Appeal No.	EAT/1052/00

EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL
58 VICTORIA EMBANKMENT, LONDON EC4Y 0DS

	At the Tribunal
	On 15 December 2000

Before
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE BELL
MS G MILLS
MR J C SHRIGLEY

MR P J CHARNETSKI	APPELLANT

SAFEWAY STORES PLC	RESPONDENTS

Transcript of Proceedings

JUDGMENT

PRELIMINARY HEARING – EX PARTE

Revised 12th February 2001

	APPEARANCES

For the Appellant	MR GRAHAM BEAMES
(Representative)
Citizens Advice Bureau
168 Canvey Island
Essex
SS8 0JP	

	MR JUSTICE BELL:	This is a preliminary hearing of Mr Charnetski’s appeal against the decision of the Employment Tribunal held at Stratford on 6th April 2000, that he was not unfairly dismissed by the respondent.

1.	We have decided that this matter should be allowed to go ahead to a full inter partes hearing. 

2.	The one new matter which has come out of this morning’s hearing in which Mr Charnetski has been represented by Mr Graham Beames, to whom we are grateful, is a matter which, whether agreed or in issue, does not appear in the Employment Tribunal’s extended reasons. It is to the effect that Mr Charnetski has instructed Mr Beames that on 16th August 1999, 5 days before the effective date of termination of his employment, a material alteration, as he would have it, was made to his working hours over the weekend. He had always worked, but on a voluntary basis, when asked and he agreed to do so over the Saturday night from 8 p.m. to 7 a.m. on Sunday, but there was no compulsion so far as that was concerned. It was not one of his established shifts; he only did it on a voluntary basis, as we understand it, from time to time to help out. He did have a shift which he could not refuse to do when asked on the Sunday night. But that ran from midnight on Sunday, until 7 am on the Monday. That Mr Charnetski could and did manage. The information which has been put before us today is that on 16th August he was told that the timing of that shift would be changed to 8 p.m. on a Sunday to 7 a.m. on a Monday. That was a new feature which Mr Charnetski was not prepared to agree to. 

3.	In the light of that information and so that the Appeal Tribunal can judge what the situation was in that respect and the extent to which, if any, it bears on the matters raised on this appeal, we direct that the Chairman of the Employment Tribunal be asked to produce his Notes of Mr Charnetski’s evidence, of the evidence of Mr Paul Wade, the respondent’s store manager and of Mr Kevin Heather, the respondent’s replenishment manager. We direct that a bundle of relevant documents be agreed. The appeal should be listed for one day in Category B and skeleton arguments should be filed with the office of this tribunal not less than 14 days before the date fixed for hearing.