The power of people analytics – what’s your opinion? Take our 10 minute survey for a chance to win £500.
In Bone v North Essex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (No.2)  IRLR 295 CA, the Court of Appeal upheld an employment tribunal decision that an employer's "deliberate failure" to deal with "a campaign of harassment and bullying" against a trade union member amounted to a detriment because of trade union activities.
The Court of Appeal has held that an employer's failure to deal with antagonism towards a trade union member amounted to a detriment because of trade union activities.
Victoria Bell is managing associate and Gerri Hurst, Carly Mather and Andrew Nealey are associates and Eleanor Cittern is a trainee solicitor at Addleshaw Goddard LLP.
Ceri Hughes, David Parry, and Carly Mather, associates at Addleshaw Goddard, detail the latest rulings.
In Yewdall v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, the EAT holds that the employment tribunal had been correct to dismiss the employee's claim that he had been subjected to a detriment for engaging in trade union activities under s.146 Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 ("TULR(C)A"), as he had not been taking part in trade union activities at the relevant time.
Legislation designed to protect trade union members from being victimised by their employers is flawed and must be changed.
An employer's investigation of the mileage claims of a number of trade union members actively involved in their union's publicity campaign against the employer's withdrawal of essential car user allowances did not amount to unlawful action short of dismissal for the purpose of preventing or deterring them from taking part in trade union activities, holds the EAT in Marshall and others v Hampshire Probation Service.
HR and legal information and guidance relating to protection from detriment in relation to union membership or activities.