Supreme Court can stop bad bosses punishing staff who strike

The Supreme Court has an opportunity to close a loophole that allows rogue employers to mistreat staff who take part in legal strike action.

In a two-day hearing that begins on Tuesday 12 December, the union seeks to overturn a Court of Appeal decision that it says leaves the UK operating outside international law and employees without proper protection at work.

The union is acting on behalf of care worker and UNISON member Fiona Mercer, who originally brought a case in 2019 against the Alternative Futures Group (AFG), a charity in north west England.

While UK law prevents employers from sacking workers involved in strikes or other workplace disputes, it does not stop unscrupulous employers from taking disciplinary action or generally making life difficult, says the union.

Fiona had been part of a dispute over AFG’s plans to cut payments to care staff working sleep-in shifts. As a result, she was suspended by the charity and prevented from attending work or contacting her colleagues during a period of strike action.

Her case against AFG eventually went to an employment appeal tribunal (EAT). That found in her favour and said she should not be treated unfairly for having taken part in industrial action. The EAT also amended UK law, creating a new protection for striking workers, to comply with international law.

However, the then business secretary Kwasi Kwarteng intervened by taking the case to the Court of Appeal, which then reversed the EAT decision in March last year. UNISON said this meant bad employers had little to stop them mistreating workers who strike and the union appealed to the Supreme Court.

UNISON general secretary Christina McAnea said: “It’s time for this glaring legal loophole to be fixed.

“Workers shouldn’t face punishment for protesting about their employer’s behaviour. They choose to strike only as a last option.

“Employees in the UK already face some of the most restrictive union laws in Europe, with the government increasingly trying to limit their rights at every turn.

“Anyone with a legitimate dispute should be able to exercise their rights without worrying they’ll be treated unfairly. The Supreme Court can bring the UK back in line with international law and offer much-needed protection to UK workers.”

Notes to editors:
– Further details of the case can be found here and the Court of Appeal judgment delivered in March 2022 is here.
– UNISON is the UK’s largest union, with more than 1.3 million members providing public services in education, local government, the NHS, police service and energy. They are employed in the public, voluntary and private sectors.

Media contacts:
Dan Ashley M: 07908 672893 E: d.ashley@unison.co.uk
Anthony Barnes M: 07834 864794 E: a.barnes@unison.co.uk

 

The article Supreme Court can stop bad bosses punishing staff who strike first appeared on the UNISON National site.

Supreme Court can stop bad bosses punishing staff who strike

The Supreme Court has an opportunity to close a loophole that allows rogue employers to mistreat staff who take part in legal strike action.

In a two-day hearing that begins on Tuesday 12 December, the union seeks to overturn a Court of Appeal decision that it says leaves the UK operating outside international law and employees without proper protection at work.

The union is acting on behalf of care worker and UNISON member Fiona Mercer, who originally brought a case in 2019 against the Alternative Futures Group (AFG), a charity in north west England.

While UK law prevents employers from sacking workers involved in strikes or other workplace disputes, it does not stop unscrupulous employers from taking disciplinary action or generally making life difficult, says the union.

Fiona had been part of a dispute over AFG’s plans to cut payments to care staff working sleep-in shifts. As a result, she was suspended by the charity and prevented from attending work or contacting her colleagues during a period of strike action.

Her case against AFG eventually went to an employment appeal tribunal (EAT). That found in her favour and said she should not be treated unfairly for having taken part in industrial action. The EAT also amended UK law, creating a new protection for striking workers, to comply with international law.

However, the then business secretary Kwasi Kwarteng intervened by taking the case to the Court of Appeal, which then reversed the EAT decision in March last year. UNISON said this meant bad employers had little to stop them mistreating workers who strike and the union appealed to the Supreme Court.

UNISON general secretary Christina McAnea said: “It’s time for this glaring legal loophole to be fixed.

“Workers shouldn’t face punishment for protesting about their employer’s behaviour. They choose to strike only as a last option.

“Employees in the UK already face some of the most restrictive union laws in Europe, with the government increasingly trying to limit their rights at every turn.

“Anyone with a legitimate dispute should be able to exercise their rights without worrying they’ll be treated unfairly. The Supreme Court can bring the UK back in line with international law and offer much-needed protection to UK workers.”

