Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


mariefab last won the day on February 12 2014

mariefab had the most liked content!


933 Excellent
  1. You say that the new manager is happy. Does your wife have an agreed start date for her redeployed role?
  2. If you think it would help; print off and show them the relevant legislation below... http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/18/part/IV ...and highlight the part in 42(4) that states... you have the right to complain to an employment tribunal if, because of your refusal to work on Sundays on which the shop is open, your employer— dismisses you, or does something else detrimental to you,
  3. Did you receive a redundancy payment in 2013? If so, was the payment based on 12ish years @ 4 hours per week?
  4. That's what I would expect too. A suggestion for the current issue... You could print copies of: WTR 14(4) http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1998/1833/regulation/14/made TUPE 4(1) http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2006/246/regulation/4/made TUPE 7(1) http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2006/246/regulation/7/made Add a note stating that you believe that deducting £600 for overtaken holiday would be unlawful because your employment is not terminating. Present it to your employer. But, it's up to you how you handle this. You know your employer, I don't. If you think they are just unaware of the legislation; showing it to them might speed things up. The ACAS helpline advice can be a bit hit and miss, so come back if you have any concerns.
  5. They are wrong. A TUPE transfer does not terminate the employment (effectively or otherwise). See TUPE 4(1) below; http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2006/246/regulation/4/made Translation- It's a transfer. At no point does your employment end, it just continues with Company B as if they'd employed you all along. It doesn't matter which terms apply to you. Company A can only deduct the £600 when your employment ends. They can't terminate your employment because they want to deduct payment for the overtaken holiday. That would be automatic unfair dismissal. This *effectively ending your employment* business is nonsense and they should know it.
  6. The only time that a deduction for overtaken holidays can lawfully be made is when the employment terminates. See s.14 of the Working Time Regulations 1998 below, particularly 14(4). http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1998/1833/regulation/14/made Your employment will not terminate when the transfer takes effect - it will continue. That's the single most important purpose of TUPE. So, as far as your holidays are concerned it should be same as if your present employer had just changed the name of the the Company.
  7. Your lawyer is mistaken, not very good at her job and has caused this current problem. After you told her that you'd complained to HMRC and they were investigating she should have kept her mouth shut about it. You would have signed the agreement as it was. If they were subsequently prosecuted and you were a witness the agreement would not have been breached Instead she chose to tip them off. I can only conclude that this is because she doesn't know or understand the legislation covering protected disclosure and feels that HMRC are perfectly happy to have their investgations revealed to the potential defendants. Her job is to advise you about the meaning of the written agreement. It's no part of her remit to worry about what happens to the Respondent after it's signed. In this context *a matter arising from your employment* would be the claims that you are making at the ET, and any other potential employment related claims that you are currently aware of in which you would be the claimant. The HMRC complaint is not a matter arising from your employment. I don't know much about your line of work, but I know that HMRC has regulatory powers. They will investigate and, if appropriate, HMRC will bring claims against your former employer. How do you suppose HMRC (or anyone else for that matter) would view your conduct if, after your lawyer informed your former employer of your complaints, you (a potential witness against them) disclosed to the party under investigation details of the complaints and the evidence against them. P.S. Where did you get the idea that the claimant produces and/or pays for the bundle? In Employment tribunal claims the bundle is almost always produced and paid for by the Respondent employer. Have you received the bundle yet?
  8. I'm assuming that their 'confidentiality' fears relate to the public interest disclosures and that the disclosures you made to HMRC etc. are the same as those you had already made to the employer. The point I was trying to make is that they can freak out as much as like about this but they can't gag you no matter what you sign. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/18/section/43J This means that there is no duty of confidentiality with a public interest disclosure. Even if they include a clause in the compromise agreement stating that you will withdraw the complaints and have no further communication with HMRC and you sign it in blood; that agreement automatically has no effect. It is void by operation of law, i.e. 43J. So, you will still be free to continue to co-operate with HMRC.
  9. Hi steampowered. Have a look at 43J below, an admittedly rarely mentioned section relating to confidentiality in the protected disclosure part of the ERA1996. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/18/part/IVA
  10. I'd suggest that the lawyer is upset because she's out of her depth. She ought to be aware that no clause in a compromise/settlement agreement can prevent you from making a protected disclosure to HMRC or any other relevant regulatory body. She should also know that her role is to advise you
  11. Unless there was a gap of at least a week between the 2 jobs; it doesn't matter whether the previous manager recorded it as a termination or a transfer. She will have continuous service of 2 years (with all the maternity and other employment rights) because she works for an associated employer. See s.218(6) & s.231 of the Employments Rights Act 1996 below: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/18/section/218 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/18/section/231
  12. If the employer has a policy stating that employees must to submit to a breathalyser test when required, I suppose they can. Of more concern are the following issues: 1. To fail the test the result would need to be >0.08%. So, why are they making such an issue of 0.02%? 2. What 'reasonable request' are you alleged to have willfully failed to carry out? Were you told not to consume any alcohol?
  13. Don't worry, the hearing you had was just to establish liability. If you win there'll be a seperate (usually shorter) remedy hearing to assess your compensation.
  • Create New...