A New Era for Chefs: The Law Has Finally Caught Up

For decades, the hospitality industry has operated in a space where long hours, unpredictable shifts, and limited protections were simply accepted as “part of the job.”

At Unichef, we have never accepted that.

We have spent years challenging those norms — speaking directly to policymakers, engaging with industry leaders, and standing firm in our belief that chefs deserve the same dignity, protection, and fairness as any other profession.

Many of you will remember when we first spoke about the recommendations of Matthew Taylor and his landmark “Good Work Plan.”

At the time, it felt ambitious.
Perhaps even distant.

Today, it is becoming a reality.

From Campaigning… to Law

We are proud to say that many of the protections Unichef has long advocated for are now being written into UK law.

Some changes are already in force.
Others will come into effect over the next 12–24 months.

Together, they represent one of the most significant shifts in employment rights in a generation — and a defining moment for our profession.

1. Sick Pay From Day One (April 2026)

For the first time:

• Statutory Sick Pay will be paid from day one of illness
• The minimum earnings threshold is removed

Why this matters:
Too many chefs have worked through illness because they simply couldn’t afford not to. That culture must now change.

2. Stronger Protection Against Unfair Dismissal (January 2027)

Major reforms include:

• Protection from unfair dismissal after 6 months (down from 2 years)
• Removal of the cap on compensation awards

Why this matters:
This is a seismic shift. It gives chefs real protection far earlier in their employment and meaningful recourse when things go wrong.

3. The Beginning of the End for Zero-Hours Abuse (2027)

Workers will gain:

• The right to guaranteed hours contracts (if they choose)

Why this matters:
For too long, chefs have lived with uncertainty over income and hours. This change introduces stability and choice.

4. Fair Notice of Shifts & Compensation for Changes (2027)

Employers must now:

• Provide reasonable notice of shifts
• Pay compensation if shifts are:
  • Cancelled
  • Cut short
  • Moved at short notice

Why this matters:
This tackles one of the most damaging practices in hospitality — last-minute changes that disrupt lives and finances.

5. Flexible Working Becomes a Real Right (2027)

Employers will now be required to:

• Justify refusals using specific legal grounds
• Clearly explain why the refusal is reasonable

Why this matters:
Flexible working will no longer be dismissed casually — it must be properly considered and justified.

6. Stronger Protections Against Harassment (2026–2027)

The law will clarify what “reasonable steps” employers must take to prevent harassment.

Why this matters:
Kitchen culture must evolve. Respect, safety, and professionalism are no longer optional — they are legal expectations.

7. A New Era for Trade Union Rights (October 2026)

New rights will include:

• Employers must inform workers of their right to join a union
• Improved union access to workplaces
• Rights to facilities and time off for union representatives
• Support for union equality roles

Why this matters:
This is transformational. It recognises the critical role unions play in protecting workers and raising standards across the industry.

This Didn’t Happen by Accident

These changes are not simply political decisions.

They are the result of years of pressure, evidence, and advocacy — from organisations like Unichef and from chefs like you who have shared your experiences and stood up for change.

We have:

• Challenged poor working practices
• Represented chefs in difficult cases
• Influenced conversations at the highest levels
• Refused to accept that “this is just how hospitality is”

What Happens Next

This is not the end — it is the beginning.

The law can change overnight.
Culture takes longer.

And that is where Unichef remains essential.

We will continue to:

• Support members through these new rights
• Hold employers accountable
• Educate chefs on what these changes mean in practice
• Push for even greater protections where needed

A Message to Every Chef

This moment matters.

For the first time in a long time, the system is beginning to recognise what we have always known:

Chefs are not expendable.
Chefs are professionals.
Chefs deserve protection, respect, and a fair working life.

And now — the law is finally starting to reflect that.

UK Hospitality on the Brink: Rising Costs, Failing Giants, and a Sector at a Turning Point

A Perfect Storm Facing UK Hospitality

The UK hospitality sector is approaching a critical inflection point.

Recent industry data indicates that one in five hospitality businesses fears collapse within the next 12 months, with many already operating on razor-thin or negative margins. At the same time, two-thirds of operators are planning job cuts, and one in seven expects to close.

This is no longer a cyclical downturn—it is a structural crisis.

