Case 2400249/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms T Hutchinson & others (see schedule) v Travel and Financial Services Limited & others (see schedule) and 1 other — 2022
- Case reference
- 2400249/2020
- Decision date
- 20 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ainscough
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Ms T Hutchinson & others (see schedule)
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal considered whether Sales Consultants and Store Managers in Thomas Cook retail stores, and Regional Managers, worked at an establishment where there was a proposal to dismiss 20 or more employees within 90 days for the purposes of section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992.
For Sales Consultants and Store Managers, the tribunal found that the relevant establishment was the individual store to which each employee was assigned. Their contracts identified a normal store location, and although they could provide cover at other stores, the evidence was that this happened only "as and when" and did not amount to assignment to a regional establishment. Where an individual store employed fewer than 20 employees at the time of liquidation, there was no duty to consult and those claimants were not entitled to a protective award.
For Regional Managers, the tribunal found that the group of 23 Regional Managers was a separate establishment. They were managed as a group, had group meetings, were assessed against specific key performance indicators, and were assigned to that group when the Thomas Cook Group went into compulsory liquidation. The tribunal held that there was a duty to consult with the Regional Managers and that they were entitled to a protective award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Protective award claims by Sales Consultants and Store Managers were not upheld where they worked at individual stores with fewer than 20 proposed dismissals within 90 days; the tribunal found there was no duty to consult for those claimants because the relevant establishment was the individual store, not the region. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | Protective award claims by Regional Managers were upheld in principle; the tribunal found the group of 23 Regional Managers was an establishment for the purposes of section 188 and that there was a duty to consult. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
6 references- section 188 Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- section 189 Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- USDAW v WW Realisation 1 Limited
- Rockfon A/S v Specialarbejderforbundet i Danmark
- Athinaiki Chartopoiia AE v L Panagiotidis and Others
- Seahorse Maritime Limited v Nautilus International
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.