GMB Union, Unite the Union and various others v AES Realisations (Coventry) Limited and and 1 other — 2025

The tribunal heard only claimant evidence because neither respondent attended. It found that the first respondent had operated Coventry and Birmingham sites after acquiring Remploy, and that recognition of trade unions had continued by TUPE and/or by conduct. On that basis, GMB was recognised at Birmingham, and GMB and Unite were recognised at Coventry, for the shop-floor or weekly/monthly paid workforce rather than office staff.

The tribunal held that the statutory threshold for a collective consultation claim was met because more than 20 employees were dismissed in a 90-day period at each establishment. It accepted evidence that about 52 workers were dismissed at Birmingham on 15 May 2020, and that around 50 furloughed workers at Coventry were contacted in May 2020 with dismissals taking effect in that period. Because the section 188 complaint had to be brought by the recognised unions, the remaining individual claims were dismissed.

For Birmingham, the tribunal found there had been attempts to consult from late 2019 or early 2020, including discussions about transfers from Birmingham to Coventry and redundancy packages, so it was not satisfied on the balance of probabilities that section 188 had been breached there. For Coventry, by contrast, it found there had been no consultation at all after the administration and fixed 12 May 2020 as the dismissal date for certainty. Applying Susie Radin and taking the absence of any mitigation into account, it made a full 90-day protective award for the Coventry bargaining units of GMB and Unite. The reasons do not quantify the monetary amount of the award.