Contributors
Helen
Sarah
Anoushka
Elle
Christine
Stephen
Fiona
Kathrin
Shona
MelissaYou can enjoy the Fashionista by email... or twitter
If you'd like to receive Fashionista-at-law posts by email, just enter your email address in the box above and click on 'Subscribe'.
To follow this blog via Fashionista's savvy little sister Modeliste, click here.-
Archives
- ▼ 2012 (12)
- ► 2011 (35)
- ► 2010 (56)
- ► November (2)
- ► October (3)
- ► September (3)
- ► July (1)
- ► June (5)
- ► May (5)
- ► April (6)
- ► March (8)
- ► February (8)
- ► January (15)
-
- Looking for an excuse to shop?
- Avoiding invasions of privacy
- Retail + TECHNOLOGY
- Winter Sales 2010 in Brussels
- The Polarization of Lady Gaga
- Does my Long Tail look big in this outfit?
- A fragment of fashion . . .
- Crimes against fashion . . .
- A copy or a trend?
- Of garments and guilt
- Paris' broken heart
- New Year Honours for Fashion Industry Icons
- Climate change and a fashion statement . . . .
- The M Word - The results are in.....
- 2010
- ► 2009 (159)
- ► December (11)
-
- Time to go Christmas shopping.
- A new dictionary for green fashion?
- "Does my Butt look funny in this ...?"
- Keeping in credit
- Fashionista heads to Copenhagen on a mission . . .
- Escada UK Rescued by Steely Determination
- What will the Chancellor have in store...?
- The place to be seen
- A site for sore Uggs?
- Falic fantasy ends up in a French court room
- Oh to look old. What a difference a product-base makes.
- ► November (11)
-
- Scottish (as opposed to French) and Saunders
- Christmas blues . . . .
- No sweat?
- Modeliste . . . . .
- Fashion Summit
- Porsche Cayman -v- Crocs Cayman
- Unringing the belle: Skechers return to nursing
- A garage sale, but not as we know it
- Nintendo: playing the fashion game
- Bankable band: is the check in the post?
- New Model Army of Avon Ladies prepares to invade Latin America
- ► October (14)
-
- Recessionista goes shopping.
- Katie's knickers "not set in stone"
- The M Word
- What if it doesn't fit?
- How much is the Baumler brand worth?
- Listed buildings: the new place to be seen for retailers?
- From shoes to suits: Diesel footwear gets an airing in court
- U.S bloggers may have to stop blagging
- Plato's Atlantis
- New Look goes to market
- m-tailing - the latest and hottest retail trend?
- Fashion Summit 2009: The "Peak" Event of the Year
- Shopping gets even more virtual
- !
- ► September (11)
-
- Life is good: Jenden's not jaded
- Fashion with compassion
- Manny's the man!
- Dusk has set on "Handbags at dawn"
- London Fashion Network: 1st birthday bash
- No Crocs, no party
- Handbags at Dawn: one week to go
- It's a Twittering frenzy!
- Only CHANEL. Never Chanel-esque.
- Nudity in fashion advertising - how much is too much?
- What do Vivienne Westwood, Nicole Farhi and Fashionista have in common?
- ► August (7)
- ► July (12)
-
- Daily Candy gets even sweeter
- Coco Before Chanel: (Not-So)-Subliminal Advertising
- JJB: the lowdown on the loan
- Sunshine gives retail a boost, but will it last?
- Turning real women into goddesses for 15 years
- In with the old, in with the new?
- Acquascutum - an MBO explained
- Never Knowingly Undersold
- The luxury lifestyle - is online the place to be?
- A report from Milan - but not from the catwalk!
- Celebrity fashion fame: more than 15 minutes?
- Gathering of the clans
- ► June (17)
-
- When store closure can be a good thing...
- Who's got the look?
- IP in the Fashion Industry
- The Perry battle: Katy vs Katie
- Cookie monster still threatening
- Amazon to launch footwear site
- Fashionista congratulates...
- LFN "Trading Online" event
- Facebook Username Change - from Saturday 13 June
- Cat fight over catsuit
- Fashionista investigates green . . . .
- McCartney childrens range for Gap announced
- Jaeger: dressing women 125 years on
- The Whispering rebrand
- Primani turns to Beckham for inspiration
- New improved design law down under
- Oasis online marketing results in domain name loss
- ► May (16)
-
- Generation Jones
- Sister Act
- Why cash is king (over gift vouchers)...
- From Zero to Hero: but who really wins?
- Guess who Gucci's suing ...
- This is not just any sale. This is the M&S 125th anniversary sale...
- M&S
- Donna Karan and Luxottica: renewed eye deal is ideal
- Fashionista is thinking green . . . . .
- Debenhams: right time for a rights issue?
- No bags of bags for Bags Bunnies
- Selfridges: delighting fashionistas for 100 years
- Online shoppers still spending
- And the price of your own name is . . . .?
- Fashion Design Piracy Bill set to return
- GET LUCKY gets lucky against LUCKY
- ► April (16)
-
- Landlords work with retailers to save costs
- "Aura of luxury" as Dior squeezes Copad in corset clash
- The champagne will keep flowing for LVMH
- Credit Insurance Top-up Scheme - Darling Disappoints
- Budget 2009 - The Retail Summary
- Will Darling Bring Relief?
