Can I be sacked for not working overtime?

[Cyclone]

'Reasonable requests' covers changes such as extra days trading - it does when they offer you an alternative day off anyways...

 

No it doesn't. If your contract states Mon-Fri x hours, then it's entirely unreasonable to demand that someone start working regularly at the weekend.

[Cyclone]

If hange most the Company discuss this change with you over a reasonable time period they can more or less change any aspect of your terms & conditions. They will normally cite that it is a neccesary buisness need (TO SUIT THE NEEDS OF THE BUISNESS).

I am afraid you will not be able to stay as you are if the needs are to operate Saturdays.

 

A contract can't be changed without agreement from both parties.

A company could choose to make you redundant if you won't accept the new terms, but they can't just impose a change on you.

[dawny1970]

A contract can't be changed without agreement from both parties.

A company could choose to make you redundant if you won't accept the new terms, but they can't just impose a change on you.

 

if the new terms breach the working time directive or are unreasonable then if the sack you based on these then you can sue for unfair dismissal

[Cyclone]

You can't be sacked for refusing a change in terms and conditions.

 

You could be made redundant, but as you say if the new T&C's were unreasonable or illegal then it wouldn't be a legal redundancy.

[MobileB]

You can't be sacked for refusing a change in terms and conditions.

 

You could be made redundant, but as you say if the new T&C's were unreasonable or illegal then it wouldn't be a legal redundancy.

 

Yes you can if the company can justify the reasons for changing them (eg economic reasons). If the changes make you "substantially" worse off then they can offer redundancy. Generally they will terminate your contract and then re-employ under the new conditions, eg British Airways.

[Cyclone]

Do you have a link, I'd like to see a case where changes were imposed with a threat of termination (as opposed to redundancy) for whatever reason.

 

You make it sound as if contracts can be terminated at will, they can't employment law stops that, and that includes for reasons of wanting to change the contract. (Unless of course they are rolling contracts, <1 year in post, etc...)

[MobileB]

The link about the BA case for you:

 

http://www.personneltoday.com/articles/2010/04/29/55424/case-of-the-month-malone.html

 

The important thing to remember is that the employer should consult about the changes and try to reach agreement. If, having done this, agreement cannot be agreed, the employee could either continue to work under protest (they would need to write) pending a future tribunal case, or they could leave and seek constructive dismissal. The onus is on the employee to show and mitigate their losses.

 

So, for instance, if the employer wished to change a contract to state that you now had to work on a Saturday. If you had childcare issues then potentially you could have a case. If you stated you didn't wish to do it because you like to go out on the beer on a Friday night then I would be most surprised if you would win, especially if the company can show a justifiable economic reason for wanting the change.

[Cyclone]

No offence, but that's entirely different. The court ruled that the employment contracts had not been changed or breached as what was changed wasn't written into those contracts but was a separate agreement between BA and the unions involved. This case has no bearing at all on whether an employee can unilaterally change a contract with an employee and I still maintain that it can't, as with any other contract any change requires agreement from all parties (unless there's a term allowing one party to change it without agreement of course).

If your employer wishes to change your contract and you refuse to sign the only option they have is to make you redundant assuming that you've been there long enough that you can't just be terminated legally.

The court ruling in that case did specifically mention a clause in some of the contracts that would allow a reasonable change to be made, but that is by no means standard and the OP would have to check out their contract to see if it contained such a clause... And then consider whether a change from a 5 day, 40 hr working pattern to include a 6th day is reasonable (clearly not, especially if that day is identified as overtime).

Edited October 20, 2011 by Cyclone