Pay and Benefits
|
Hartley and others v King Edward VI College
|
Due to be heard in March 2015
|
Whether sixth-form college teachers who went on strike should have their wages docked at 1/365 of their annual salary (in accordance with the Apportionment Act 1870) or 1/260 reflecting only days when the claimants would be required to work and paid holidays.
|
TUPE
|
Rangers Football Club Ltd (formerly Sevco Scotland Ltd) v Professional Footballers Association Scotland and another
|
EAT – judgment reserved on 13 May 2014
|
Whether a football club in liquidation failed to inform and consult employee representatives about the TUPE transfer of players to the newly created company.
|
Collective Consultation
|
USDAW and Wilson (the ‘Woolworths’ case)
|
ECJ will determine issue later this year [Advocate General's opinion delivered on 5 February 2015]
|
Whether the words "at one establishment" in TULRCA 1992 are to be disregarded for the purposes of any collective redundancy involving 20 or more employees and whether the European Directive requiring collective consultation has direct effect against the Secretary of State.
|
Lyttle and others v Bluebird UK Bidco 2 Ltd
|
ECJ will determine issue later this year [Advocate General's opinion delivered on 5 February 2015]
|
Whether the duty to collectively consult is triggered when 20 or more employees are dismissed at a particular establishment or across the whole of the employer's business, seeking clarification on the meaning of the term "establishment".
|
Balkaya v Kiesel Abbruch and und Recycling Technik GmbH
|
ECJ – application lodged 12 May 2014
|
Whether a member of the board of directors of a limited liability company, interns and trainees should count towards the number of affected workers for the purposes of triggering the obligation to collectively consult in respect of proposed redundancies.
|
University College Union v University of Stirling
|
Supreme Court – Hearing took place in January 2015 (Judgment awaited)
|
Whether the dismissal of fixed-term employees on the expiry of their contracts is a redundancy, or for a "reason relating to them as individuals", in which case there is no duty to collectively consult.
|
United States of America v Nolan
|
Court of Appeal due to hear case on 15 July 2015
|
At what stage is the duty to consult about redundancies triggered? Is it when an employer is proposing to make a strategic business or operational decision that will foreseeably lead to collective redundancies, or only once the employer has made that strategic decision and is proposing consequential redundancies? |