The High Court dismissed an appeal by Brian Tangney and 27 others over the timing of consultation before collective redundancies at Dell Products in Limerick. Mr Justice Birmingham concluded that the appeal identified no point of law that justified overturning the Employment Appeals Tribunal’s decision.
The dispute concerned written communications Dell sent to employees on 8 January 2009, alongside a staff meeting that day. The employees argued that the communications amounted to notice of dismissal, meaning consultation afterwards came too late to meet the Protection of Employment Act 1977. Dell maintained that the letters set out estimated terms that would apply if redundancies proceeded and that consultation began on 8 January.
A Rights Commissioner had found that Dell breached section 9 of the Act. The Employment Appeals Tribunal later upheld the Rights Commissioner’s decision on a section 10 issue, but found no breach of section 9 and set aside the earlier decision on that issue. The employees appealed to the High Court on a point of law.
Justice Birmingham considered European case law on when an employer’s duty to consult arises. He said the tribunal had treated the dispute as essentially factual and found that the 8 January communications were not notice of dismissal and that consultation began at an appropriate stage. He understood the tribunal’s reference to Dell’s entitlement to make a strategic decision as meaning consultation began when a strategic or commercial decision compelled the company to contemplate or plan collective redundancies.
The judgment noted that matters changed during consultation, which continued until 27 March 2009. Some employees were redeployed and did not leave; leaving dates for several production lines differed from the estimates in the initial letters; and the severance package improved. The letters described their contents as for information only and their leaving dates and severance calculations as estimates. The judge also acknowledged that the letters contained substantial detail and did not suggest Dell had an entirely open mind.
The court dismissed the appeal. It did not overturn the tribunal’s section 9 determination; the judgment’s stated conclusion was that no point of law had been identified to provide a basis for doing so.