Notes to editors:
– Further details of the case can be found here and the Court of Appeal judgment delivered in March 2022 is here.
– UNISON is the UK’s largest union, with more than 1.3 million members providing public services in education, local government, the NHS, police service and energy. They are employed in the public, voluntary and private sectors.

Media contacts:
Dan Ashley M: 07908 672893 E: d.ashley@unison.co.uk
Anthony Barnes M: 07834 864794 E: a.barnes@unison.co.uk

 

The article Supreme Court can stop bad bosses punishing staff who strike first appeared on the UNISON National site.

Q&A: Who could be entitled to thousands in unpaid wages?

Many UK workers could be entitled to thousands of pounds unfairly taken from their pay following a landmark Supreme Court ruling in a successful challenge brought by UNISON.

The case was between police workers (officers and staff) and their employer: the Northern Ireland police force. Formally titled Chief Constable of Police Service of Northern Ireland v Agnew, the case was about underpayment of holiday pay over a period of 25 years.

UNISON intervened in the case and the workers won. Here, the union’s head of legal services, Shantha David, explains exactly what happened – and what this means for all workers.

How did this case end up in the Supreme Court?

In short, police workers in Northern Ireland who were regularly working overtime had not seen pay for their additional hours reflected in their holiday pay.

In 2018, when the workers took their case to an employment tribunal, the judge ruled that the Police Service of Northern Ireland had made unlawful deductions from the holiday pay of almost 4,000 officers and civilian staff since 1998.

While the Police Service accepted the workers had been underpaid, they disputed the period of time (and back pay) for which the staff could recover the money. This was the focus of UNISON’s challenge in the case.

Employment law requires that claims for wage deductions are brought to a tribunal within three months, and that other previous similar deductions can also be claimed. For example, if regular overtime was omitted in a person’s recent holiday, and this was also previously the case, then this was a series of linked deductions, and they could both be claimed at a tribunal.

However, a piece of case law, from an Employment Appeal Tribunal in 2016 (Fulton v Bear Scotland Ltd), said that, if the incorrectly calculated holiday pay deductions were broken by gaps three months or more, it would break the link between these deductions (and so workers wouldn’t be able to claim past the most recent underpayment).

Why did UNISON get involved?

We saw that this was an opportunity to correct this bad piece of case law (Fulton v Bear Scotland Ltd), which could have a huge impact on workers across Britain, not just Northern Ireland.

Our argument was that a gap of three months or more between deductions would not break the chain between them, and that in effect, the police staff were entitled to recover all of their historic underpayments, not just the most recent.

What was the outcome?

The Supreme Court agreed with us that gaps of three months or more would not break the chain between underpayments. This now means that workers in Northern Ireland can make back-dated claims for indefinite periods of underpayment, and workers in Britain can also make back pay claims, but only going back up to two years.

So what does this mean now?

Thanks to UNISON, who led the arguments in the UK Supreme Court, workers can challenge ongoing, linked underpayments in their wages, even if there is a gap of three months or more between the underpayments.

Who does this impact?

All workers, regardless of the type of contract you’re on. It’s not just salaried employees, it includes people on zero-hours contracts too.

How do workers identify underpayments?

People need to check their pay slips and see whether any element of pay has not been reflected in their holiday pay. If someone does regular overtime and this hasn’t been reflected in holiday pay, or you receive commission pay or bonuses that also haven’t been reflected, this could mean you have a claim.

Every worker is entitled to a minimum of 5.6 weeks paid annual leave. Some contracts may say employees get more than that. If, week on week, you do overtime and get bonus payments, and that isn’t included in holiday pay, you may have a claim. In the police service case, they all did regular overtime and that wasn’t included in their holiday pay.

Another way this might be identified is if you see that your employer suddenly corrects your holiday pay.

If I see I have been underpaid, or my employer suddenly corrects my holiday pay, how can I claim this money back?

Speak to your UNISON rep and local branch about it, to see whether you can bring an unlawful deduction of wages claim through an employment tribunal.

You must act quickly because, to bring the claim to an employment tribunal, the last deducted payment must have been in the last three months – but you may be entitled to claims that go much further back.

