Significant changes to terms and conditions 




The duty to consult collectively is triggered by any “dismissal for a reason not related to the individual concerned” (section 195, TULRCA). This is much wider than the definition used to claim unfair redundancy dismissal and a redundancy payment, set out at the start of this Chapter. In GMB v Man Truck and Bus UK [2000] IRLR 636, the EAT confirmed that the dismissal of employees and their re-engagement on new terms and conditions triggers collective redundancy consultation obligations, even if there is no proposed reduction in the number of employees.




In Pujante Rivera v Gestora Clubs Dir [2016] IRLR 51, the ECJ ruled that a resignation in response to a significant unilateral cut to contract terms and conditions (that is, a constructive dismissal) also counts towards the 20-employee threshold triggering the duty to consult collectively over redundancies, as long as the contract change was for a reason unrelated to the individual worker. The definition of “redundancy” under the Directive must not be interpreted narrowly, said the ECJ in this case.