bateman_asdaEAT2010
EAT CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT: Incorporation into contract
Asda wished to ensure that their entire store staff were employed on the same pay and work structure and this meant that those on the old regime had to transfer to a new regime. Some 9,330 employees agreed, but some did not. So when the new regime was imposed on them, 6 test Claimants brought claims for unauthorised deductions from their wages contrary to section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
Asda contended before the Employment Tribunal that they were entitled to impose new conditions because the staff handbook stated that Asda ‘reserved the right to review, revise, amend or replace the contents of this handbook, and introduce new policies from time to time reflecting the changing needs of the business.’ The handbook also provided details of pay and other conditions of employment.
The conditions in the staff handbook were incorporated in the Claimants’ contracts of employment. The Employment Tribunal held that these conditions permitted Asda to impose the new regime on its employees without obtaining their further consent.
The Claimants appealed contending that Asda could not rely on the conditions in the staff handbook to justify imposing the new regime and they required the consent of all employees.
Held: The appeal is dismissed because:
1. The staff handbook permitted Asda to make the changes to the pay and work regimes without obtaining the further consent of the Claimants (Dicta of Lord Woolf M.R. in Wandsworth London Borough Council v D’Silva [1998] IRLR 193 [31] applied);
2. The wording in the staff handbook was wide enough to permit Asda to change matters set out in it and these included the pay and work structure with the result that Asda were entitled to impose the changes in the Claimants’ pay and work provisions without the need to obtain their express consent.
Silber J
[2010] UKEAT 0221 – 09 – 1102, [2010] IRLR 370
Bailii
Employment
Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.396736