How much can you claim back?

For workers in Britain, claims can go back up to two years. For Northern Ireland, claims can go back indefinitely. It’s estimated that the police workers in Northern Ireland are owed around £40m in total.

Does it only apply to holiday pay, or any other types of underpayment?

It’s not just about holiday pay. It can also apply to maternity and paternity pay, commission pay, bonus pay or even one-off payments for trade union activities.

The article Q&A: Who could be entitled to thousands in unpaid wages? first appeared on the UNISON National site.

Q&A: Who could be entitled to thousands in unpaid wages?

Many UK workers could be entitled to thousands of pounds unfairly taken from their pay following a landmark Supreme Court ruling in a successful challenge brought by UNISON.

The case was between police workers (officers and staff) and their employer: the Northern Ireland police force. Formally titled Chief Constable of Police Service of Northern Ireland v Agnew, the case was about underpayment of holiday pay over a period of 25 years.

UNISON intervened in the case and the workers won. Here, the union’s head of legal services, Shantha David, explains exactly what happened – and what this means for all workers.

How did this case end up in the Supreme Court?

In short, police workers in Northern Ireland who were regularly working overtime had not seen pay for their additional hours reflected in their holiday pay.

In 2018, when the workers took their case to an employment tribunal, the judge ruled that the Police Service of Northern Ireland had made unlawful deductions from the holiday pay of almost 4,000 officers and civilian staff since 1998.

While the Police Service accepted the workers had been underpaid, they disputed the period of time (and back pay) for which the staff could recover the money. This was the focus of UNISON’s challenge in the case.

Employment law requires that claims for wage deductions are brought to a tribunal within three months, and that other previous similar deductions can also be claimed. For example, if regular overtime was omitted in a person’s recent holiday, and this was also previously the case, then this was a series of linked deductions, and they could both be claimed at a tribunal.

However, a piece of case law, from an Employment Appeal Tribunal in 2016 (Fulton v Bear Scotland Ltd), said that, if the incorrectly calculated holiday pay deductions were broken by gaps three months or more, it would break the link between these deductions (and so workers wouldn’t be able to claim past the most recent underpayment).

Why did UNISON get involved?

We saw that this was an opportunity to correct this bad piece of case law (Fulton v Bear Scotland Ltd), which could have a huge impact on workers across Britain, not just Northern Ireland.

Our argument was that a gap of three months or more between deductions would not break the chain between them, and that in effect, the police staff were entitled to recover all of their historic underpayments, not just the most recent.

What was the outcome?

The Supreme Court agreed with us that gaps of three months or more would not break the chain between underpayments. This now means that workers in Northern Ireland can make back-dated claims for indefinite periods of underpayment, and workers in Britain can also make back pay claims, but only going back up to two years.

So what does this mean now?

Thanks to UNISON, who led the arguments in the UK Supreme Court, workers can challenge ongoing, linked underpayments in their wages, even if there is a gap of three months or more between the underpayments.

Who does this impact?

All workers, regardless of the type of contract you’re on. It’s not just salaried employees, it includes people on zero-hours contracts too.

How do workers identify underpayments?

People need to check their pay slips and see whether any element of pay has not been reflected in their holiday pay. If someone does regular overtime and this hasn’t been reflected in holiday pay, or you receive commission pay or bonuses that also haven’t been reflected, this could mean you have a claim.

Every worker is entitled to a minimum of 5.6 weeks paid annual leave. Some contracts may say employees get more than that. If, week on week, you do overtime and get bonus payments, and that isn’t included in holiday pay, you may have a claim. In the police service case, they all did regular overtime and that wasn’t included in their holiday pay.

Another way this might be identified is if you see that your employer suddenly corrects your holiday pay.

If I see I have been underpaid, or my employer suddenly corrects my holiday pay, how can I claim this money back?

Speak to your UNISON rep and local branch about it, to see whether you can bring an unlawful deduction of wages claim through an employment tribunal.

You must act quickly because, to bring the claim to an employment tribunal, the last deducted payment must have been in the last three months – but you may be entitled to claims that go much further back.

How much can you claim back?

