Tesco loses legal case against 'fire and rehire' tactics for factory staff
Image - Nigel - stock.adobe.com
Shop workers union Usdaw has won its appeal in a Supreme Court battle against over its so-called 'fire and rehire' approach to cutting staff pay, bringing a three-year legal saga to an end.
The Union of Shop Distributive and Allied Workers, which represents 360,000 members across the UK, originally took legal action against Tesco in 2021 after the supermarket attempted to sack staff at its distribution centres in Daventry and Lichfield only to recruit them on lower pay.
The case centred around Tesco's use of "retained pay", which it offered staff willing to relocate after it closed distribution centres in 2007.
In 2021, Tesco attempted to remove retained pay from individual employment contracts in exchange for a lump-sum payment. If a staff member did not agree, Tesco would cease their employment then re-offer them their jobs but with the retained pay element removed.
The High Court initially ruled in Usdaw's favour in 2022, but Tesco successfully appealed the decision the same year. The case was then taken to the highest court where five Supreme Court justices ruled unanimously that Tesco should not be allowed to dismiss staff in this way.
Paddy Lillis, the general secretary at Usdaw, said retained pay should have always been seen as "a permanent right".
"These sorts of tactics have no place in industrial relations, so we felt we had to act to protect those concerned. We were very disappointed with the outcome in the Court of Appeal but always felt we had to see this case through. We are therefore delighted to get this outcome, which is a win for the trade union movement as a whole," Lillis said.
In their judgment statement on Thursday, the justices said: "The employment contracts contained a term implied by fact with the effect that the employer's right to terminate could not be exercised for the purpose of depriving the employees of their right to RP."
Disclaimer & Declaration of Interest
The information, investment views and recommendations in this article are provided for general information purposes only. Nothing in this article should be construed as a solicitation to buy or sell any financial product relating to any companies under discussion or to engage in or refrain from doing so or engaging in any other transaction. Any opinions or comments are made to the best of the knowledge and belief of the writer but no responsibility is accepted for actions based on such opinions or comments. Vox Markets may receive payment from companies mentioned for enhanced profiling or publication presence. The writer may or may not hold investments in the companies under discussion.