Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
    • Advertise
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Equality, diversity and inclusion
    • 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
    • OHW Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • XpertHR
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Pricing
    • Free trial
    • Subscribe
    • XpertHR USA
  • Webinars
  • OHW+

Personnel Today

Register
Log in
Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
    • Advertise
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Equality, diversity and inclusion
    • 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
    • OHW Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • XpertHR
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Pricing
    • Free trial
    • Subscribe
    • XpertHR USA
  • Webinars
  • OHW+

Employment lawCase lawTUPE

Sweetin v Coral Racing

by Personnel Today 12 Jul 2006
by Personnel Today 12 Jul 2006

Sweetin v Coral Racing
Employment Appeal Tribunal

TUPE: compensation for failure to consult

Ms Sweetin worked for Toals, a bookmaker, at its shop in Stranraer, Scotland. Under her contract of employment, she was employed as a clerk, but she occasionally performed deputy manager duties when the manager was absent. On 29 September 2003, the Toals business where Sweetin worked was transferred to Coral Racing.

After the transfer, a number of meetings took place between Sweetin and Coral Racing’s representatives at which the post of deputy manager was discussed. Sweetin was not told that she could not be deputy manager, but assumed this was the case.

On 19 November 2003, Sweetin pointed out, for the first time, that she considered herself to have been deputy manager when Toals had been running the business, and this was subsequently confirmed (in writing) by Toals.

The next day, a representative of Coral Racing went to see Sweetin, but she had been certified as unfit for work. She never returned and by letter dated 3 December 2003 she resigned, stating she had lost all trust and confidence in Coral Racing’s management.

Duty to inform

Sweetin claimed constructive unfair dismissal, sex discrimination and a failure to comply with Regulation 10 of TUPE in respect of the duty to inform and consult representatives before a TUPE transfer.

The tribunal dismissed her unfair constructive dismissal and sex discrimination claims, but held that Coral Racing had failed to inform and consult as required by TUPE.

They made an award of six weeks’ pay in respect of that failure. Sweetin appealed to the EAT against the limiting of the compensation to only
six weeks’ pay.

The EAT held that tribunals should adopt the same approach to assessing compensation for a failure to consult under TUPE 1981 Regulations that they adopt when assessing the amount of a protective award for failure to consult under the collective redundancy consultation provisions in section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992.

Compensation in such cases is punitive rather than compensatory.

Key points

Compensation for failure to inform and consult on a TUPE transfer is intended to punish the employer for its default and should be at the maximum level of 13 weeks’ pay per employee unless there are mitigating circumstances.

Tribunals must follow the guidelines in Susie Radin v GMB and others. Where there has been no consultation at all, the proper approach is to start with the maximum amount of 13 times a week’s pay for each employee (as compensation for failure to consult under TUPE) and then reduce it by such amount as the tribunal considers “just and equitable”.

The EAT also ruled that actual loss suffered by an employee can be taken into account.

What you should do

Be aware that while the failure to consult in redundancy cases appears more serious (no job) than in a TUPE transfer (job secure), the legislation treats both equally seriously. Mistakes in either arena are likely to prove costly.

Appreciate the significance of this case for transferors. While currently the liability for a transferor’s failure to consult transfers under TUPE (the 1981 Regulations) to the transferee, the position changes from 6 April under the new TUPE (the 2006 Regulations). From this date, the transferor and transferee may be held jointly liable to pay any award of compensation for a failure by the transferor to comply with its information and consultation requirements.

Check carefully the indemnities and warranties in any transfer agreement to ensure they deal adequately with the risk of liability for failing to consult.

Avatar
Personnel Today

previous post
Crown Prosecution Service denies racism claim
next post
Work and pensions secretary, John Hutton, confident that job cuts at Department for Work and Pensions will not affect service delivery

You may also like

Long Covid: what tribunal’s disability ruling means for...

23 Jun 2022

Oxford study highlights best gig economy firms to...

9 Jun 2022

Tesco appeal against fire and rehire ban to...

8 Jun 2022

Bank holidays: six things employers need to know

5 Jun 2022

Frewer v Google: How it’s getting harder to...

30 May 2022

P&O Ferries boss denies reputational damage after mass...

27 May 2022

Employers lack data to make IR35 worker status...

25 May 2022

Maternity leave: Cost of living crisis highlights need...

25 May 2022

One in five employers planning ‘no jab no...

19 May 2022

MP demands timeline on carer’s leave legislation

13 May 2022
  • NSPCC revamps its learning strategy with child wellbeing at its heart PROMOTED | The NSPCC’s mission is to prevent abuse and neglect...Read more
  • Diversity versus inclusion: Why the difference matters PROMOTED | It’s possible for an environment to be diverse, but not inclusive...Read more
  • Five steps for organisations across the globe to become more skills-driven PROMOTED | The shift in the world of work has been felt across the globe...Read more
  • The future of workforce development PROMOTED | Northumbria University and partners share insight...Read more
  • Strathclyde Business School expands its Degree Apprenticeship offer in England PROMOTED | The University of Strathclyde is expanding its programmes...Read more
  • The Search for Talent: Six Major Employer Pitfalls PROMOTED | The Great Resignation continues unabated...Read more
  • Navigating the widening “Skills Confidence Gap” in 2022, and beyond PROMOTED | Cornerstone OnDemand conducted a global study...Read more
  • Apprenticeships are the solution to your recruitment problems PROMOTED | Apprenticeships have the pulling power...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 2022

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Linkedin


© 2011 - 2022 DVV Media International Ltd

Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
    • Advertise
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Equality, diversity and inclusion
    • 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
    • OHW Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • XpertHR
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Pricing
    • Free trial
    • Subscribe
    • XpertHR USA
  • Webinars
  • OHW+