Behind these figures lies a convergence of pressures:

• Rising labour costs
• Increased employer National Insurance contributions
• Escalating business rates
• Energy volatility
• Reduced consumer spending

Yet while these pressures are real, the narrative emerging from parts of the industry—particularly around wages—requires careful scrutiny.

When Even the Giants Struggle

Heston Blumenthal: Fine Dining Under Pressure

 

 

The planned closure of Dinner by Heston Blumenthal marks a symbolic moment for the industry.

Despite global recognition and critical acclaim, reports indicate:

• Sustained financial losses
• Declining commercial viability
• Strategic retrenchment rather than expansion

This is not an isolated case—it reflects a broader shift in the economics of premium dining, where high labour intensity meets cost inflation and changing consumer habits.

Gordon Ramsay Group: Growth at a Cost

 

4

The challenges are equally visible within the Gordon Ramsay Restaurants group:

• Reported losses of approximately £13 million
• Around 200 jobs were cut
• Rising operating costs despite strong revenues

Even at scale—with global branding and diversified income streams—the UK restaurant model is under significant strain.

Unichef Position: Wages Are Not the Problem — They Are the Correction

At the centre of the current debate is a familiar argument:
that rising wages are pushing businesses to the brink.

Unichef fundamentally rejects this position.

Wages are not the cause of this crisis. They are the long-overdue correction of it.

For decades, hospitality has operated on a model characterised by:

• Below-market pay for highly skilled labour
• Long hours normalised as industry culture
• Profitability underpinned by labour suppression

This is not conjecture—it is supported by long-standing labour market evidence.

Economic Reality: A Historically Low-Paid Sector

According to the Office for National Statistics:

• Hospitality has consistently ranked among the lowest-paid sectors in the UK economy
• Median hourly pay in accommodation and food services has historically lagged behind national averages

Similarly, the Resolution Foundation has repeatedly highlighted:

• The sector’s reliance on low-wage labour models
• High levels of in-work poverty among hospitality workers

This is reinforced by findings from the Low Pay Commission, which oversees minimum wage policy and has noted:

• Hospitality as one of the sectors most affected by minimum wage increases due to historic underpayment

The Scapegoating of Wages Must End

To suggest that fair pay is now the cause of collapse is to ignore a more uncomfortable truth:

👉 The business model itself is under strain.

Economic theory supports this.

The concept of a “low-road labour model”—widely discussed in labour economics—describes industries that compete primarily through cost suppression rather than productivity or innovation.

Hospitality in the UK has, in many cases, followed this path.

Now, as wages rise:

• Margins are exposed
• Inefficiencies are revealed
• Unsustainable expansion models begin to fail

This is not a wage crisis.

It is a model correction.

Customers Have Always Paid — The Hidden Subsidy Ends

There is another economic reality often overlooked:

Consumers always bear the true cost of production.

Historically, hospitality has artificially suppressed visible prices by:

• Embedding costs into labour exploitation
• Increasing workload rather than staffing levels
• Relying on unpaid or underpaid time

As labour costs normalise, pricing must follow.

This aligns with basic economic principles of:

• Cost pass-through
• Market price correction

What is happening now is not distortion—it is realignment.

The Failure of Overexpansion and Chain Growth

The current crisis is also exposing the fragility of rapid expansion strategies.

Many operators pursued:

• Multi-site scaling
• High fixed overheads
• Centralised cost structures

In favourable conditions, this delivered growth.

Under pressure, it creates vulnerability.

This reflects classic economic risk models, where:

• High fixed-cost businesses are less resilient to demand shocks
• Labour-intensive sectors are more exposed to wage correction cycles

The result is what we are now seeing:

👉 Retrenchment, closures, and restructuring

A Sector at a Crossroads

The question facing hospitality is no longer whether conditions are difficult.

It is whether the industry is willing to adapt.

What Evolution Looks Like

A sustainable future requires:

• Honest pricing that reflects real costs
• Reduced reliance on excessive working hours
• Investment in staff retention and skills
• Smaller, more resilient operating models
• A shift from scale to quality and sustainability

This is not idealism—it is economic necessity.

A Line in the Sand

Unichef’s position is clear:

We will not support any narrative that:

• Blames workers for structural failure
• Frames fair pay as a burden
• Seeks a return to exploitative labour practices

Instead, we advocate for:

• A professionalised workforce
• A sustainable business model
• An industry built on fairness, not fragility

Conclusion: The Real Question

If businesses are struggling now that wages are rising, the question is not:

“Why are wages too high?”

