EAT CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT- Implied term/variation/construction of term
An ET found that employees had established a right to an annual pay increase in line with RPI by custom and practice. The employees concerned were a group whose employment had transformed under TUPE to the Appellant employer in 2000. The Judge had said he would not have been prepared to find that a customary right had crystallised by then. The employer however believed there was such a right, originating before 2000, and behaved accordingly, inter alia attempting to buy out individual right to the increase in 2008 and to negotiate it away with what it (wrongly) thought was the appropriate Union. Each of 6 grounds of appeal was rejected: in particular, finding that the employer ‘believed’ there was such a right did not mean there was not; the fact that some employees had not been paid the award was capable of being contemplated by the alleged custom; it was not uncertain because amounts of pay award could vary; it was not inherently unreasonable; it was apt for incorporation and not merely aspirational; and specific evidential points were rejected.
Judges:
Langstaff P J
Citations:
[2012] UKEAT 0252 – 12 – 1112
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Employment
Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.471289