Case 1306318/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs J Jordan & Others (as per schedule of claimants) v Shaylor Management Services (In Voluntary Liquidation) and 1 other — 2020
- Case reference
- 1306318/2019
- Decision date
- 1 April 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Miller RESERVED
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mrs J Jordan & Others (as per schedule of claimants)
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that the claimants were employed by the First Respondent and were permanently assigned to a centralised organisation based at the Aldridge office. Temporary assignments to project sites did not alter that conclusion because staff remained within the same organisational structure, with no site-specific line management or managerial autonomy. The tribunal found that all 193 employees were at one establishment and were made redundant on 17 June 2019.
There was no recognised trade union and no existing body of employee representatives with authority to receive information and be consulted. The tribunal found that the First Respondent took no steps to arrange elections of employee representatives, provide information, or consult collectively or individually before the redundancies.
The tribunal held that the First Respondent's duties under section 188 TULRCA were engaged and that it had failed to comply with sections 188 and 188A. Because the First Respondent did not participate and showed no mitigating circumstances, the tribunal made a protective award for each claimant made redundant, with a protected period of 90 days from 17 June 2019. If the First Respondent is insolvent, the Second Respondent must meet the liability subject to the statutory limits in Part XII of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Claim was for a declaration and protective award under sections 188, 188A and 189 of TULRCA 1992 for failure to consult collectively about proposed redundancies. The tribunal awarded a 90-day protected period but did not quantify individual or aggregate sums. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
9 references- s.188 Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- s.188A Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- s.189 Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- Rockfon establishment test
- USDAW establishment test
- Susie Radin Ltd v GMB protective award approach
- Independent Insurance Company Ltd v Aspinall scope of protective award
- Part XII Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.186 Employment Rights Act 1996
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.