More transparency around Tupe regulations required, say sector heads

Finance | Niki May Young | 8 Feb 2012

The leaders of several of the sector's umbrella bodies have responded to a call for evidence on Transfer of Undertakings Regulations 2006, recommending greater clarity of all parties' responsibilities in the transfer process.

Leaders of the NCVO, Locality, Charity Finance Directors' Group, Acevo, Birmingham VSC, Voluntary Sector North West, Social Enterprise UK and Navca submitted their responses to the Department for Business Innovation & Skills (BIS) based on a joint survey of 24 questions posed to their members.

Transfer of Undertakings (Tupe) Regulations 2006 implement an EU directive to protect staff's terms and conditions in the circumstance when a business is taken over by another employer. The regulations, however, are not clear enough on where responsibilities lie in different circumstances, the joint survey found, with the majority of respondents advising there were "too many grey areas, too open to interpretation" in the regulations.

The leaders had three key recommendations:

for full disclosure of Tupe information to be published at the first point of the tender process
for the government to undertake a formal consultation on the Tupe Regulations 2006
for a similar and simultaneous process addressing the transfer of pensions liabilities to take place

They also advised that respondents "tended to focus their criticisms on the way the process of transfer is managed within the commissioning process, rather than on the Tupe regulations themselves. In particular the responsibilities of the commissioner are unclear".

The sector leaders called upon the government to take greater repsonsibility of the matter and to publish codes of practice for commissioners to be transparent in their implementation of the transfer process. A number of survey respondents suggested implementing a fining structure for misleading, lacking or inaccurate information on liabilities from transferring organisations. Others called for the right to withdraw from a tender if a commissioner fails to provide full information on cost implications.

Directory: Association of Chief Executives of Voluntary Organisations (ACEVO) | Charity Finance Directors' Group (CFDG) | National Association of Voluntary and Community Action | National Council of Voluntary Organisations (NCVO)

Comments

[Cancel] | Reply to:

Name *

Email *

Organisation

Job Title

Comments *

Verification *

* Please read our Community Standards

Close »

Community Standards

The civilsociety.co.uk community and comments board is intended as a platform for informed and civilised debate.

We hope to encourage a broad range of views, however, there are standards that we expect commentators to uphold. We reserve the right to delete or amend any comments that do not adhere to these standards.

We welcome:

Robust but respectful debate
Strongly held opinions
Intelligent relevant discussion
The sharing of relevant experiences
New participants

We will not publish:

Rude, threatening, offensive, obscene or abusive language, or links to such material
Links to commercial organisations or spam postings. The comments board is not an advertising platform
The posting of contact details for yourself or others
Comments intended for malicious purpose or mindless abuse
Comments purporting to be from another person or organisation under false pretences
Gratuitous criticism, commentary or self-promotion
Any material which breaches copyright or privacy laws, or could be considered libellous
The use of the comments board for the pursuit or extension of personal disputes

Be aware:

Views expressed on the comments board are left at users’ discretion and are in no way views held or supported by Civil Society Media
Comments left by others may not be accurate, do not rely on them as fact
You may be misunderstood - sarcasm and humour can easily be taken out of context, try to be clear

Please:

Enjoy the opportunity to express your opinion and respect the right of others to express theirs
Confine your remarks to issues rather than personalities

Together we can keep our community a polite, respectful and intelligent platform for discussion.