Takeover Query / TUPE Regulations

JaMarcus

I'll keep this as a hypothetical scenario with fake names and company names, but I'd love to hear to some feedback on this. Not looking for legal advice, just people's opinions on the situation.

----

Tom has worked for Company A for over 10 years. It was a small, family-run business. Tom never had an official contract written up for his employment.

For those 10 years, Tom always had the same working conditions - including (i) minimum number of hours worked per week, and (ii) 1.5x pay for working on weekends. Again, this was not accounted for in an official contract - but these were the conditions under which Tom was worked for more than 10 years.

Company B have now acquired/taken over Company A. Legacy staff from Company A are retained (under TUPE Regulations), and new part-time and full-time staff are also hired.

Company B have now issued new contracts to legacy staff (including Tom) that significantly reduce the number of hours he will work per week. They have also removed the 1.5x pay for working weekends.

Legacy staff were assured in private meetings with new management during the takeover that hours and rate of pay would not be changed. Though this is not in writing anywhere. The new contracts obviously renege this promise.

Management have said (in person, not in writing) that the reason for the hours being cut for legacy staff is that their hourly rates are too high, and that the newly hired part-time/full-time staff are cheaper to roster.

My questions are:

(1) Does Tom have any protection here? I know this is trickier seeing as there is no previous contract of his to refer to - but does the fact that his working conditions have been consistent for so long count in his favour in any way?

(2) If Tom's hours/rate-of-pay have already been cut BEFORE he is issued with his new contract, does he have any right to be paid according to what his normal minimum hours are? i.e. if Company B are not issuing new contracts until later this year, but are still insisting he works the lower number of hours in the meantime?

dreamers75

Tom and his workmates should have asked the previous owners for a written contract prior to the sale. TUPE would have guaranteed him that at the basic hours (OT is optional ie you have to agree to do OT the rate is the rate the company say it is, but OT is optional), i dont believe TUPE covers OT but stand to be corrected.

Tom should not sign the new contract as it differs from his previous arrangement which is not written in contract (not his fault) Company B were aware of this when they purchased Company A (if not its not Toms Fault).

Tom should put feelers out for a new job because this may not end well, he has no protection but he would have WRC case should they dismiss him for not signing the new contract. It can be difficult to get a constructive dismissal unless he can prove they are cutting his hours based on the below **

*All meeting should have minutes, Tom only needs to remember the dates and person who stated this information.

** When you say management do you mean the new management? Tom needs to record that if its the latter as it is literally the opposite of TUPE.

best of luck to Tom.