Misplaced Pages

Alexander v Standard Telephones & Cables Ltd (No 2)

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
(Redirected from Alexander v Standard Telephones Ltd (No 2))
This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these messages)
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
Find sources: "Alexander v Standard Telephones & Cables Ltd" No 2 – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (June 2023) (Learn how and when to remove this message)
This article relies excessively on references to primary sources. Please improve this article by adding secondary or tertiary sources.
Find sources: "Alexander v Standard Telephones & Cables Ltd" No 2 – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (June 2023) (Learn how and when to remove this message)
(Learn how and when to remove this message)

Alexander and Wall v Standard Telephones & Cables Ltd (No 2)
CourtHigh Court
Citation IRLR 287
Case opinions
Hobhouse J
Keywords
Contract of employment

Alexander and Wall v Standard Telephones & Cables Ltd (No 2) IRLR 287 is a UK labour law case on when a collective agreement is incorporated into an employment contract.

Facts

The workplace collective agreement of Standard Telephones & Cables Ltd in paragraph 6.1 worked on a "last in, first out" criteria for redundancy, ‘selection within each skill group will be made on the basis of service within the group’. Paragraph 6.2 said the ‘mutual objective will be to ensure that a balance of skills within the department is preserved…’ Standard Telephones instead made people redundant on the basis of skills needed. Mr Alexander and Ward both had informal contracts of employment. They were older and claiming they should not have been made compulsorily redundant. Because there was no evidence of express incorporation, the court asked whether it could be incorporated through implication.

Judgment

Hobhouse J held that the collective agreement would not be incorporated. He said that whether the collective agreement was incorporated was a matter of construction. Here the agreement designated itself as a ‘procedure’ agreement. ‘It is undoubtedly primarily a policy document applicable to the relationship between the unions and the company. It is also specifically concerned with procedure.’ Another clause referring to redeployment depended on another company division accepting the worker. This was not,

apt to be a term of an existing contract of employment as it involves the choice of the company to make an offer and it is only from the making of that offer and its acceptance that any individual right can subsequently arise....

In this context, where none of the other clauses of the collective agreement are apt to be incorporated into the individual contract of employment, it would require some cogent indication in clause 6 that it was to have a different character…

... in policy terms having regard to inter-union relationships’.

... is expressed in terms which are capable of giving rise to individual rights… However, I consider that the wording of paragraph 6.1 is too weak, when considered in the context in which it occurs… Clear and specific express words of incorporation contained in a primary contractual document could displace this conclusion…

See also

Employment contract cases
Johnson v Unisys Ltd
Gisda Cyf v Barratt
Employment Information Directive
Employment Rights Act 1996 ss
Devonald v Rosser & Sons 2 KB 728
Sagar v Ridehalgh & Sons Ltd 1 Ch 310
Wiluszynski v Tower Hamlets LBC ICR 439
SS for Employment v ASLEF (No 2) ICR 19
System Floors (UK) Ltd v Daniel ICR 54
Scally v Southern Health Board 1 AC 294
Crossley v Faithful & Gould Ltd
UCTA 1977 ss
Keen v Commerzbank AG
Johnstone v Bloomsbury Health Authority 2 All ER 293
Dryden v Greater Glasgow Health Board IRLR 469
French v Barclays Bank plc
Alexander v Standard Telephones Ltd (No 2) IRLR 287
TULRCA 1992 ss 179-180
Kaur v MG Rover Group Ltd
Malone v British Airways plc `
see Employment contract in English law

Notes

References

Categories:
Alexander v Standard Telephones & Cables Ltd (No 2) Add topic