Complex undertakings
Page 51
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• While I am pleased to see that Commercial Motor has begun to highlight the complex issues surrounding the Transfer of Undertakings, I am concerned at the manner in which you have chosen to interpret events.
NFC is not, as you report, seeking to "turn the tables" on rivals, nor is it trying to avoid obligations over redundancy arrangements. We are seeking clarification over a serious point of European law which has already begun to influence our industry. We have done so after taking leading counsel's opinion, an opinion which differs from the view of your legal expert. We have also promised all our former employees that if we are wrong, we shall stand fully behind our obligations, though, as you pointed out arrangements have already been put into place in most instances to provide payments equivalent to redundancy.
We do not agree with your unattributable industry source who claims that "contracts will never change hands". That has not been our experience over the years when we have transferred staff from customers under the same terms. Our view remains that the arguments for contracting out or changing a contractor are based on service and quality rather than providing labour at the cheapest rate.
We have no doubt that the Transfer of Undertakings Regulations constitute a major issue for the industry and its employees. It is in everyone's interest to examine properly the applicability to the contracting out of services to remove the confusion which has arisen over the years — as highlighted by your report on the James Vickers tribunal. It is surely not surprising that NFC should be seeking that clarification. BRS's recently published study Transfer of Undertaking — Understanding the Issues aims to highlight many of the issues.
Ian Barr Human resources Director, NFC, Bedford.
LI We shall be returning to the complex matter of Transfer of Undertakings in future issues — Ed.