Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+

Personnel Today

Register
Log in
Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+

Case lawEmployment lawEmployment tribunalsPay & benefitsPay settlements

Case of the week: Anderson and others v London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority

by Ben Gomer 18 Oct 2012
by Ben Gomer 18 Oct 2012

Anderson and others v London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority

FACTS

The case relates to a term in a pay and conditions agreement between the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority and recognised trade unions. The July 2007 collective agreement provided:

“On 01/04/09 pay will be increased by 2.5% or by the National Joint Council (NJC) for Local Government services settlement plus any uplift required to ensure general pay increases for the period 2007-09 are 1% above the NJC settlements for the same period.”

Prior to the collective agreement, pay for the authority’s workers had followed those agreed by the NJC for Local Government Services. In 2007, it was necessary to make higher pay awards to give effect to changes to terms and conditions. Negotiations resulted in the collective agreement.

The claimants brought claims for unauthorised deductions from wages in respect of the difference between the 2.5% pay increase that they alleged was due and the 1.575% that was in fact paid from April 2009.

DECISION

The employment tribunal concluded that the pay deal was not apt for incorporation in contracts of employment. The local authority was entitled to pay the lesser of the two options for calculating pay increases because the collective agreement was silent as to which would prevail.

The claimants appealed to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT).

The EAT held that the agreement between the unions and the authority to fix a pay increase by reference to the NJC agreement was sufficiently certain to give rise to a contract. The employment tribunal also erred in concluding that the agreement for a pay increase in 2009 did not have contractual effect because it contained two alternative methods of calculating the increase without giving precedence to either.

The EAT concluded that each option was clear and unambiguous and it was clear that it was for the paying party, the authority, to choose between the two. They were not contractually obliged to pay 2.5%, or whichever alternative would give the higher increase.

IMPLICATIONS

In this case, the ultimate result was in the employer’s favour. However, the case highlights the fact that, when agreeing financial arrangements, and in particular pay deals, the contractual documentation needs to be as clear and unambiguous as possible.

This may mean having difficult negotiations up front, but it will lessen the risk of subsequent expensive litigation. However, it is entirely possible for an agreement to provide for alternative measures of calculation of a pay award or other sum.

Sign up to our weekly round-up of HR news and guidance

Receive the Personnel Today Direct e-newsletter every Wednesday

OptOut
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Ben Gomer, partner, DLA Piper

XpertHR FAQs on contracts of employment and collective agreements

  • What are incorporated terms and are they legally binding?
  • Is an employer obliged to stick to the terms of a collective agreement?
  • When will a term agreed through a collective process be binding on individual employees?

Ben Gomer

previous post
John Philpott on the latest ONS labour market data: mini-jobs, maximum confusion
next post
Changes to harassment law ‘will not benefit employers’

You may also like

Living wage pushes up spring pay settlements

2 Jul 2025

Government publishes ‘roadmap’ for Employment Rights Bill

2 Jul 2025

Why bosses must set pay independently

2 Jul 2025

Reforming paternity leave could benefit UK by £13bn...

30 Jun 2025

Employers’ duty of care: keeping workers safe in...

27 Jun 2025

Bank of England says NIC rise is dampening...

27 Jun 2025

When will the Employment Rights Bill become law?

26 Jun 2025

Graduate pay versus the living wage: an HR...

25 Jun 2025

Pay awards remain ‘cautious’ in uncertain economy

25 Jun 2025

HR manager with ‘messy’ work loses discrimination case

25 Jun 2025

  • Empowering working parents and productivity during the summer holidays SPONSORED | Businesses play a...Read more
  • AI is here. Your workforce should be ready. SPONSORED | From content creation...Read more

Personnel Today Jobs
 

Search Jobs

PERSONNEL TODAY

About us
Contact us
Browse all HR topics
Email newsletters
Content feeds
Cookies policy
Privacy policy
Terms and conditions

JOBS

Personnel Today Jobs
Post a job
Why advertise with us?

EVENTS & PRODUCTS

The Personnel Today Awards
The RAD Awards
Employee Benefits
Forum for Expatriate Management
OHW+
Whatmedia

ADVERTISING & PR

Advertising opportunities
Features list 2025

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Linkedin


© 2011 - 2025 DVV Media International Ltd

Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+