The real question is:

“Why were they ever so low?”

A revolution in working practise is about to impact on our industry and change the way employers engage with their workforce is about to happen, starting in April 2020.

In 2018 the Government commissioned an independent report by Mathew Taylor on how to modernise and inspire the British workforce and its findings and recommendations have sent shock-waves through the Catering Industry.

The principals are to create a British workforce fit for the 21^st Century, a workforce that is inspired  to do better and to produce more through Employer engagement, improved working conditions and care in the workplace as well as improved regulation and a new Regularly body to police these laws.

Each Industry has its own unique issues and the Catering Sector is no different.

Chefs have suffered for many years from inequality and discrimination, especially in multi departmental establishments, such as Hotels where, clerical staff, reception and HR are all treated differently in terms of facilities and contracts. This will all soon come to an end.

Almost all of Mathew Taylor's recommendations have been accepted by the Government and the departments responsible are busy drafting the necessary legislation which is likely to come on stream bit by bit until the full report is enshrined in Law.

These include ...

Work Committees

The right to have “workers committees” which will apply to businesses of 15 employees or more or 2% of the workforce.

The Committee's will be encouraged to engage with their employer in ways never seen before.

The committees will work with their employer who MUST engage in discussions and set up regular meetings to discuss all aspects that involve the workforce. Employers will be encouraged to seek ideas and put forward proposals to inspire and reward their workforce as part of the Government’s Good Work Plan. The Employer must encourage and act upon agreed grievances and consultations.

Zero Hours.

Those on Zero Hour Contracts, have at last been recognised. Whilst Zero hours has been useful to some, to many it is a huge lack of insecurity and the report recognises this.

The discrimination of Zero Hours will end. Those on ZH for more than a year must be offered a permanent contract and those working add hock hours will be allowed to ask for a “minimum” working schedule.

Zero Hours will come under the new heading of “one sided flexibility” where contracts that favour the Employer will be seen as discriminatory.

So too will the abhorrent practice of prematurely ending of agreed shifts. Shifts that are cut in the middle of a working day when business is low, and workers are sent home without notice. This practise will cease, and business’s will be required to Re-work their business model in order to accommodate this.

Split Shifts ( one sided flexible working )

Unique to the Hospitality Industry, Split shifts have long been used primarily for the benefit of the Employer. This totally unnecessary and abhorrent practice will also cease in places where the business operates normal straight shift patterns within its Company. Offering split shifts to Chefs and waiters whilst administrative and managerial staff are offered straight shifts will be discriminatory.

Designated Policing

The Government have also accepted the need for a designated Ombudsman solely to deal with issues arising from this legislation including hotlines for complaints.

Conclusion

In all, the most radical and positive work-related proposals in a generation. A chance to end the abuse and discrimination seen daily in kitchens every day and an exciting way forward for new chefs coming into the profession.

Q: Who owns Unichef
A: Our chefs, that's right, every member of Unichef owns a unique part of this very special Union, you are a member for life, and your share in it remains until you resign.

Q: Can I sell my share
A: No, the share (stakeholding) is unique to you and cannot be transferred

Q: Who is the Head of Unichef
A: Our current Executive Director is Brian Mcelderry an experienced International Executive Chef and businessman.

Q: What does he do
A: The Executive is there to ensure that Unichef stays financially sound and adheres to the Constitution (bible) of its members.

Q: Who does he answer to
A: He is in charge of all day-to-day matters but answers to the Board of Directors, who are the Members' Representatives.

Q: Can Unichef help me with my work issues
A: Of course, we have experienced councillors who can support you or direct you to the appropriate support network.

Q: Can Unichef be with me at a disciplinary hearing
A: Unfortunately, no, but on most occasions (unless it is very serious), this isn’t needed or required as Union reps are normally there without involvement in the case. We can (if required) attend remotely, provided we have sufficient notice. As a case progresses, we may need to attend tribunals, court, and case meetings, but again, this is rare; most issues are resolved before these stages.

Q: Can Unichef represent me in a Tribunal
A: Absolutely, we work just like a normal Union in many respects, but with some important differences.

