Monthly Employment Local Government Newsletter - February 2014 - DAC Beachcroft

Monthly Employment Local Government Newsletter - February 2014's Tags

Tags related to this article

Monthly Employment Local Government Newsletter - February 2014

Published 3 February 2014

It might be grey and dull outside but it's been lively in employment law this month. We've already alerted you to the fact that the Woolworths collective redundancy case, which looks at what constitutes an establishment for the purposes of collective consultation, has been referred to the ECJ. If you missed our alert click here. On the issue of restructuring, the new Collective Redundancies and TUPE Regulations largely came into force on Friday. While not as far reaching as we first thought there are some significant changes which we highlight below.



Muslim chaplain not indirectly discriminated against by length of service pay criterion

In this case the EAT considered whether a Muslim prison chaplain had been indirectly discriminated against because of his religion or race in respect of his pay.

Read more


Flexible working

New regime not coming in this April, but draft ACAS Code and Guide published

The government has confirmed that the extended right to request flexible working will not be brought in this April. They have not yet said when the change will be implemented.

Read more


Fixed term contracts

Expiry of FTC's did not count for collective redundancy consultation purposes

This case looks at the issue of whether the dismissal of fixed-term employees on the expiry of their contracts was a redundancy or not, and therefore whether the collective consultation obligations applied to them.

Read more



New Regulations and BIS guidance in force from 31 January

The majority of the Collective Redundancies and Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) (Amendment) Regulations 2014 came into force on 31 January 2014.

Read more



Emails to different people about the same topic amounted to a qualifying disclosure

This case looked at the issue of whether emails addressed to different recipients about the same issue amounted to a protected disclosures.

Read More


< Back to articles