In this case, the tribunal was right to consider that the Claimant had been poorly treated by the employer when it failed to pursue a discussion about alternative roles and to provide the Claimant with a timely right of appeal. The finding of unfair dismissal was therefore upheld.
With thanks to Daniel Barnett’s employment law bulletin for providing a summary of this case.
Back to Contents
Effective Date of Termination 19 January 2018
Where there is a summary dismissal and notice is subsequently given, does that move the effective date of termination ("EDT”) to the end of the notice period?
No, held the EAT in Cosmeceuticals Ltd v Parkin .
The Claimant was the managing director of a manufacturer and distributor of skincare and makeup. The Respondent's board had concerns about her performance and, on the Claimant's return from sabbatical, the Chairman informed her that she could not return to the job. This happened on 1 September 2015. Three days later she was put on garden leave and on 29 September the Chairman wrote to her (for the sake of clarity) to give notice of termination ending on 23 October 2015. The Claimant brought a claim with both parties agreeing that 23 October 2015 was the EDT. The tribunal found that on 1 September the Claimant was told her employment had ended and that constituted communication of the dismissal. However, the tribunal held the EDT fell at the end of the subsequently-given notice period. The EAT held this to be in error. The EDT is a statutory construct under which the date of communication to the employee of summary dismissal is the EDT even if the employer should have given notice but failed to do so. The tribunal had made a factual finding there had been an effective dismissal without notice on 1 September and the employer only subsequently sought to put the Claimant on garden leave and give her notice. The EDT was thus 1 September and that was the relevant date for determination of whether the claim was presented in time.
With thanks to Daniel Barnett’s employment law bulletin for providing a summary of this case.
Back to Contents
£250,000 holiday back-pay paid out to London construction workers 19 January 2018
Workers were getting holiday pay based on 39 hours a week but in reality they often worked around 55 hours because they were compelled to work overtime on Saturdays.
Over 100 construction workers at three high profile projects across London have collectively secured an estimated £250,000 worth of holiday pay after a Unite campaign forced their employer to pay up.
Over 150 construction workers working for Byrne Bros at construction projects including Westfield in White City, The International Quarter in Stratford and 100 Bishopsgate have secured payments of between £400 and £1,000 each with further back payments to follow after the workers joined forces to demand their full holiday entitlement. When the workers first approached Byrne Bros management they were ignored, until construction workers at different sites, backed by Unite, joined forces and commenced a campaign which culminated in a collective grievance. Management then tried to deal with the grievance on an individual basis but workers insisted on a collective remedy to the underpayments. Eventually, because of union pressure, management conceded and Byrne Bros is now in the process of paying every worker what they are rightfully owed, including back pay.
Read the full press release from Unite the Union
The Chartered Institute of Payroll Professionals
Policy News Journal
cipp.org.uk
Page 98 of 516
Made with FlippingBook - Online magazine maker