Care workers dismissed after TUPE transfer: claims against new provider mostly out of time
Four care workers who lost their jobs when a quadriplegic man's care moved to a new provider won statutory redundancy pay, but their unfair dismissal and notice claims failed because they were brought too late.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- SM is a quadriplegic with severe disabilities requiring 24-hour care.
- Before December 2020, SM's care was provided by JSP with a dedicated team of seven carers employed by SM.
- From 16 December 2020, Embracing Care took over SM's care in a shared supported living setting.
- The tribunal found a service provision change under TUPE Regulation 3(1)(b)(ii).
- All claimants were dismissed by Embracing Care for refusing to employ them under TUPE.
- Claims for unfair dismissal and notice pay were out of time against Embracing Care; only statutory redundancy claims succeeded.
Timeline
-
Initial contact about care change
Yvonne Shillock received an email from Deborah Jude to discuss future care arrangements for SM.
-
TUPE first raised
Laurel Daniels raised the possibility that TUPE applied to the change of care provider.
-
At risk meeting
JSP convened a meeting informing SM's carers of the planned move and potential redundancies.
-
SM moved to St Godric's
SM physically moved to the new care home; legal responsibility for care transferred to Embracing Care.
-
TUPE dispute continues
JSP sent contracts to Embracing Care asserting TUPE applied; Embracing Care disagreed.
-
Staff meeting confirming TUPE
JSP staff meeting informed carers that TUPE applied and their employment transferred to Embracing Care.
-
Deborah Jude confirms Embracing Care as employer
Deborah Jude told Mrs Burnip and Ms Eglon that Embracing Care was now their employer.
-
P45s issued
P45s were issued to all claimants, dated 1 March 2021, after resolution of holiday pay disputes.
-
Claim forms presented
Claim forms were presented to the tribunal by the claimants.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether a service provision change occurred under TUPE when care for a disabled individual moved from one provider to another, and if so, which respondent was liable for the claimants' dismissals.
The outcome
The tribunal decided that there was a service provision change under TUPE Regulation 3(1)(b)(ii) when care for SM transferred from JSP to Embracing Care.
However, all claims for unfair dismissal and notice pay against Embracing Care were dismissed as they were presented outside the three-month time limit. Only the claims for statutory redundancy payments succeeded.
Compensation: No damages awarded as claims other than statutory redundancy were out of time; statutory redundancy payments to be determined separately.
Lessons & takeaways
- If you believe you have been dismissed due to a TUPE transfer, you must bring a claim to the employment tribunal within three months of the effective date of termination.
- A service provision change can occur even if the client's care setting changes, as long as the same activities are carried out for the same client after the transfer.
- Statutory redundancy pay claims are not subject to the same time limits as unfair dismissal claims, so they may still succeed even if other claims fail.
What this case shows in practice
Four dedicated carers who looked after a quadriplegic man, SM, found themselves out of work when his care moved from one provider to another. The tribunal confirmed that this was a service provision change under TUPE, meaning their employment should have transferred to the new provider, Embracing Care. However, the new provider refused to take them on, leading to their dismissal.
What the losing side could have done differently
Embracing Care argued that TUPE did not apply, but the tribunal disagreed. If they had accepted the transfer and employed the carers, they could have avoided the dismissal claims entirely. More critically for the carers, they delayed bringing their unfair dismissal claims until after the three-month time limit had expired. They could have protected their position by presenting claims earlier, even if they were still hoping for a resolution.
Why the result matters for similar claims
This case highlights the strict time limits for unfair dismissal claims in a TUPE context. Even where the transfer is clear, employees must act quickly. It also confirms that a change in the setting of care (from a private home to a shared supported living arrangement) does not prevent a service provision change, as long as the same client receives the same care activities. The success of the statutory redundancy claims shows that some protections remain even when other claims are lost.
Similar cases
Four night drivers unfairly dismissed after employer wrongly assumed TUPE transfer
Four HGV night drivers with up to 12 years' service were unfairly dismissed when their employer assumed their jobs would transfer to a new contractor under TUPE, but the tribunal found no organised grouping existed.
Five workers unfairly dismissed after TUPE transfer missed them out
Five employees of Westfield Shovels Limited were unfairly dismissed when their jobs were lost to a service change. The tribunal found they should have been transferred to the new contractor, not made redundant.
TUPE transfer during liquidation: protective award and unfair dismissal claims fail, but consultation breach succeeds
Former telemarketing employees lose protective award and unfair dismissal claims after a TUPE transfer from a company in creditors' voluntary liquidation, but win compensation for failure to consult.
Clinical Support Worker awarded statutory redundancy payment after 19 years' service
A tribunal awarded a statutory redundancy payment of £2,077.16 to a Clinical Support Worker with 19 years' service, finding that his refusal of an alternative role was not unreasonable.