Collective Redundancy Consultation

Employers should be aware of the potentially serious financial consequences of failing to consult when making collective redundancies.

If an employer is proposing to make redundant 20 or more employees at one establishment within a period of 90 days or less, the collective consultation provisions of Section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 (TULRCA) come into play. Where the employer is proposing to dismiss 100 or more employees, the consultation period must be at least 90 days; otherwise it must be at least 30 days. Failure to consult with the appropriate representatives of affected employees can lead to a protective award requiring the employer to pay each affected employee 90 days’ pay. Even if the obligation to consult is for a minimum 30 day period, a serious breach of the requirement can result in employees being granted a 90 day protective award.

Genuine efforts to consult must be made – merely keeping employees informed does not fulfil this duty. Consultation of the required duration must take place before any employees are given redundancy notices. Consultation must be meaningful, with a view to reaching an agreement. If the decision to dismiss employees has already been taken, it effectively compromises the consultation process.

In addition, in a collective redundancy situation, the employer has a statutory duty to notify the Secretary of State for the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills before giving notice to terminate an employee’s contract. If an employer fails to give the required notification, the Secretary of State may institute legal proceedings that could lead, on summary conviction, to a fine of up to £5,000.

The obligation to consult over avoiding proposed redundancies extends to consultations over the reasons for the closure of a business. Where it is recognised that dismissals will inevitably, or almost inevitably, result from closure, dismissals are proposed at the point when the closure of the business is proposed. Where closure and dismissals are inextricably linked, the duty to consult over the reasons for the closure arises.

Collective consultation does not replace the need to consult with individuals who may be made redundant in order for any subsequent dismissal to be fair.

It is important that employers are aware of this requirement to consult at an early stage in the decision-making process. Making employees redundant always requires care and advice should be sought as soon as redundancies are contemplated. Restructuring a business, even where staff may not actually leave your employment, also carries with it potential risks. Care must always be taken where fundamental changes are made to employees’ jobs. We can help ensure that a proposed redundancy programme or the restructuring of your business is carried out with the minimum risk of unanticipated financial consequences.

Contact us if you would like advice on any of the issues raised.
View my profile
Louise Attrup
Executive Partner
T: 01727 735663 (DDI)
E:  
The contents of this article are intended for general information purposes only and shall not be deemed to be, or constitute legal advice. We cannot accept responsibility for any loss as a result of acts or omissions taken in respect of this article.

Latest News

A recent case ( Whitham v Club 24 Ltd. t/a Ventura ) sheds further light o...
A consultation on ways of making it easier for social housing providers t...
HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) will be targeting 6,000 Swiss bank accounts ...
There has recently been a further case on long-term sickness and a worker&...
Creating a commercial database and keeping it up to date is an expensive b...
When a supplier to a marquee company was not paid for goods it had supplie...
The Supreme Court has denied HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) the right of ap...
Under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (now superseded by the Equ...
HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) have announced that the Mortgage Verificatio...
The Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) (Amendment) Regu...
The Bribery Act 2010 came into force on 1 July 2011. Under Section 2 of ...
In Williamson & Soden Solicitors v Briars , the Employment Appeal T...
HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) have announced that, from 1 January 2012, su...
The Forum of Private Business (FPB) has reported a noticeable increase in ...
It is common for service charges to be paid ‘on account’ of th...
There are generally strict time limits that apply when presenting a claim ...
The penalties for engaging in anti-competitive behaviour are very substant...
The Government is proposing to integrate the operation of the Income Tax a...
When an elderly woman passed away, her daughter, who was her personal repr...
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has issued for consultation proposals for in...
In July, the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) announced that it...
When one business uses the trade marks of another, an action may be able t...
Company liquidations have edged up in the first quarter of 2011, with 4,12...
Every year the firm's Christmas party presents employees with the chance t...
If you are used to taking part of your company income by way of dividends ...
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has published provisional fatal inj...
When does a commercial property become vacant under a lease agreement? Thi...
  Luke Tucker Harrison, Senior Associate Solicitor in Debenhams Otta...
An advertising and media company run by a Mr Casey sought to register the ...
A recent survey of businesses carried out by the Institute of Chartered Ac...
Following its Resolving Workplace Disputes consultation and the Red Tape C...
Operators of Amusement With Prizes (AWP) machines who receive VAT refunds ...
Under the Agency Workers Regulations 2010 (AWR), which came into force o...
MoneySavingExpert.com (MSE) founder Martin Lewis has won summary judgment...
A developer who completely demolished a property when he only had permissi...
Two companies have been fined a total of £450,000 and ordered to pay...
The law relating to the fiduciary duties of directors is stricter than man...
News that HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) are to create a dedicated team of ...
The Supreme Court has handed down its decision in a case concerning the em...
On 1 October 2011, changes to the Housing Grants, Construction and Regene...
Following Lord Justice Jackson’s report on his review of civil litig...
As reported previously, the Working Time Regulations 1998 (WTR) as they ...
A covenant can either represent a commitment to do something or a commitme...
Readers are reminded that an application to reclaim VAT incurred in anothe...
Employers are reminded that new National Minimum Wage (NMW) rates came int...
When a licensing application cannot be heard because insufficient informat...
The Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) (Amendment) Regu...
Earlier this year, the Government published a consultation document entitl...
The Government is calling on businesses to have their say in the latest ...
An employee wishing to bring a claim of unfair dismissal must do so before...
HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) have won a major battle in the Supreme Court...