Share this page!

Jason Braier Profile picture
Twitter logo
21 Apr, 4 tweets, 2 min read
1/ Hamilton v Fife Council: Where collective agreements are incorporated into individual contracts, truly collective rights in those agreements aren't individually enforceable (as opposed to rights intended to be individually enforceable such as pay, holidays etc). #ukemplaw
2/ Hence in this case, a term in a collective agreement suggesting a post would only be advertised if there were no surplus teachers to fill it was not incorporated as an individual enforceable right in a surplus teacher's employment contract, for breach of which she could resign
3/ Separately, the EAT held that an ET isn't obliged to consider the just & equitable extension to time limits under EqA s.123 where no evidence or argument is made in support of an extension of time.
4/ The judgment (Lord Fairley's 5th published judgment in 2 days!) is here: bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Jason Braier

Jason Braier Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @JasonBraier

Jason Braier Profile picture
19 Apr
1/ The CA judgment is out in Kelly v PGA on that topic all Respondent #ukemplaw-yers fear, orders for re-engagement. This judgment may take a little of the fear away given its emphasis on a respondent-friendly approach to practicability. bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/… #ukemplaw
2/ K was unfairly dismissed as the PGA European Tour's group marketing director. He claimed it was age discrimination. He lost on that but won on unfair dismissal. The ET ordered re-engagement as the Commercial Director, China.
3/ The EAT allowed an appeal against that decision, holding re-engagement not practicable where the employer genuinely & rationally believes the employee incapable of fulfilling the role the employer wished him to fulfil or where conduct led to a breakdown in trust & confidence.
Read 14 tweets
Jason Braier Profile picture
12 Apr
1/ Cox v Adecco: The EAT often criticises ET decisions to strike out whistleblowing claims against LiPs. This, from HHJ Tayler is amongst the most strident & includes some interesting additions, especially on how the Respondent is expected to act
assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/607035ff… #ukemplaw
2/ The case concerned an EHCP assistant at LB Croydon's SEN department, assigned to the local authority by Adecco. He was encouraged to apply for an EHCP coordinator role even though not qualified for it. He succeeded & was then charged out as EHCP coordinator.
3/ Colleagues discovered this. C was concerned they were told by Adecco. He raised concerns by in email & in meetings about a GDPR breach re his personal data. He also emailed to allege his work was being overcharged to Croydon & unqualified staff were being put into jobs.
Read 19 tweets
Jason Braier Profile picture
11 Apr
1/ Elliott v Dorset CC - In a case in which an EJ was found to err in finding E failed to show substantial adverse effect & thus not disabled notwithstanding his Aspergers diagnosis, HHJ Tayler makes a number of important points of determining disability. #ukemplaw
2/ The case concerned an information systems manager disciplined for false recording of timings, & who accepted redundancy on a representation that to do so would stop the disciplinary process. He explained an array of effects of his impairment:
3/ The EJ found these impairments not substantial. The EJ's judgment erred in focusing on what E could do rather than what he couldn't, compared E's abilities to the general population rather than to himself without the impairment, & failed to tackle the meaning of substantial.
Read 13 tweets
Jason Braier Profile picture
6 Apr
1/ Chief Constable of Avon & Somerset v Eckland - Who should the respondent be to a police officer's disability discrim claim against disciplinary decisions taken by the Independent Office for Police Conduct & a police misconduct tribunal? #ukemplaw assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/606c439d…
2/ The disciplinary process emanated from allegations E lied in evidence at a Crown Court, wrongly saying he visited a mortuary. The Ch. Const appointed the misconduct panel, who found E should be dismissed for gross misconduct. E appealed that decision but withdrew the appeal.
3/ E brought disability discrim claims solely against the Ch. Const reliant on depression & anxiety and events during his service & on dismissal. The claims against the Ch. Const included claims holding him liable for actions of the IOPC & the misconduct panel.
Read 21 tweets
Jason Braier Profile picture
1 Apr
1/ De Lacey v Wechseln Ltd - This is a real thread about a real case. I promise! I really do. Look, it's got a link to the judgment & everything: bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT…

And it's a useful one on discriminatory constructive disimssal, so have a read.

#ukemplaw
2/ DL was a trainee hair stylist. In May 2015 she found out she was pregnant. She was on maternity leave from Oct '15 to Sept '16 & resigned the following January. She brought claims of pregnancy, maternity & sex discrim as well as unfair dismissal.
3/ DL relied on events during the period post-announcement & pre-maternity leave as well as the period between return & resignation as a course of discriminatory conduct. She relied on being made to clean up dog poo in front of other trainees as a last straw.
Read 15 tweets
Jason Braier Profile picture
1 Apr
1/ Day v Phool Industries Ltd - EAT holds BHS v Burchell non-compliant with ECHR Article 6 & Article 14 read with Article 8. Lord Summers finds reasonableness of misconduct dismissal must be objectively determined at the time of trial. #ukemplaw
2/ In a surprisingly brief judgment given the topic, Lord Summers places reliance on Lady Hale's comments in Reilly v Sandwell & the ECHR case of Denisov v Ukraine in finding Burchell should not have been relied upon once the Human Rights Act came into force.
3/ The judgment will raise eyebrows and will doubtless be appealed. If upheld, it will lead to a fundamental shift in the care with which employers will have to conduct disciplinary processes, & to far lengthier unfair dismissal trials.
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Like this author's thread?

Get emails when @JasonBraier has new unrolls!

Check out other threads from @JasonBraier!

Read all threads by @JasonBraier