- in United States
In the latest episode of our podcast, Matthew Ramsey delves into a major Supreme Court decision regarding Tesco's dismissal and re-engagement practices, exploring the legal implications of "firing and rehiring" and its impact on employment contracts.
He covers:
- Tesco's 2007 agreement offering "retained pay" as a permanent contractual term;
- the Supreme Court ruling barring Tesco from dismissing employees to remove this benefit; and
- legal implications for employers using dismissal to change contract terms.
If you would like more information or want to discuss any of the topics in this podcast, please get in touch with Matthew.
Episode summary
In the latest Macfarlanes HR podcast, Matthew Ramsey discusses a significant Supreme Court decision involving Tesco and the Union of Shop, Distributive and Allied Workers (USDAW) regarding the practice of "firing and rehiring". The case centres on Tesco's attempts to change the retained pay rights of employees, which were established in a collective agreement from 2007, leading to legal debates about contractual entitlements and the employer's right to terminate contracts.
He then moves on to explain the implications of the ruling, emphasising that the Supreme Court determined that Tesco could not dismiss employees solely to strip them of their retained pay rights. The court underscored the importance of contractual language and the context of agreements made, indicating that dismissals aimed at removing established rights could not be justified.
He concludes with a discussion of the wider context surrounding firing and rehiring practices in the UK, noting the increased scrutiny and calls for legislative changes following high-profile cases.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