- Manhattan in May, will AA have to pay?
- Designer fashion at High Street prices
- Lipstick index is no more
- London lettings up
- High end vs High St.
- Reorganising your business is the new black
- Hobbs goes postal with new sub-brand
- H&M is Europe's No.1 brand
- The beauty is in the small print
- Good news for Business Rates
- ► March (16)
-
- Can TopShop conquer the Big Apple?
- Bling is dead . . . . .
- Style Insider: inside the brand
- Agent Optimism
- This is not just Code...this is M&S Code
- BRC budget submission 2009
- From "outlet" to "outnet"
- Who says labels don't have pulling power?
- Online, cross-border: new report published
- A fashion house that now houses people..
- Don't be a prize criminal!
- Business rates to increase
- Data rules (if you know the rules)!
- Straight to the Top!
- Mosaic is latest to go down "pre-pack" route
- Beverly Hills and the German shopping question
- ► February (17)
-
- Pre-packs: now you can have your say
- Creditors dig their heels in on Stylo CVA plans
- Sounding off: the dangers of reviews and comment-based sites
- Welcome to and thank you for visiting Fashionista-at-law!
- Better deals for all tenants or just the luxury sector?
- January online spending up 32%
- Viva Vintage!
- Eastern Opportunities
- YSL estate won't let go of rabbit and rat
- The right to return and a close escape for Fashionista
- Red Carpet News
- Baugur's fall from fashion....
- Is online the way to succeed in 2009?
- Imitation, flattery and . . . tea on 5th Avenue
- Woolworths saved by Shop Direct
- What price Duck and Fcuk?
- It's my name! Or is it . . . . ?
- ► January (11)
-
- Ethics of outsourcing: not just Tesco's problem
- Will the latest “pre-pack” trend continue despite the recently introduced SIP 16?
- India's Fashionistas
- When should a trouser be quilted?
- Just an idea
- The Icelandic effect shows no signs of thawing
- Is patriotism the answer to recession?
- Primark's luck
- Economic Hope?
- You thought we wouldn't notice ...
- Fur flies as PETA takes on Lagerfeld
- ► 2008 (24)
- ► December (18)
-
- Chinese win big bucks for footwear fraud
- The Legend of the Golden Fleece
- Pentland takes stake in Gio-Goi
- "Wedding dress and two curries, please ..."
- Why designers are better than models
- Oily Boy
- Gracefully she slips out of her own name ...
- Old clothes cool in Poland
- UKFE joins BCIA as dreams begin to come true
- Of Sleeves and Arms
- But do catwalks have nine lives?
- Skechers Croc'd?
- Keywords v Trade Marks -- let the battle commence.....
- Law on Laur
- Keeping cool in KL, the Islamic way
- Posh confession raises copyight issues
- Shutting up shop - how to get redundancy right
- New look, no mark
- ► November (4)
- ► October (2)
Fashion Links
Shutting up shop – how to get redundancy right
1) What is redundancy?
This is when an employer dismisses an employee because it will be closing down the employee’s work place 9as in this scenario) but it will also apply where an employer will not be carrying on the part of the business in which the employee works, or it needs fewer employees to do that type of work.
Redundancy is a potentially fair reason for dismissal. But, unless the employer follows a proper procedure in a genuine redundancy situation, there is a risk the dismissal will be found unfair. In the event that an employee is successful in an unfair dismissal claim, they could be awarded up to £63,000 (£66,200 for dismissals after 1 February 2009). Store closures which involve making 20 or more employees redundant within a period of 90 days or less, require an employer to follow a collective consultation procedure in addition to consulting individually with employees.
2) When is a redundancy dismissal fair?
There must be a genuine redundancy situation and a fair selection process. There must be appropriate warning and consultation, a fair selection process and consideration must be given to suitable alternative employment for the employees in question. For retailers this could mean offering to move an employee from shop floor to warehouse (or vice versa) or to another store.
3)What is the process for collective redundancies?
A collective redundancy situation arises where an employer proposes to make redundant 20 or more employees at one establishment within a period of 90 days or less. An employer must consult with appropriate representatives at least 90 days before the dismissals take effect if 100 or more employees are to be made redundant, or otherwise at least 30 days before.
The consultation process must include consultation about ways of avoiding the dismissals and of mitigating the consequences of the dismissals. The employer must disclose in writing to the representatives certain information including the reasons for the proposals, the number and description of employees to be made redundant, and the method of selection. Failure to consult adequately or at all can lead to an Employment Tribunal making a protective award (of up to 90 days’ pay per employee).
An employer contemplating closing a store may well find that it is caught by the collective redundancy regime, and it is therefore important to allow a sufficient period of time to carry out the consultation process before the firm dismissal takes effect.
The Fashionista says that since the purpose of a redundancy programme is to reduce costs, it makes good financial sense for employers to get specialist advice upfront when considering a store closure to ensure they get the process right and minimise the risk of expensive and time consuming Tribunal claims and possible damages awards.