The Court of Appeal has held that, where the reason for a TUPE-related dismissal is to continue running a business and to avoid liquidation, this can constitute an economical, technical or organisational (ETO) reason entailing changes in the workforce, meaning that such a dismissal is not automatically unfair.
James Buckle, Gerri Hurst, Joelle Parkinson, Chris McAvoy and Helen Samuel are associate solicitors at Addleshaw Goddard LLP. They round up the latest rulings.
This employment tribunal decision shows that there is nothing to stop a transferee from disciplining a transferred employee who is alleged to have committed misconduct before the transfer.
Practical guidance on dealing with the benefits of employees who transfer to the organisation under TUPE, including the difference between contractual and discretionary benefits; flexible benefit schemes; and the risks if there is no "ETO reason" for varying terms and conditions.
In DLA Piper's case of the week, Ceva Freight (UK) Ltd v Seawell Ltd, the Court of Session provided guidance on what constitutes an "organised grouping of employees" on a service provision change for TUPE purposes.
Additional information on the transfer of undertakings for local authority employers, including the Cabinet Office statement of practice; and Best Value and pensions.
Practical guidance on the law on harmonising contractual terms and conditions following a TUPE transfer, including variation of terms derived from a collective agreement; economic, technical and organisational reasons for variation; and varying terms with employees' consent.
In I Lab Facilities Ltd v Metcalfe and others  IRLR 605 EAT, the EAT held that an employment tribunal had been wrong to uphold claims under reg.13 of TUPE in respect of a failure to inform and consult representatives of employees of that part of an insolvent business that was not sold. The duty to inform and consult arose only in respect of those employees employed in the wholly distinct part of the business that was sold and transferred.
In Shields Automotive Ltd v Langdon and another EAT/0059/12, the EAT held that a protective award of seven weeks' pay in respect of the employer's technical breach of its obligation to consult on a TUPE transfer was too high.
HR and legal information and guidance relating to TUPE.