Patient services of the Walton branch of Aintree Hospitals NHS Trust were transferred to two wards in Fazakerley. Cleaners, through ‘Initial Hospital Services’, had refused to take jobs, on worse terms, with RCO doing the same thing. RCO won the contract, partly, by giving an assurance that TUPE would not apply. RCO relied heavily on Süzen, and argued that if neither assets nor workforce were transferred, there could be no TUPE application. Unison argued Süzen favoured its position.
The EAT noted that it was not sorry to conclude that the Tribunal was correct to hold there was a transfer of an entity which retained its identity. Were it otherwise, new contractors could simply avoid TUPE by not hiring any of the old sacked workers.
Judgmentedit
Mummery LJ noted that RCO relied on Paul Davies’ discussion of the ‘checkered history’ of the background to the Süzen decision.[1] He agreed, all the circumstances should be taken into account. He agreed with RCO's submission that subjective motive is not a real issue. But the offer by RCO to the workers to resign from Initial and join them could be considered.
support, services, unison, support, services, unison, 2002, ewca, labour, case, concerning, transfers, undertakings, security, rights, employees, support, services, unisoncourtcourt, appealcitation, 2002, ewca, 464keywordstransfer, undertakings, contents, fact. RCO Support Services v Unison 2002 EWCA Civ 464 is a UK labour law case concerning transfers of undertakings and the job security rights of employees RCO Support Services v UnisonCourtCourt of AppealCitation s 2002 EWCA Civ 464KeywordsTransfer of undertakings Contents 1 Facts 2 Judgment 3 See also 4 Notes 5 External linksFacts editPatient services of the Walton branch of Aintree Hospitals NHS Trust were transferred to two wards in Fazakerley Cleaners through Initial Hospital Services had refused to take jobs on worse terms with RCO doing the same thing RCO won the contract partly by giving an assurance that TUPE would not apply RCO relied heavily on Suzen and argued that if neither assets nor workforce were transferred there could be no TUPE application Unison argued Suzen favoured its position The EAT noted that it was not sorry to conclude that the Tribunal was correct to hold there was a transfer of an entity which retained its identity Were it otherwise new contractors could simply avoid TUPE by not hiring any of the old sacked workers Judgment editMummery LJ noted that RCO relied on Paul Davies discussion of the checkered history of the background to the Suzen decision 1 He agreed all the circumstances should be taken into account He agreed with RCO s submission that subjective motive is not a real issue But the offer by RCO to the workers to resign from Initial and join them could be considered See also editUK labour lawNotes edit para 20External links editFor the full case see http www bailii org ew cases EWCA Civ 2002 464 html Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title RCO Support Services Ltd v Unison amp oldid 1212288403, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,
