This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn more

Middlesborough BC v TGWU [2002] IRLR 333

By Oxbridge Law TeamUpdated 07/01/2024 07:07

Judgement for the case Middlesborough BC v TGWU

Table Of Contents

  • Defendant told the Union that it planned to make 150 employees redundant in over 90 days time, so as to allow for the consultation period under s.188.

  • However it then issued redundancy notices the next day.

  • TGWU argued:

    1. That the decision on redundancies had already been made, so that there was no genuine consultation, and

    2. That consultation was supposed to be about ways of avoiding redundancies, and not merely mitigation or reductions in numbers.

  • Thus Defendant was in breach of art. 188.

  • EAT agreed, saying that since ‘avoiding’ redundancies is one of the heads of consultation under 188, an employer may not escape it by arguing that consultation on that matter would be futile.

    • Also the consultation was a sham: to be lawful within s.188 consultation has to be genuine and meaningful, with the views of the representatives being seriously considered by the employer.

    • This wasn’t the case here. 

Any comments or edits about this case? Get in touch

For Further Study on Middlesborough BC v TGWU

Labour Law Notes
1,003 total pages
273 purchased

Labour Law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambridge...

Need instant answers? Our AI exam tutor is here to help.

Ask questions 🙋 Get answers 📔 It's simple 👁️👄👁️

Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.

Get Started
Claim every advantage to get a first in law
Labour Law Notes
1,003 total pages
273 purchased

Labour Law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambridge...