|Safeway Stores plc v Burrell|
|Court||Court of Appeal of England and Wales|
|Citation(s)|| ICR 523|
Safeway Stores plc v Burrell  ICR 523 is a UK labour law case, concerning redundancy.
Safeway Stores plc (now owned by Morrisons) wanted to de-layer and reorganise its departments under its ‘Safeway 2000’ plan. Mr Burrell was a petrol station manager at the Penzance, Cornwall, supermarket. The petrol station manager post would be replaced by a petrol station controller who got paid less. The work was much the same. The former job description carried some management responsibility but Mr Burrell had not in practice performed them. Mr Burrell did not apply for the new post and got redundancy. He then claimed unfair dismissal. The Tribunal held the employers had not demonstrated Mr Burrell was redundant, because the new job involved the same work as before.
Safeway was a chain of supermarkets and convenience shops in the United Kingdom. It started as a subsidiary of the American Safeway Inc., before being sold off in 1987.
Wm Morrison Supermarkets plc, trading as Morrisons, is the fourth largest chain of supermarkets in the United Kingdom, and is headquartered in Bradford, West Yorkshire, England.
Penzance is a town, civil parish and port in Cornwall, in England, United Kingdom. It is the most westerly major town in Cornwall and is about 64 miles (103 km) west-southwest of Plymouth and 255 miles (410 km) west-southwest of London. Situated in the shelter of Mount's Bay, the town faces south-east onto the English Channel, is bordered to the west by the fishing port of Newlyn, to the north by the civil parish of Madron and to the east by the civil parish of Ludgvan.
Peter Clark J held the Tribunal had used the wrong test for redundancy as understood from ERA 1996 section 139(1)(b). The right one is to ask (1) whether the employer’s need for employees had diminished and (2) whether the dismissal was caused by the diminution. So the case was remitted to be reheard. He noted that one should concentrate on the diminution of employees, not of work, referring to Carry All Motors Ltd v Pennington. Furthermore, a business reorganisation is interesting factual background, but its fact does not answer the two stage question of redundancy.
|“||The contract versus function test debate is predicated on a misreading of both the statute and the cases of Nelson and Cowen v Haden Ltd… the applicant/employee’s terms and conditions of employment are irrelevant to the questions raised by the statute.||”|
United Kingdom labour law regulates the relations between workers, employers and trade unions. People at work in the UK benefit from a minimum charter of employment rights, which are found in various Acts, Regulations, common law and equity. This includes the right to a minimum wage of £7.83 for over 25-year-olds under the National Minimum Wage Act 1998. The Working Time Regulations 1998 give the right to 28 days paid holidays, breaks from work, and attempts to limit excessively long working hours. The Employment Rights Act 1996 gives the right to leave for child care, and the right to request flexible working patterns. The Pensions Act 2008 gives the right to be automatically enrolled in a basic occupational pension, whose funds must be protected according to the Pensions Act 1995.
In employment law, constructive dismissal, also called constructive discharge or constructive termination, occurs when an employee resigns as a result of the employer creating a hostile work environment. Since the resignation was not truly voluntary, it is, in effect, a termination. For example, when an employer places extraordinary and unreasonable work demands on an employee to obtain their resignation, this can constitute a constructive dismissal.
Termination of employment, is an employee's departure from a job and the end of an employee's duration with an employer. Termination may be voluntary on the employee's part, or it may be at the hands of the employer, often in the form of dismissal (firing) or a layoff. Dismissal or firing is typically thought to be the fault of the employee, whereas a layoff is generally done for business reasons outside the employee's performance.
In United Kingdom law, the concept of wrongful dismissal refers exclusively to dismissal contrary to the contract of employment, which effectively means premature termination, either due to insufficient notice or lack of grounds. Although wrongful dismissal is usually associated with lack of notice sometimes it can also be caused by arbitrary dismissal where no notice was required but certain grounds were specified in the contract as being the only ones available but none existed.
Unfair dismissal in the United Kingdom is the part of UK labour law that requires fair, just and reasonable treatment by employers in cases where a person's job could be terminated. The Employment Rights Act 1996 regulates this by saying that employees are entitled to a fair reason before being dismissed, based on their capability to do the job, their conduct, whether their position is economically redundant, on grounds of a statute, or some other substantial reason. It is automatically unfair for an employer to dismiss an employee, regardless of length of service, for becoming pregnant, or for having previously asserted certain specified employment rights. Otherwise, an employee must have worked for two years. This means an employer only terminates an employee's job lawfully if the employer follows a fair procedure, acts reasonably and has a fair reason. Contrary to the gov.uk website, it is not automatically unfair for an employer to dismiss an employee for a discriminatory reason protected by the Equality Act 2010 ; there is no statutory provision for this and it just amounts to ordinary discrimination.
The Employment Rights Act 1996 is a United Kingdom Act of Parliament passed by the Conservative government to codify existing law on individual rights in UK labour law.
The New Zealand Employment Relations Act 2000 is a statute of the Parliament of New Zealand. It was substantially amended by the Employment Relations Amendment Act 2001 and by the ERAA 2004.
Nethermere Ltd v Gardiner And Another  ICR 612 is a UK labour law case in the Court of Appeal in the field of home work and vulnerable workers. Many labour and employment rights, such as unfair dismissal, in Britain depend on one's status as an "employee" rather than being "self-employed", or some other "worker". This case stands for the proposition that where "mutuality of obligation" between employers and casual or temporary workers exists to offer work and accept it, the court will find that the applicant has a "contract of employment" and is therefore an employee.
O'Kelly v Trusthouse Forte plc  ICR 728 was a UK labour law case, in which a bare majority held that a requirement for a contract is "mutuality of obligation" between the parties, which was thought to mean an ongoing duty to offer and accept work. It has been consistently doubted, and its outcome reversed by legislation, and its reasoning superseded by Autoclenz Ltd v Belcher, which states that the only "mutual" obligations that are required is the consideration of work for a quid pro quo.
Western Excavating (ECC) Ltd v Sharp  ICR 221 is a UK labour law case, concerning unfair dismissal, now governed by the Employment Rights Act 1996.
Williams v Compair Maxam Ltd  ICR 156 is a UK labour law case, concerning unfair dismissal, now governed by the Employment Rights Act 1996.
Polkey v AE Dayton Services Ltd  UKHL 8 is a UK labour law case, concerning unfair dismissal, now governed by the Employment Rights Act 1996.
In labour law, unfair dismissal is an act of employment termination made without good reason or contrary to the country's specific legislation.
Redundancy in United Kingdom law concerns the rights of employees if they are dismissed for economic reasons in UK labour law.
Lesney Products & Co v Nolan  EWCA Civ 8 is a UK labour law case concerning redundancy.
Muschett v H M Prison Service  EWCA Civ 25 is a UK labour law case, which held that an agency worker had no right to claim discrimination from either the agency or the place of work.
Ravat v Halliburton Manufacturing and Services Ltd  UKSC 1 is a UK labour law case, concerning the test for when workers are covered by employment rights when they work abroad.
Richmond Precision Engineering Ltd v Pearce  IRLR 179 is a UK labour law case, concerning redundancy.
British Aerospace plc v Green  ICR 1006 is a UK labour law case, concerning redundancy.
In French Labour Law a Dismissal is the breach of the employment contract by the employer. French Labour Law stipulates that an employment contract can be terminated by either of the parties. The 2008 reform of Labour Law introduced the possibility of a negotiated termination.