The employer in this tribunal case had to deal with the common scenario of a transferred employee taking exception to being required to stick more strictly to contractual working hours.
This employment tribunal held that a heating engineer whose new employer had different types of client and required him to do more of his own administration work did not suffer substantial changes to his working conditions to his material detriment after a TUPE transfer.
David Malamatenios is a partner and Colin Makin, Sandra Martins, Melissa Powys- Rodrigues and Linda Quinn are associates at Colman Coyle Solicitors. They round up the latest rulings.
The Advocate General has taken the view that the TUPE Regulations can be given a "dynamic" interpretation, suggesting that UK law can permit the survival after transfer of a pay increase negotiated under a collective agreement signed by the transferor before the transfer.
In The Manchester College v Hazel and another EAT/0642/11 & EAT/0136/12, the EAT upheld a ruling by the employment tribunal that dismissals as a result of post-TUPE-transfer harmonisation were automatically unfair because they did not constitute an ETO reason "entailing changes in the workforce".
Definition from the XpertHR glossary.
HR and legal information and guidance relating to TUPE.