Q: What are the differences between Unichef and a “normal” Union
A: Unichef is 100% owned by its members, it’s totally independent and completely non-political, and it is solely for chefs; there is no other Union quite like it. It is a "Community Union," the very first of its type anywhere.

Q: What happens to the money members pay
A: All our funding and spending is tightly controlled and is overseen by the Board of Directors and the Government Ombudsman, who are the “eyes and ears” of the Members. Unichef is a “not for profit” organisation and its main aim is to inspire, support, educate, and give a voice to chefs in the UK. Most of the finance is spent on making sure we have a good core structure to our Union, that we always have sufficient funds to meet its expenses and obligations.  Thereafter, the Directors have a say in how surplus funding (if any) can be spent on behalf of the members.

Q: What is a C.I.C
A: Unichef is a Community Interest Company, similar to a Charity but without the restraints of a charity, which allows us to work in the special way we do. It’s a mix between a charity and a business, run as a Social Project but managed as a Non non-profit making business.Unichef aims to educate and inspire our Chefs in a way no other Union can, whilst working together with partners and Employers in our industry to build a better, more supportive culinary community.

Q: How do I contact Unichef
A: Initial Contact is through our "contact section" on our website or you can message us on our dedicated WhatsApp number 07359 436285. Phone calls are NOT accepted and are by appointment only. Alternatively, you can contact us 24/7 at our email address admin@thechefsunion.co.uk

Q: How do I request support?
A: Simply contact us through our website contact section ( this is quicker). All requests are dealt with within 24hours and we will always reply to you.DO NOT send documents or lengthy statements at this stage; we only want the bare facts of your issue, so please be brief. DO NOT use AI-generated information. Set your notifications to respond to us quickly, and please follow our instructions carefully  

There was a time — not so long ago — when eating in a restaurant was not routine. It was not a weekly convenience, not a default Friday night plan, not an algorithm-suggested delivery,It was an occasion.

For many working families in the 1970s, a restaurant meal meant birthdays, anniversaries, or life’s small victories. It carried anticipation. It carried meaning. And perhaps most importantly — it carried value.

Today, we are told the restaurant sector is in crisis because fewer people are dining out. Headlines speak of closures. Commentators speak of hardship. Operators speak of survival.

But what if what we are witnessing is not collapse — but correction?

For years, Unichef has argued that the hospitality sector expanded beyond sustainable demand. Cheap finance, rapid franchising, casual dining chains, and the race for market share created an industry that was not just competitive — but crowded. Streets filled with venues chasing the same customers, at the same times, with increasingly similar menus.

Growth became volume-driven rather than value-driven.

The pandemic did not create the current contraction. It merely exposed structural fragility that already existed.

Now the numbers tell the truth. The UK has lost thousands of restaurants since 2019. Diners are eating out less frequently. Prices have risen. Disposable income has tightened.

These are not signs of failure alone,they are signs of market rebalancing.

In economic terms, this is natural selection. Businesses that were built on thin margins, heavy borrowing, or unsustainable models will fall away. Those with strong foundations, identity, standards, and loyal customers will remain.

This is not cruelty. This is how industries mature.

We should also be honest about something rarely said aloud,dining out was never meant to be routine.

When a meal out becomes as casual as making toast, something is lost — not only for chefs, but for diners. Craft becomes commodified. Skill becomes discounted. Experience becomes expected rather than appreciated.

A restaurant should not have to compete with the price of a supermarket meal deal.

It should compete on experience, quality, and memory.

When dining returns to being occasional rather than constant, something remarkable happens:

• Standards rise

• Craft regains value

• Diners appreciate the experience more

• Chefs regain professional pride

• Businesses can operate sustainably

A smaller industry is not a weaker industry,It can be a stronger one.The real question is not,“Why are restaurants closing?”It is:“Why were there so many to begin with?”

If policymakers truly wish to support hospitality, the answer is not simply subsidies or temporary relief. It is creating conditions where:

• Good operators can thrive

• Skilled professionals are respected

• Quality is rewarded

• Sustainability replaces saturation

Restaurants are cultural institutions, they bring communities together. They showcase heritage, skill, and creativity.But like any ecosystem, they must exist in balance, Perhaps the future of hospitality is not a return to excess — but a return to meaning.

And perhaps that is not a crisis at all, perhaps it is progress?


