Permission given to appeal in Woolworths collective redundancy case

On 10 September 2013, the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) was given permission to appeal EAT’s controversial decision in USDAW v Ethel Austin Ltd, more commonly known as “the Woolworths case”.

On 10 September 2013, the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) was given permission to appeal EAT’s controversial decision in USDAW v Ethel Austin Ltd, more commonly known as “the Woolworths case”.

As reported in our earlier bulletins, the EAT had held that the duty to collectively consult employees was engaged where there are 20 or more proposed redundancies within a period of  90 days across the whole of a business regardless of where employees are located.

Previously, the approach was location-focused - with the duty to collectively consult arising for where there were 20 or more redundancies proposed at one site.

The shift in approach has caused concern for many employers who must now carefully monitor the numbers of redundancies being made across multiple sites. This is problematic for employers in terms of practical compliance and has significantly raised the risk of costly claims for protective awards.

It is likely that the Government will ask the Court of Appeal to take into account the case of Lyttle and Others v Bluebird Bidco 2 Ltd which has recently been referred by the Northern Ireland Industrial Tribunal to the European Court of Justice on the same issue.

Whilst a date for the appeal has not yet been set, this is one we are watching keenly - watch this space.