Bucknor v Bidvest Noonan (UK) Ltd 
Legal BodyEmployment Tribunal (ET)
Type of Claim / JurisdictionDismissal, Discrimination and Equality
The claimant was employed as a security guard from 2016. The contract of employment expressly had a flexibility clause citing the needs of the business. The claimant has a young daughter and this is relevant to these proceedings considering there was a difficulty custody battle and at the end of that the claimant had full custody of his daughter.
The issue arising related to the claimant’s availability for work and his flexibility. The Tribunal outlined a series of months were no or a very limited number of shifts. There were other months in which the claimant had to be chased for his availability. The claimant stated in June
Already a subscriber?
Click here to login and access the full article.Log in now to read the full article
Don't miss out, register today!
Are you fully aware of the benefits of Legal-Island's Employment Law Update Service? We help hundreds of people like you understand how the latest changes in employment law impact on your business.
Help understand the ramifications of each important case from NI, GB and Europe
24/7 access to all the content in the Legal Island Vault for research case law and HR issues
Ensure your organisation’s policies and procedures are fully compliant with NI law
Receive free preliminary advice on workplace issues from the employment team at Worthingtons Solicitors
The information in this article is provided as part of Legal-Island's Employment Law Hub. We regret we are not able to respond to requests for specific legal or HR queries and recommend that professional advice is obtained before relying on information supplied anywhere within this article.