|
A ruling
by the Court of Appeal has opened the door to taking the length of
time an employee has been working for a firm into account when
making decisions about redundancies.
The
Court was judging the case of older Rolls Royce workers who were
facing being laid off by the company.
The
case rested on whether including the number of years an employee has
been working as part of the redundancy selection process breached
the anti-age discrimination regulations.
The
concern was that using length of service might contravene the law
because it is unfair on younger employees.
However,
the Court ruled that Rolls Royce could nominate length of employment
as an acceptable factor in making redundancy decisions.
But
the judgment also emphasised that the amount of time an employee has
been working for an employer should only be one of several
redundancy criteria that are taken into consideration and that the
ruling should not be interpreted as condoning length of service as
the sole factor for laying off an employee.
The
Rolls Royce workers were represented the trade union, Unite.
The
union said that older employees deserve the extra protection the
ruling affords because they were less likely to find alternative
employment during the economic downturn.
Employees
facing redundancy selection at Rolls Royce were assessed according
to their achievement, self-motivation, expertise, versatility and
personal contribution. Only then were the workers allocated an extra
score for each year they had worked for the company.
Derek
Simpson, the joint general secretary of Unite, commented: “We are
delighted with this decision. The ruling sets a precedent, where
other factors are equal, for protecting older workers from the
effects of redundancy.”
Lawyers,
though, warned that the judgment should not be viewed as supporting
the old fashioned ‘last in first out’ approach. |
