However, in most instances that ‘real possibility’ will be present save, for example, where a trade union is applying to be recognised or, as above, where the collective bargaining process has been exhausted without terms having been determined. The Court did acknowledge that for an offer made directly to employees to be prohibited there needed to be at least a ‘real possibility’ that the employees’ terms would otherwise have been determined by collective agreement. If the employer genuinely believes the collective bargaining process has been exhausted then, in making offers directly to employees, the employer’s purpose cannot be to circumvent that process. The Court noted that additional protection is also afforded to employers by the statutory rules which provide that employers will not be in contravention of the law unless their purpose in making an offer directly to employees is to prevent employment terms being determined by collective agreement.
It found that the recognition agreement could deal with this sufficiently (as was the case here, the Court concluding in this case that the final stage of the agreed collective bargaining process under the agreement had not been completed by the parties).
The employer argued that it can be difficult to know when the collective bargaining process has been exhausted, but the court did not accept that argument. The Supreme Court has decided that an employer is prohibited from making an offer of revised terms and conditions directly to its employees before the collective bargaining process with the trade union has been exhausted.
#INPORTANT HR DATES UPDATE#
Update posted: 11 November 2021 Collective bargaining
0 kommentar(er)
