Smith v Glasgow City District Council | |
---|---|
Court | House of Lords |
Citation | [1987] ICR 796, 1987 SC (HL) 175, 1987 SLT 605 |
Keywords | |
Unfair dismissal |
Smith v Glasgow City District Council [1987] ICR 796 is a UK labour law case, concerning unfair dismissal on the requirement for an employer to state a main reason for a dismissal.
Mr Smith claimed his dismissal from the Glasgow City District Council’s Building and Works Department, after three complaints, and a majority decision by a special committee that he had to go, was unfair. A letter to him had set out three reasons that (i) he unduly expanded the workforce (ii) he failed to respond to legitimate requests (iii) he was irresponsible in not getting written instructions before spending money on expanding and recruiting.
The Tribunal found the second complaint was unfounded, but the dismissal was fair in any case. The EAT dismissed the appeal. The Inner House of the Court of Session held that the committee wrongly took the second complaint into consideration and so the dismissal had to be unfair. The council appealed.
Lord Mackay held the dismissal was unfair. First, the employer failed to show the principal reason for dismissal because it did not distinguish among the three complaints. Second, the employer relied upon the second complaint as part of the principal reason for dismissal. He said that a tribunal cannot impute a reason to the employer's dismissal which it did not have at the time of dismissal.
Lord Keith, Lord Brandon, Lord Ackner and Lord Oliver concurred.
In employment law, constructive dismissal, also called disguised dismissal, constructive discharge or constructive termination, occurs when an employee resigns due to the employer creating a hostile work environment. This often serves as a tactic to avoid payment of statutory severance pay and benefits. In essence, although the employee resigns, the resignation is not truly voluntary but rather a response to intolerable working conditions imposed by the employer. These conditions can include unreasonable work demands, harassment, or significant changes to the employment terms without the employee’s consent.
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.
The Transfer of Undertakings Regulations 2006 known colloquially as TUPE and pronounced TU-pee, are the United Kingdom's implementation of the European Union Transfer of Undertakings Directive. They are also used in Ireland. It is an important part of UK labour law, protecting employees whose business is being transferred to another business. The 2006 regulations replace the old 1981 regulations which implemented the original Directive. The law has been amended in 2014 and 2018, and various provisions within the 2006 Regulations have altered.
Employment tribunals are tribunal public bodies in both England and Wales and Scotland that have statutory jurisdiction to hear disputes between employers and employees.
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.
Redfearn v Serco Ltd [2006] EWCA Civ 659 and Redfearn v United Kingdom [2012] ECHR 1878 is a UK labour law and European Court of Human Rights case. It held that UK law was deficient in not allowing a potential claim based on discrimination for one's political belief. Before the case was decided, the Equality Act 2010 provided a remedy to protect political beliefs, though it had not come into effect when this case was brought forth.
Western Excavating (ECC) Ltd v Sharp [1978] ICR 221 is a UK labour law case, concerning unfair dismissal, now governed by the Employment Rights Act 1996.
Buckland v Bournemouth University [2010] EWCA Civ 121 is a UK labour law case, concerning unfair dismissal, now governed by the Employment Rights Act 1996.
Gisda Cyf v Barratt [2010] UKSC 41 is a UK labour law case, concerning unfair dismissal governed by the Employment Rights Act 1996.
British Leyland UK Ltd v Swift [1981] IRLR 91 is a UK labour law case, concerning unfair dismissal, now governed by the Employment Rights Act 1996.
Polkey v AE Dayton Services Ltd [1987] 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.
Duncombe v Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families[2011] UKSC 14 and [2011] UKSC 36 is a UK labour law case, concerning the test for when the continued used of a fixed term contract is objectively justified, and when employees are covered by employment rights during work abroad. The case was joined with Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families v Fletcher.
Edwards v Chesterfield Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and Botham v Ministry of Defence[2011] UKSC 58 is a UK labour law case, concerning wrongful dismissal.
Dunnachie v Kingston-upon-Hull City Council [2004] UKHL 36 is a UK labour law case, concerning unfair dismissal.
Port of London Authority v Payne [1993] EWCA Civ 26 is a UK labour law case, concerning unfair dismissal and the remedy of reinstatement.
Abernethy v Mott, Hay and Anderson [1974] ICR 323 is a UK labour law case, concerning unfair dismissal.
Spring v Guardian Assurance plc[1994] UKHL 7, [1995] 2 AC 296 is a UK labour law and English tort law case, concerning the duty to provide accurate information when writing an employee reference.
Stefanko v Doherty and Maritime Hotel Ltd [2019] IRLR 322 (EAT) is a UK labour law case concerning unfair dismissal and discrimination.
Royal Mail Group Ltd v Efobi [2021] UKSC 33 is a UK labour law case, concerning race discrimination and the burden of proof.