The EAT recently handed down its decision in the case of Publicis Consultants v O’Farrell, in which the employer (“Publicis”) was found to be in breach of contract in respect of a failure to pay notice pay to a departing employee, even though it had in fact made payment of an equivalent sum of money to the employee
In the recent case of Worrall v Wilmott Dixon Partnerships Limited , the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) held that terms in collective agreements will not be incorporated into an employee's contract of employment unless they are agreed or specifically brought to the employee's attention.
The general position in employment law is that an employer may not vary an employee's terms and conditions without first obtaining the employee's express consent to the variation.
Back in November we reported the case of Radecki v Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council where the EAT held that the removal of Mr Radecki from the Council's payroll, even with his knowledge and arguably his consent, did not in itself terminate the employment relationship.
The EAT has stressed the importance of expressly stating the fact that dismissal is contemplated in step 1 letters pursuant to the statutory dismissal and disciplinary procedures.