Retail trade union Usdaw represented by social justice law firm Thompsons Solicitors have succeeded in a claim against Tesco in a High Court battle, which will protect its workers from unfair fire and rehire tactics. Usdaw brought the case on behalf of 42 workers employed by the supermarket giant in its Daventry and Lichfield distribution centres. The group faced having their wages cut as part of a change to their terms and conditions of employment by Tesco.
The High Court ruling will prevent the supermarket’s ‘fire and rehire’ practice in this case where it had sought to lay people off and re-employ them on new contracts, with less favourable terms and conditions, in England.
The court noted that the 42 workers had been guaranteed an entitlement to a specific payment labelled ‘retained pay’ to keep them within the business, which Tesco intended to remove by firing and then rehiring them. The judge held that there was an implied term in the workers’ contracts that the right to terminate employment could not be exercised if the aim was to remove a right to ‘retained pay’.
Neil Todd, a trade union specialist at Thompsons Solicitors, said: “This is a huge win for the workers and for Usdaw. The practice of firing and re-hiring staff on less favourable terms and conditions has been in widespread use over the last 18 months as employers try to erode rights that have been hard fought for and are there to protect some of the lowest paid in society.
“Tesco had made unequivocal commitments to its workers who had come into work throughout the lockdown, when it needed them most. The court agreed that, in those circumstances, it wasn’t then open to them to deploy fire and rehire tactics when it suited them”.
Joanne McGuinness – Usdaw National Officer added: “Companies are more frequently resorting to using fire and rehire tactics when they want to reduce employees’ terms and conditions of employment. Rather than reaching an agreement with the employees or their union, they simply threaten the employees with termination of their contracts, leaving them with an impossible choice”.
A Tesco spokesperson said it was “disappointed” with the ruling and intends to appeal.
This provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where employment tribunal and appellate court cases are reported, the information does not set out all of the facts, the legal arguments presented and the judgments made in every aspect of the case. Employment law is subject to constant change either by statute or by interpretation by the courts. While every care has been taken in compiling this information, we cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Specialist legal advice must be taken on any legal issues that may arise before embarking upon any formal course of action.