For workers in Britain, claims can go back up to two years. For Northern Ireland, claims can go back indefinitely. It’s estimated that the police workers in Northern Ireland are owed around £40m in total.

Does it only apply to holiday pay, or any other types of underpayment?

It’s not just about holiday pay. It can also apply to maternity and paternity pay, commission pay, bonus pay or even one-off payments for trade union activities.

The article Q&A: Who could be entitled to thousands in unpaid wages? first appeared on the UNISON National site.

Supreme Court ruling is a victory for underpaid workers

Many UK workers could be entitled to thousands of pounds unfairly taken from their pay following a landmark Supreme Court ruling today (Wednesday) in a successful challenge brought by UNISON.

Prior to this, workers who consistently received incorrect pay could only make a claim at an employment tribunal for  the most recent underpayment. They could also include similar underpayments on previous occasions, but not if there was a gap of three or more months between them.

Today’s ruling means many workers will now be able to challenge ongoing linked underpayments in their wages.

They will be able to do this even if there is a gap of three months or more since the last time this happened, says UNISON. They weren’t able to do so previously.

The judgment in Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland and another v Agnew and other & UNISON overrules holiday pay case law operating since 2015.

This had prevented tribunals from considering deductions where there had been a gap of three months or more between a series of similar underpayments for an employee.*

The facts of the case focused on holiday pay, where it will be applied most widely. However the ruling affects all other forms of payment too**, says UNISON.

The Supreme Court drew attention to the purpose of the provisions for unlawful deductions in protecting workers, some of whom may be vulnerable, from being paid too little for the work they do.

Commenting on the
ruling, UNISON head of legal Shantha David said: “UNISON’s intervention has ensured the law has now been corrected.

“The previous interpretation meant workers couldn’t get compensation where a series of similar underpayments had happened three or more months apart.

“The Supreme Court understood here that this could allow some employers to game the system by spacing out holiday payments over more than three months.

“For years, many workers have been denied unfairly the chance to have their legitimate claims heard.

“This judgment ensures they’ll get all the wages they’re rightfully owed.”

Notes to editors:
– The case, Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland and another v Agnew and other, originated in Northern Ireland where it was heard by the Court of Appeal in Northern Ireland. UNISON intervened at the UK Supreme Court, and led the arguments in court on the side of the workers and employees.
– *Employees must lodge a case within three months of what they believe is an unfair deduction. However, if it is part of a “series” of similar underpayments these can also form part of the claim. However, since the 2015 employment appeal tribunal case of Bear Scotland Ltd v Fulton, tribunals have not been able to consider the underpayments as a series if they were three or more months apart. Today’s ruling clarifies that a three-month break does not interrupt a series of claims for underpayment.
**The issue affects any employee and applies to claims on all forms of wages. For holiday pay, commission and bonuses the “series” is limited by statute to two years in Great Britain but not in Northern Ireland. For other payments including statutory sick pay, statutory maternity/paternity/adoption pay and time off for union duties, the claim can go back to when the underpayment first began.

Media contacts:
Anthony Barnes M: 07834 86794 E: a.barnes@unison.co.uk
Liz Chinchen M: 07778 158175 E: press@unison.co.uk

The article Supreme Court ruling is a victory for underpaid workers first appeared on the UNISON National site.

Supreme Court ruling is a victory for underpaid workers

Many UK workers could be entitled to thousands of pounds unfairly taken from their pay following a landmark Supreme Court ruling today (Wednesday) in a successful challenge brought by UNISON.

Prior to this, workers who consistently received incorrect pay could only make a claim at an employment tribunal for  the most recent underpayment. They could also include similar underpayments on previous occasions, but not if there was a gap of three or more months between them.

Today’s ruling means many workers will now be able to challenge ongoing linked underpayments in their wages.

They will be able to do this even if there is a gap of three months or more since the last time this happened, says UNISON. They weren’t able to do so previously.

The judgment in Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland and another v Agnew and other & UNISON overrules holiday pay case law operating since 2015.

This had prevented tribunals from considering deductions where there had been a gap of three months or more between a series of similar underpayments for an employee.*

The facts of the case focused on holiday pay, where it will be applied most widely. However the ruling affects all other forms of payment too**, says UNISON.

