Every now and then, a case comes along that shatters perceived wisdom and established practice. The “Woolsworths” case (as it has become known) is one of those cases. Up until this point, an employer embarking on a collective redundancy exercise could be fairly confident that the consultation obligations were triggered only if it proposed to dismiss 20 or more employees “at one establishment” within a 90-day period. For multiple site businesses, this threshold was usually applied to each place of work to give some flexibility before hitting this consultation obligation threshold. Breaking new ground, the EAT has now ruled that this approach is wrong. Read on to learn more.
Members-only access
To access the full resource, you must be a member. Already a member? Login to unlock.
Login
Not an ACC member?
Gain access to a comprehensive collection of global resources for in-house counsel
Sign up for a 30-day trial
Region:
United Kingdom
The information in any resource collected in this virtual library should not be construed as legal advice or legal opinion on specific facts and should not be considered representative of the views of its authors, its sponsors, and/or ACC. These resources are not intended as a definitive statement on the subject addressed. Rather, they are intended to serve as a tool providing practical advice and references for the busy in-house practitioner and other readers.