Employment Contract Alteration

jammie-dodger_4

Hi Guys,

My (part-time) employer, merged with with another company recently and subsequently has re-written our contracts of employment as part of the "harmonisation" process for merging the two companies. Unfortunately this means that the new contract of employment will no longer include company sick pay and will move over to statutory sick pay with a three-day waiting period along with some other minor changes. There was a consultation process carried out in Novemeber 2006 and I attended a meeting with my general manager to submit my view that I was unhappy with this change and would decline from signing the new contract.

I heard nothing further until I attended work on the 10th of January 2007 when I was told that I must sign the new contract and that the withdrawal of company sick pay was still in place.

I had been off work for two days on the 4th and 5th of January 2007 after suffering from a respiratory virus and have been informed that as the new contract comes into effect on the 1st of January, I would not receive any pay for the two days I was off ill. I informed the company that I would consider signing the new contract for a few days and up until this point have not signed it.

My question is that given the fact that I have not signed the new contract, can I argue that I should be paid for the two sick days on the 4th and 5th of January 2007 as the original contract was still in place? Additionally, I would like to know my rights should I choose not to sign the new contract as I have been led to believe by my employer that this would probably lead to termination of my employment with the company.

I would appreciate any assistance that anyone could offer.

Thanks.

mountainofdebt

I can't remember what it stands for but doesn't something called TUPE come into play when two companies merge which basically means that existing employees can't be offered worse conditions of employment when companies are taken over / merged?

I think you may have to sign the new contract as effectively your employer has changed and so are effectively without a contract.

Do you have legal assistance with your home insurance as they will be able to give you the definitive answer.

firesidemaid

i only have experience of the nhs, but i do not think that this can be correct.

are you a member of a union? i agree with the above, that there at least must be some level/time period of protection of your terms and conditions under the old contract.

i would ring acas - number available from the web - for further advice.

if i find out anything else i will post again.

firesidemaid

http://www.worksmart.org.uk/rights/viewquestion.php?eny=203

i am hoping the above link (or else cut + paste) will work.

it refers to TUPE as the previous poster states - i think it answers your question, in that your old contract details will have to be protected.

let us know what happens;)

pinkfairy1

This wouldn't be a supermarket starting with the letter 'M' would it? :eek:

Pink

jammie-dodger_4

In reply to the last post, afraid it isn't a supermarket chain involved here.

I have discussed the issue with a lawyer specialising in employment law who advised me to raise a grievance on grounds that TUPE regulations were breached.

I also visited the DTI website and found an interesting document at:
http://www.dti.gov.uk/employment/trade-union-rights/tupe/page16289.html

At the bottom of page 18 of that document I found:

Q. Does this freedom to vary contracts permit the transferee employer to harmonise the terms and conditions of the transferred workers to those of the equivalent grades and types of employees he already employs ?

A. No. According to the way the courts have interpreted the Acquired Rights Directive, the desire to achieve "harmonisation" is by reason of the transfer itself. It cannot therefore constitute "an ETO reason connected with a transfer entailing changes in the workforce."

Therefore I have written an email quoting the above and lodged my objection to all alterations to the terms and conditions of our employment, along with a complaint of with holding company sick pay that is contractually owed.

Unfortunately it appears that everyone else had signed their contracts so I'm not sure where they stand in this.

I will keep you updated and many thanks to all of you for your assistance, if you hadn't pointed me in the right direction then I would probably have let the issue go.

firesidemaid

good for you!

it is amazing how many companies or employers either don't know anything about employment law - or they hope no-one else does.

i'm assuming any contracts signed were invalid or suchlike.

please do let us know how it goes:T

silvercar

when I worked in further education there were some older members of staff who were still on a very old contract as they had declined to accept the new contract. This was about 15 years after the new contract was introduced. I think the old contract offered a better pension and better annual leave. They did miss out on a lot of pay rises as these were only given to people on the new contract. Every few years there was an incentive offered to them to make them take up the new contracts but some never obliged.

eamon

Hi jammie-dodger

Sorry to be the bringer of bad vibes and I hope that i'm incorrect anyway........
Lots of employers get the law incorrect and the same applies to employees as well. It is possible for your employer to vary your contract without your permission its all down to if they have followed best practice and the size of the organisation(s) involved. Typically if you eventually finish up at an Industrial Tribunal then they allow a small organisation with few resources more leeway in the process as opposed to a much larger organisation where they would expect a more professional approach. Size can matter. Additionally your continued presence at work could be construed as an acceptance of the new terms & conditions.

TUPE regulations also might not be relevant as you have said the two organisations merged. TUPE usually happens/applies when for example a local authority privatises part of its activities/services and the new service provider elects to take on the affected people on their existing terms of employment and I think this protection lasts 12months.

From a personal point of view I hope you get what you want. I've had plenty of experience of being shafted by employers and in my opinion if an employer doesn't pay a pension or sick pay then are they really worth working for!? (small business's are excluded from my rant unless they make tonnes of profit) You can bet your life that the managers/directors etc are not getting screwed like this.

yours

Eamon

MORE-MONEY_2

I work for a supermarket and they were taken over last february. In the letter I got it said if you didnt accept the new contract then this will be seen as resignation.

Its always best to get the facts and to know your rights. Employment contracts are not worth the paper they are written on - like most contracts.