Employer changing contracts without notifying staff

Surfer

Surfer

Surfer

Soldato
Joined
31 Dec 2005
Posts
11,179
Location
Glasgow
Is it the case that an employer does not need to consult staff if they want to change employee contracts? For example changing from not having any bank holidays(but increased annual leave) to implementing bank holidays again(corresponding reduction in annual leave)
The employer only needs to consult the trade union correct ? Even if many of the staff are not in the union (due to cost and union incompetence)

It seems rather disingenuous to consult with 'staff' via the union when many of the staff are not members.
 
They do need to consult you before making changes to your contract but the specifics will depend on what it says in the original contract i.e. collective agreement vs individual.
 
Depends a bit on the wording of your contract - certain types of changes will be implied - sometimes with a wide scope (which actually often wouldn't stand up in law).

Funnily enough we've had the opposite change here - and no one has complained about not being consulted hah - I now have an extra 8 days at my disposal with only 4 have to be used for bank holidays on a first come first served selection basis.
 
beh said:
They do need to consult you before making changes to your contract but the specifics will depend on what it says in the original contract i.e. collective agreement vs individual.
Click to expand...

According to what I've been reading on t'internets they only need to consult the work union. (Through the union..Unison they are consulting staff)
 
Not sure how many are members of the union but according to ACAS website they don't need to consult individual employees..only the recognised work union.

I will try and find out how many are in the union.
 
Sort of off-topic, but if you have a recognised union at work and the consultations happen between management and them, you should consider joining.
 
^ union is Unison. Don't have a lot of faith in their abilities to help the workers. Not just me. Other union members have expressed dissatisfaction over how they communicate (or lack of). Just paying them money for nothing...

In any case its a shame not being in a union seems to adversely affect ones employee rights.
 
Surfer said:
According to what I've been reading on t'internets they only need to consult the work union. (Through the union..Unison they are consulting staff)
Click to expand...

This is correct. If there is no recognised union, then they need to consult individually with each employee. In this situation, this is where employers like having a recognised union.

If you want a say, then join the union as they'll have polled members opinion on whether or not to accept the proposed change. Although on the face of it, the change sounds pretty benign, so do you have an objection to the change itself or rather the way in which it was implemented?

Surfer said:
^ union is Unison. Don't have a lot of faith in their abilities to help the workers. Not just me. Other union members have expressed dissatisfaction over how they communicate (or lack of). Just paying them money for nothing...

In any case its a shame not being in a union seems to adversely affect ones employee rights.
Click to expand...


Many members think union reps own a magic wand and can magic away problems. Workplace reps are elected from the workers - if members don't like how they are being represented then there is nothing to stop them standing themselves for election or electing someone more capable. I suspect though, and it's my experience as a union rep and exec committee member, that plenty of members moan about things but wont support their reps or step up to the plate and volunteer some time to help.

A union is only as effective and as strong as it's members.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom