees' pay arrangements without their consent because it had reserved a clear contractual right to make unilateral variations to their terms and conditions of employment.
-
- Type:
- Contract clauses
A model contract clause giving an employer a specific right to change an employee's working hours.
-
- Type:
- Contract clauses
A model contract clause in order to provide a general right to vary an employees' contractual terms.
-
- Type:
- Contract clauses
A model contract clause to reserve the right to change an employee's place of work.
-
- Type:
- Employment law cases
Susannah Jarvis (associate) and Kate Williams (professional support lawyer), Addleshaw Goddard, analyse important recent rulings.
-
- Type:
- FAQs
-
- Date:
- 11 November 2009
- Type:
- Employment law cases
In Tapere v South London and Maudsley NHS Trust EAT/0410/08, the EAT held that, in requiring a transferred employee to move to a location outside the scope of the mobility clause in her original contract of employment with the transferor, the transferee had acted in fundamental breach of contract. The employee's subsequent resignation therefore amounted to a constructive dismissal. Further, the transferee's attempt to move her place of work amounted to a substantial change in her working conditions to her material detriment. She was, therefore, also entitled to be treated as having been dismissed under reg.4(9) of the TUPE Regulations.
-
- Type:
- FAQs