Policy News Journal - 2016-17

The Chartered Institute of Payroll Professionals ……………………………………………………………Policy News Journal

CJEU did say in the Bear Scotland case that it is for the national court to assess the link between the various components which make up the total remuneration of the worker and that assessment must be carried out on the basis of an average over a reference period which is judged to be representative - leaving it somewhat open to interpretation. We remain hopeful that The Department for Business, Innovation & Skills (BIS) will be in a position to develop long awaited guidance once the outcome of further cases are decided later in the year.

The CIPP run a practical half day course which includes an overview of the legal framework that governs holiday pay and entitlement, as well as worked exercises to explore the calculations thoroughly. This course will always include the most up to date information to account for ongoing case law. Visit the training area of our website for full details.

Back to Contents

Acas Early Conciliation: what is a 'month'? 15 April 2016

When the time limit for an employment tribunal claim is extended by a month (under s207B ERA 1996) after Acas Early Conciliation, does the extension run following the 'corresponding date' rule (e.g. from 30th June to 30th July)?

Yes, held the EAT in Tanveer v East London Bus and Coach Company Limited , dismissing the Claimant's appeal against a decision barring his unfair dismissal claim as out of time.

The Claimant was dismissed on 20th March 2015, he went to ACAS on 18th June 2015 and an Early Conciliation 'EC' Certificate was issued on 30th June 2015 ('Day B' in Section 207B ERA). The Claimant's solicitors presented the Claim Form on 31st July 2015, and the unfair dismissal claim was dismissed by the employment tribunal as one day late, but time was extended for a discrimination claim. The appeal turned on the application of the 'corresponding date' rule to Section 207B, which extends time for a claim by one month after Day B. The rule meant that time runs from the date in question (the issue of the EC certificate) to the corresponding date in the following month (i.e. 30th June to 30th July), or the last day in a shorter month, e.g. 31st May to 30th June. The EAT followed as binding the House of Lords decision in Dodds v Walker , a tenancy case, but also noted that this interpretation made for clarity and simplicity. 'One month after Day B' did not mean one month from "in this case" 1st July. As Lord Diplock said in Dodds "all that the calculator has to do is mark in his diary the corresponding date in the appropriate subsequent month"•

With thanks to Daniel Barnett’s employment law bulletin which provided the details of this case.

Back to Contents

Taxpayer pays £1.5m in Protective Awards case 25 April 2016

The BBC has reported that 374 employees, who were made redundant with just one day’s notice when the company went into administration, have each been given the equivalent of eight weeks' wages in compensation.

Tullis Russell Papermakers, based at Markinch in Fife, went into administration in April 2015. Lawyers said that despite the company directors being under an obligation to provide employees with at least 45 days' notice - as more than 100 workers were losing their jobs - this was ignored, meaning each employee was entitled to sue for compensation.

However, acting alone would have meant each affected worker lodging "an extremely complex" and expensive employment tribunal claim, so they made a joint bid.

David Martyn, a senior employment lawyer at Thompsons, the firm that represented the workers, said:

"The more notice the workforce have to prepare for these devastating changes, the better they can organise their financial responsibilities to soften the blow. This award of compensation will be paid by UK administration service.


Page 79

of 588

Made with FlippingBook - Online magazine maker