Where necessary, details of work abroad and currency of payThe statement is not the contract, it is merely evidence of it<\/p>\n
System Floors v Daniel [1982] ICR 54 (EAT)<\/p>\n
Held Browne-Wilkinson: \u2018It [the statement] provides very strong prima facie evidence of what were the terms of the contract between the parties, but does not constitute a written contract between the parties.<\/p>\n
[And on the issue of the statement as evidence\u2026]<\/p>\n
Nor are the statements of the terms finally conclusive: at most they place a heavy burden on the employer to show that the actual terms of the contract are different from those which he had set out in the statutory statement\u2019.
\nVariation<\/p>\n
ERA 1996, s.4. Employees must be informed of any variation within one month of the change.<\/p>\n
Continuing to work under the variation may amount to acceptance. Henry v London General Transport [2002] ICR 910 (CA)<\/p>\n
Pill LJ [23]: \u2018\u2026.I would find it extremely difficult to conclude other than that the employees had accepted the revised terms. I bear in mind the petitions and their content but, having presented them, the applicants worked upon the same rotas and terms of employment as a very large number of fellow employees, who had expressly accepted the terms, for a period of two years before instituting the present proceedings.
\nBurdett-Coutts v Herts CC [1984] IRLR 91 (QBD)
\nOther Documents<\/p>\n
The rulebook is not part of the contract. It is merely the employers\u2019 directions of how to do the job, which may be changed by the employer at any time: Secretary of State for Employment v ASLEF (No 2) [1972] 2 QB 455 (CA)<\/p>\n
Collective agreements
\nLegal status
\nSection 179 Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
\nIncorporation<\/p>\n
The fact that a collective agreement is not legally binding between the negotiating<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Where necessary, details of work abroad and currency of payThe statement is not the contract, it is merely evidence of it System Floors v Daniel [1982] ICR 54 (EAT) Held Browne-Wilkinson: \u2018It [the statement] provides very strong prima facie evidence Read More …<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-94202","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/94202","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=94202"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/94202\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=94202"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=94202"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=94202"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}