Right not to be unfairly dismissed

Gwrthodwyd y cais gan Y Weinyddiaeth Amddiffyn.

My reference: LSM/FOI/120909/07

Background. Part X of the Employment Rights Act 1996 creates a statutory right not to be unfairly dismissed. Section 95 defines the circumstances in which an employee is treated as having been dismissed and they include a limited term contract which comes to the end of its term (see s.95(2) and s.235). Consequently, a private employee whose 3 year contract came to an end and was not renewed could (in principle at least) claim to be dismissed and, if the dismissal was unfair, would have a statutory remedy. The rights in Part X of the 1996 Act are applied to most of those in Crown employment – see s.191 of the 1996 Act. However, s.191 is subject to s.192. The version of s.192 which is currently in force is set out in Schedule 2 paragraph 16 of the 1996 Act. It simply provides that s.191 does not apply to service as a member of the naval, military or air forces of the Crown. From a date to be appointed, a different version of s.192 will come into force. This replaces the blanket exemption from s.191, thus extending to members of the naval, military or air forces of the Crown, statutory protection against unfair dismissal. The revised version of s192 has not been brought into force. The position therefore remains that members of the armed forces do not currently have the statutory protection against unfair dismissal to which other employees are entitled.

Further to s1(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000:

a. What is the policy basis for excluding members of the armed forces from statutory protection against unfair dismissal?

b. When will the revised version of s192 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 be brought in to force?

c. Please provide all MOD documentation, discussion and analysis regarding the military's exclusion from the relevant sections of the Employment Rights Act 1996, from the drafting of that Act, to the present day.

My preferred format to receive this information is by electronic means. If one part of this request can be answered sooner than others, please send that information first followed by any subsequent data. If you need any clarification of this request please feel free to email me. If FOI requests of a similar nature have already been asked could you please include your responses to those requests.

I note that under s16 of the Act, it is the MOD's duty to provide advice and assistance, so far as it would be reasonable to expect the authority to do so, to persons who make requests for information to it. Accordingly, if the MOD considers attempting to block release of information under s12 of the Act (exemption where cost of compliance exceeds appropriate limit), please a) provide a breakdown of costs, and b) explain what information *would* be releasable within the appropriate limit according to the department's purported calculations. I would, in that situation, apply for internal review, and ultimately apply for decision by the Information Commissioner, per s50 of the Act.

I would be grateful if you could confirm in writing that you have received this request, and I look forward to hearing from you within the 20-working day statutory time period.


L Mowday


1 Atodiad

Dear Ms Mowday,


Please find attached a response to the following FOI requests.


LSM/FOI/120909/07 - [1][FOI #128612 email]


LSM/FOI/120909/08 - [2][email address]


LSM/FOI/120909/09 - [3][email address]


LSM/FOI/120924/24 - [4][email address]


LSM/FOI/120924/25 - [5][email address]






Defence Personnel Secretariat


Visible links
1. mailto:[FOI #128612 email]
2. mailto:[email address]
3. mailto:[email address]
4. mailto:[email address]
5. mailto:[email address]