AIBU - sacking due to refusal to up hours

[JustMuddlingOn]

DH currently works 22 hours a week so that he can have DD while I work full time. He has worked for the same company for just over a year but has recently transferred to a new site.

The site he has transferred to has now been taken over by a new company. DH has yet to have his meeting with the new company but other staff that have have said that they were asked to up their hours (especially if they were on part time contracts) and got the impression that of they refused they would be fired.

Is this possible? I know that theres not a lot of assurance under 2 years but does there need to be a reason or can they just make something else up? DH has a flexible parental working agreement for his part time hours, will that make any difference?

Its not the be all and end all for us but seems so unfair.

He should be TUPEd over to the new company with exactly the same T&Cs, check with your union if there's a problem.

Type will protect him for 2 years speak to hr.

www.gov.uk/transfers-takeovers/transfers-of-employment-contracts

Good luck

Yes, he should be TUPE'd

He can ring ACAS tomorrow for advice, or go to the CAB they deal with that sort of thing all the time.

He is going currently on here say- he hasn’t had the meeting, No one has actually been let go, but the assumption from their meetings is that this might happen. I’d make sure he knows what his rights are, and what hours his currently contract stipulates, whether there is any overtime or extra hour clauses written in, but to go to the interview and find out what’s actually being said. It may be that the impression someone else got is incorrect.

I think the poster means that it depends how long the person has been employed overall - if it's been less than 2 years he has less employee protection than someone who has been with the company longer.

In theory TUPE protects for ever but in practise employers can get round it if they can show they have a valid economic, technical or organisational (ETO) reason for doing so - this usually allows them a way out. Unfortunately if he has been there less than two years then he usually won’t have a leg to stand on because he won’t be able to bring a claim (thanks Tories!). That said, if he is working part time for childcare or other caring responsibilities he may be able to claim that his dismissal is discriminatory and therefore wouldn’t need the full two years but you really need advice from a solicitor with the full facts. There are some solicitors that offer a free initial half hour.

if he is working part time for childcare or other caring responsibilities he may be able to claim that his dismissal is discriminatory

Being a parent/carer isn't a protected characteristic. Unless only women were allowed to be part time, he wouldn't have any claim for (sex) discrimination.

No but sex/gender is a protected characteristic so if he could show that he is being treated differently to others because of his sex (I.e women are allowed to work part time but he isn’t) then potentially he could have a claim. It is a complicated area though hence needing proper legal advice with all of the facts.