GMB v SE-Tek Ltd (in administration) — 2023

The claimant GMB brought a complaint under section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 alleging that Se-Tek Limited failed to comply with section 188 collective consultation requirements. The respondent's administrator consented to the claim continuing, and Employment Judge Jeram decided under Rule 21 that the complaint could properly be determined on the available material.

The tribunal was satisfied that, as at 22 June 2022, the respondent was proposing to dismiss as redundant 20 or more employees within 90 days or less at West Quay Road, Sunderland Enterprise Park, Sunderland SR5 2TD. It found that GMB was recognised by the respondent for collective bargaining, that the Sunderland site was an establishment within section 188, and that the respondent was required to consult GMB as an appropriate representative of affected employees.

The tribunal found that the respondent failed to comply with the consultation requirement in section 188(4), that the section 189 complaint was presented within the primary time limit, and that there was no information suggesting it was not reasonably practicable for the respondent to comply with its consultation obligations. The complaint was therefore well founded.

The tribunal made a protective award under section 189(3). It ordered the respondent to pay each employee in respect of whom GMB was recognised a payment equivalent to 90 days' remuneration, beginning on 1 July 2022, the date on which the first dismissals took effect. Applying the guidance in Susie Radin Ltd v GMB, and noting the absence of evidence of consultation or mitigating circumstances, the tribunal considered the maximum 90-day protected period just and equitable. The Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefits) Regulations 1996 apply to the award.