The Supreme Court drew attention to the purpose of the provisions for unlawful deductions in protecting workers, some of whom may be vulnerable, from being paid too little for the work they do.

Commenting on the
ruling, UNISON head of legal Shantha David said: “UNISON’s intervention has ensured the law has now been corrected.

“The previous interpretation meant workers couldn’t get compensation where a series of similar underpayments had happened three or more months apart.

“The Supreme Court understood here that this could allow some employers to game the system by spacing out holiday payments over more than three months.

“For years, many workers have been denied unfairly the chance to have their legitimate claims heard.

“This judgment ensures they’ll get all the wages they’re rightfully owed.”

Notes to editors:
– The case, Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland and another v Agnew and other, originated in Northern Ireland where it was heard by the Court of Appeal in Northern Ireland. UNISON intervened at the UK Supreme Court, and led the arguments in court on the side of the workers and employees.
– *Employees must lodge a case within three months of what they believe is an unfair deduction. However, if it is part of a “series” of similar underpayments these can also form part of the claim. However, since the 2015 employment appeal tribunal case of Bear Scotland Ltd v Fulton, tribunals have not been able to consider the underpayments as a series if they were three or more months apart. Today’s ruling clarifies that a three-month break does not interrupt a series of claims for underpayment.
**The issue affects any employee and applies to claims on all forms of wages. For holiday pay, commission and bonuses the “series” is limited by statute to two years in Great Britain but not in Northern Ireland. For other payments including statutory sick pay, statutory maternity/paternity/adoption pay and time off for union duties, the claim can go back to when the underpayment first began.

Media contacts:
Anthony Barnes M: 07834 86794 E: a.barnes@unison.co.uk
Liz Chinchen M: 07778 158175 E: press@unison.co.uk

The article Supreme Court ruling is a victory for underpaid workers first appeared on the UNISON National site.

Supreme Court hearing to decide strike protection, says UNISON

The Supreme Court has granted permission for UNISON to bring a legal challenge that could provide greater protection for striking workers, says the union today (Monday).

UNISON is seeking to overturn a Court of Appeal decision from earlier this year that enables employers to discipline staff who take lawful industrial action.

The union is acting on behalf of care worker and UNISON member Fiona Mercer, who originally brought a case in 2019 against the Alternative Futures Group (AFG), a charity in the north west of England.

While UK law prevents employers from sacking workers involved in strikes or other workplace disputes, it does not stop unscrupulous employers from taking disciplinary action or generally making life difficult, says the union.

Fiona had been part of a dispute over AFG’s plans to cut payments to care staff working sleep-in shifts. As a result, she was suspended and prevented from attending work by the charity.

Her case against AFG eventually went to an employment appeal tribunal (EAT). That found in her favour and said she should not be treated unfairly for having taken part in industrial action. The tribunal also decided that the UK wasn’t complying with international law.

However, the then business secretary Kwasi Kwarteng intervened when the case went to the Court of Appeal, which then reversed the EAT decision. This means bad employers now have little to stop them mistreating workers who strike, says UNISON.

UNISON general secretary Christina McAnea said: “This is a chance to fix a glaring legal loophole. Employees only strike as a last resort and shouldn’t face punishment for protesting about their employer’s behaviour.

“Hundreds of thousands of workers are thinking about industrial action as they struggle to cope with low pay in the face of soaring prices. Everyone must be able to exercise their rights without fearing they’ll be treated unfairly for standing up for themselves at work.”

The Supreme Court hearing is likely to be in the latter half of next year.

Notes to editors:
– Further details of the case can be found here and the Court of Appeal judgment delivered in March 2022 is here.
– UNISON is the UK’s largest union, with more than 1.3 million members providing public services in education, local government, the NHS, police service and energy. They are employed in the public, voluntary and private sectors.

Media contacts:
Anthony Barnes M: 07834 864794 E: a.barnes@unison.co.uk
Liz Chinchen M: 07778 158175 E: l.chinchen@unison.co.uk

The article Supreme Court hearing to decide strike protection, says UNISON first appeared on the UNISON National site.

August: it was no holiday

There was no lying on sun-loungers for UNISON or many of our members involved in key struggles at work The article August: it was no holiday first appeared on the UNISON National site.