Mencap has appealed an Employment Tribunal case taken by UNISON relating to back pay for care staff undertaking sleep-ins. The appeal date has not yet been set.
Back to Contents
Glasgow City Council to pay up following equal pay victory 27 June 2017
UNISON Scotland has won an equal pay victory which will affect thousands of low-paid workers in Glasgow.
Women in Glasgow had been excluded from sizeable bonuses for many years. UNISON argued that while the claimants had been unfairly discriminated against before the new system was introduced, the council’s decision to continue the unequal pay was also discriminatory as it excluded women claimants from pay protection. The Court of Session judgement (31 May 2017) will be welcome news to the 6,000 claimants of which UNISON – Scotland’s largest public service union – represents 1,400 claimants. Many have equal pay claims dating back to 2006. The Court of Session has also been asked to consider whether the current council pay system is a valid pay scheme (see last paragraph below).
Mike Kirby, UNISON’s Scottish Secretary, said:
“The pay protection win is great news. The way Glasgow rates and pays workers has been the source of conflict and division for ten years. These women have already waited long enough to receive the pay they have worked hard for and deserve. It’s time for Glasgow City Council to do the right thing and pay up on equal pay.”
Suzanne Craig, UNISON’s legal officer, said:
“I am delighted that the Court of Session has ruled in favour of our women members. It also sends a clear message to Glasgow City Council that it cannot continue to defend these discriminatory practices any longer. This decision will deliver money for women who should have been paid more before single status and were then excluded from pay protection after single status.” Second appeal refused UNISON has been waiting for the Court of Session’s judgement in a second appeal which concerns UNISON’s challenge to the Glasgow City Council’s Workforce, Pay and Benefits Review (WPBR). In 2006, UNISON was not satisfied with the council’s way of measuring the value of jobs. In particular, UNISON objected to the use of different scales, one for core pay and others for non-core pay. UNISON believed that the system made it impossible for employees to know if they were being paid equal pay for equal work, as the law requires.
Employee Benefits has reported that the Court of Session has refused Glasgow City Council’s appeal bid.
Back to Contents
TUPE and Garden Leave 27 June 2017
A senior executive was placed on garden leave. Were the circumstances such that a TUPE transfer enabled him to object to it and terminate his garden leave?
No, held the High Court in ICAP Management Services Ltd v Berry .
Mr Barry worked for ICAP Management Services Ltd, which was a service company for the ICAP Global Banking Business. He gave notice to leave in order to join a competitor, BGB Services (Holdings) Limited. ICAP put him on garden leave. During the garden leave ICAP was the subject of a share sale acquisition by Tullett Prebon plc. Mr Berry notified ICAP that he considered there was a TUPE transfer and purported to object to it under Reg 4(7) of TUPE . That would, by virtue of Reg 4(8), have terminated his contract (and his garden leave) forthwith, releasing him to take up his new employment earlier than would otherwise have been the case. ICAP sued to enforce the garden leave.
The Chartered Institute of Payroll Professionals
Policy News Journal
cipp.org.uk
Page 77 of 516
Made with FlippingBook - Online magazine maker