NCVO has reacted positively to the conclusion of the government’s consultation on Tupe, but questioned whether the discussion had the correct focus.

The Department of Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) has been consulting on legislative changes to Tupe – Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) – for two years, and has now released its response.

NCVO’s public service delivery officer Fiona Sheil has praised the government in her blog for taking on board concerns that NCVO and others raised.

“Over 40,000 charities and voluntary organisations are involved in delivering public services,” she wrote. “We have seen many examples of organisations unable to bid because of insufficient Tupe information, and we welcome steps to address this unnecessary barrier.”

In terms of specific steps, Sheil pointed to the doubling of the time period at which employee liability information (ELI) must be shared before transfer to 28 days; that the BIS has scrapped plans to repeal the 2006 Service Provision Change clause; and that now new employers and transferred employees will be able to negotiate a ‘harmonisation’ of terms one year after the transfer date, derived from collective agreements.

However, she bemoaned that the consultation did not pay attention to certain issues that NCVO were particularly concerned about.

Specifically, NCVO wants employee liability information to be made available to potential bidders at invitation to tender stage of procurement, and the commissioner’s role in Tupe to be strengthened and given greater clarity.

Acevo broadly supports response

Acevo has similarly backed the government's Tupe response, while also airing its own grievance. 

Its chief executive, Sir Stephen Bubb said: "This response is largely positive and shows that the government has listened to the concerns of the sector. Acevo strongly opposed the weakening of requirements for the provision of ELI, and BIS has sensibly scrapped these proposals. The new requirement to provide ELI 28 days before transfer will give organisations more time to evaluate and prepare for their liabilities under Tupe.

“Other proposed changes, for example to rules around renegotiation of terms derived from collective agreements, should give employers greater flexibility while protecting the rights of transferring employees. This must be carefully monitored to ensure that employee's rights are upheld in practice.”

However, Bubb’s response was tinged with disappointment over the lack of consideration of the role of public sector commissioners in the governance of Tupe transfers in public service markets.

The government’s full response to the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 can be read here.

Charity Finance is now requesting charity responses for our annual Fund Management Survey, which will be published in November's issue. Click here to share your views, and be in with the chance of winning a £100 John Lewis gift card.