Relocation query

[Fireman]

I have to be a little vague with this, so apologies in advance.

I have worked for a company for about 5 years. There was a major restructure involving creation of new companies and dissolution of old. I was TUPE'd to one of the new compnies.All okay so far. Now I have been told that I must accept another TUPE to another of the new companies. All my T&C's will remain except that I now have to travel to a new location, 25 miles away, involving a 45 minutes at absolute best. probably 75 minutes or more at the peak time I will be travelling. I currently hve 5 minute commute if I go into the office, but mainly work from home. There is no "mobility clause" in my contract. I absolutely do not want to comply.

Any thoughts?

Thanks.

[ULA]

Are you actually being TUPE'd in that you are moving to a new legal entity as your employer?

[Fireman]

Yes.I was TUPE’d into a new company, now they want to TUPE me into another, some distance away. As far as I am concerned, for various reasons, a 25 Mile, 55 minute commute is not reasonable - considering that I am on about the “Living wage”

[ULA]

Have you spoken to your current company about your circumstances and asked if there is any opportunity for you not to transfer?

[Fireman]

Yes, of course. They are insistent that the distance is @reasonsnle”.

[ULA]

At least you have done what would always be my initial advice and had the discussion with your employer about your change of location under the proposed TUPE.

Unfortunately from a legal perspective this would come down to whether the change of location was considered a substantial change in working conditions to your detriment under TUPE, in the event of a claim being made. Less helpfully there is case law that indicates an addition of between 30 minutes and 60 minutes travelling per day was not, in the opinion of the employment tribunal, substantial, or to the material detriment of the employees. However in another case where a new place of work was only a few miles away, the change in location would disrupt the childcare arrangements and result in a longer journey to work of the individual and they were allowed to pursue a claim.

There is therefore no definitive answer to provide on this for you.

[Fireman]

At least you have done what would always be my initial advice and had the discussion with your employer about your change of location under the proposed TUPE.

However in another case where a new place of work was only a few miles away, the change in location would disrupt the childcare arrangements and result in a longer journey to work of the individual and they were allowed to pursue a claim.

Thankyou hfor yiur response. I am having to be a little vague, to try to avoid ID. Would it be possible, and convenient, to provide a reference to the specific case that you menton? There are other factors in this issue, and that case woud be of significance.

I promise to fully explain, once this is all over - it is irritating not to know how ones assitance actually benefited an enquirer.

Thanks

[ULA]

The first case I referenced was:

Centinsoy & Others v London United Busways Limited, which went to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT)

The second was:

Tapere v South London and Maudsley NHS Trust, again another EAT decision

[Fireman]

Ups, thank you so much for taking the time to respond.
FYI, the situation has now been partially resolved, just awaiting the final details. I apologise for being cryptic, but if the other party see me here it could mess up the settlement. Once everything is settled I will be more forthcoming.

Thanjs again for your kindness

[Fireman]

I promised to “reveal all” when the matter was concluded, apologies fir not having done so.

To be honest, I was not entirely honest about the circumstances, as I was worried about it being seen by the other parties.

To clarify, the affected individual was not me but my wife. She worked for a local council, that had amalgamated with neighbouring Councils, hence the change of location.

She was caring for her father, her mother having recently passed away. She had also reduced her hours from 4 days to 3, specifically to help with grand child care. The travel to the new location is well known for delays, and after including the walk to the car park would be over one hour, and often significantly more.

The employer had made most of the “top brass” redundant- 8 councils reduced to two need a lot less execs etc, at a huge cost.
“Normal” employees were absolutely refused redundancy, but conditions were altered so a large amount threw in the towel.
The idea of redundancy for her was floated but was told in no uncertain terms that “we don’t do redundancy packages”, that the job was still there, and if she failed to “show” she would be deemed as resigning.

I felt that her Union Rep was not particularly helpful, so sat and compiled a 3 page document, illustrating why the move was not “reasonable”, and suggested that there were limited options:

Redundancy
Allowing her to continue to work from home
Dismissal

I said she would not object to redundancy. If she was dismissed, she is not in a frame of mind to launch an unfair dismissal case, but we would do what is required in the required timescale, and by the time court time was available she would be in a better state to carry through the process.
The document was passed to the Union Rep, who submitted it.
The next day a message was received, cancelling the arranged meeting, and to say that a redundancy package would follow.

So, all in all, a success. The truth is that she absolutely would not have done the journey and would have resigned, but that the attitude of the management was such that she felt compared to stick other guns.

Thank you to all those that responded , especially with case histories.

[ULA]

Thank you for the update and glad that things worked out for your wife.