TUPE and office closure

incus432

Jarndyce wrote: »

Buit if you are asking whether any detriment renders an alternative job offer unsuitable then the answer is no.

Not necessary to pore too much. This case says answer yes if material detriment.

" The change in working conditions must be to the material detriment of the employee. “Detriment” should be construed from a subjective point of view ... In other words, the Tribunal should have considered the impact of the proposed change from the employee’s point of view. The questions that ought to have been asked were whether the employee regarded the factors such as disruption to childcare and a longer journey, as detrimental and, if so, whether that was a reasonable position for the employee to adopt."

Jarndyce

Ah well, good luck with that then :silenced:

LittleVoice

Who knows what the SHAs will change into eventually? Though it's good to be prepared, I think there will be (and I think have been) many changes to how things will operate compared with what it looks like today.

SarEl

Jarndyce wrote: »

Ah well, good luck with that then :silenced:

I agree entirely. In the first place you are constructing a legal argument for a case you do not have on the basis of a change that has not happened. EAT rulings are very specific - and potted law guides are not the actual case law. You have not a clue if the specific circumstances of the case will apply to you because nothing has happened and nothing will happen for 12 - 18 months. I would sriously suggest that you give it up and wait and see - if you carry on at this rate you will be nigh on dead with the stress by the time they actually do something!

incus432

Ok thanks for the advice folks. Will consult Union legal advice later

Jarndyce

incus432 wrote: »

Ok thanks for the advice folks. Will consult Union legal advice later

Advice on what? Nothing has happened yet!