Redundancy
There is a statutory duty on employers to consult those they are considering making redundant. With collective redundancies an appropriate representative must be consulted, such as from a trade union.
If there are 20 or more employees threatened with dismissal within a period of 90 days, consultation must take place at least 30 days before the first dismissal. If there are 100 or more employees threatened, consultation must take place at least 90 days before the first dismissal.
The recent EAT case of UK Coal Mining Limited and the National Union of Mineworkers (whereby safety was falsely quoted by the employer as the reason for closing a mine when the real reason was economic) has significantly increased the rights of workers threatened by redundancy. In the past consultation has meant workers attempting to reduce the numbers of those to be made redundant and to try and mitigate the consequences.
Now however the employer must consult regarding any underlying reasons for contemplating redundancies. The economic case for redundancies will have to be explained to you. You will be able to put your case for avoiding the need for redundancies based upon this information.
If your employer does not follow this process, then his making you redundant will enable you put in a claim to an employment tribunal for unfair dismissal.
Your employer needs to consult you before selecting you for redundancy. He sounds like he is using the 'last in, first out' method of selecting who should be made redundant.
If you are indeed made redundant, you can apply to an employment tribunal for unfair dismissal owing to indirect age discrimination under the age discrimination legislation.
Unfair Dismissal
Health & Safety
Most employers have rules regarding drugs and alcohol. Such rules are rarely comprehensive and even if written into a contract, don't automatically confer a right on an employer to test or stop and search employees or their belongings.
An employer can however write a disciplinary policy that makes it clear that a breach of a drugs and alcohol policy will result in disciplinary proceedings that can lead to dismissal.
An employer is able to discipline a worker who is obviously 'under the influence'. But a worker who has been tested should not be disciplined for having traces of substances in his body where they might have been taken outside of work.
In disciplining workers, the policy must be implemented consistently and fairly. If one worker is given a harsher punishment than a colleague for the same offence, the employer will have to justify that.
A common practise that is acceptable is testing 'for cause' owing to a worker's involvement in an accident or other workplace incident. Random testing by employers is not acceptable however for workers other than those working in safety critical roles.
Your employer can not make you undergo testing, although he might try to discipline or even dismiss you refusing, especially if testing is in your contract and you work in a safety critical area. Writing such a policy into the contract is not strictly necessary as it could be introduced as a work rule providing it was properly publicised on notice boards, emails,newsletters etc.
Were you to be dismissed for refusing to undergo a test, your employer would have to convince a tribunal that his policy of drug testing was proportionate and reasonable. Your job and environment in which your work would be relevant.
Disclaimer
: articles and information published by WorkRep are intended for general information purposes only. No representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, about the completeness, accuracy or reliability of such information are made.
© Workrep 2007