 

Is eating out too expensive now? Families say higher prices put them off

WWW.BBC.CO.UK

---

The restaurant industry says it is facing a double whammy - rising costs and customers with less money.

2026: A Year of Progress, Protection and Purpose

As we step into 2026, Unichef enters the year stronger, clearer in its mission, and more determined than ever to protect and advance the working lives of chefs across the UK.

The year ahead is not about slogans or soundbites — it is about delivery. About turning hard-won experience into meaningful change for members on the ground, in kitchens, hotels, care homes and catering operations nationwide.

A Union That Stands Firm

In 2026, members can expect Unichef to continue doing what it does best: standing up when it matters most.
We will remain visible, vocal and unafraid to challenge unfair dismissals, unsafe working practices, bullying cultures and procedural failures — whether that is through early resolution, formal representation, or litigation where necessary.

Our growing casework, tribunal successes and negotiated outcomes have already shown what a focused, specialist chefs’ union can achieve. That momentum carries firmly into this year.

Raising Standards — Not Just Defending Rights

2026 also marks a shift from reactive to proactive unionism.

This year sees the expansion of Unichef’s work with employers who genuinely want to do better — setting clear expectations around fairness, respect, legal compliance and workplace dignity. Our work is no longer just about challenging poor practice, but about recognising and encouraging good employers who value chefs as professionals, not commodities.

This approach protects members, stabilises workplaces, and strengthens the profession as a whole.

Support in a Changing Industry

The hospitality industry is evolving rapidly — immigration sponsorship, agency practices, skills shortages, rising costs and pressure on public services all affect chefs directly.

In 2026, Unichef will continue to:

• Scrutinise emerging employment practices
• Challenge exploitation and wage suppression
• Speak openly about the wider social impact on housing, health and job security
• Ensure chefs — British and migrant alike — are treated lawfully and fairly

Our position is simple: fairness for one group must never come at the expense of another.

A Stronger Union, Built for the Future

Behind the scenes, 2026 is also a year of consolidation and preparation. Governance, structures and systems are being strengthened to ensure Unichef remains independent, credible and resilient for years to come.

This work may not always be visible — but it is essential. A union that plans for the future is a union that can protect its members when it counts.

What Members Can Expect

Above all, members can expect consistency:

• Clear advice
• Honest representation
• Measured but fearless advocacy
• A union that understands kitchens — because it comes from them

Unichef enters 2026 not chasing headlines, but quietly building something stronger:
a union that chefs can rely on, trust, and be proud to belong to.

2026 is not just another year.
It is a year of purpose — and of progress.

The UK hospitality industry has long benefited from the skills and dedication of migrant chefs, and Unichef continues to value their vital contribution to our sector.

However, Unichef is increasingly concerned about the rapid expansion of immigration sponsorship within the hospitality agency industry, and the impact this is having on chefs, wages, and workforce security.

Immigration sponsorship was designed to fill genuine skills shortages through stable, permanent roles. In some cases, it is now being applied to agency-based labour models built on flexibility and short-term placements. This has created situations where sponsored chefs are offered full-time, fixed-hour contracts, while other chefs — including British and nationalised workers — remain on zero-hours or insecure arrangements, despite doing the same work,we belive this to be a form of indirect discrimination.

This risks creating a two-tier workforce. While immigration rules may require guaranteed hours for sponsored workers, that requirement should not be used to justify the routine denial of secure employment to other chefs. Where nationalised or settled workers are excluded from full-time opportunities, serious questions arise about fairness and the potential for indirect discrimination.

Unichef is also concerned about the wider effects on pay and conditions. Ready access to sponsored labour can reduce pressure on employers and agencies to improve wages, invest in training, or offer permanent roles, contributing to wage suppression across the sector.

There are broader social impacts too. Increased reliance on sponsored labour, without coordinated planning, adds pressure to local housing markets and public services, including the NHS. These challenges are not caused by migrant workers, but by policy choices that prioritise short-term labour solutions over long-term workforce sustainability.

Unichef is equally concerned about the position of sponsored workers themselves. Visa-linked employment can create dependency and vulnerability, limiting a worker’s ability to challenge unfair treatment, refuse unsuitable shifts, or move freely within the labour market. A system that relies on fear of visa loss to maintain workforce compliance is not ethical, and it is not compatible with a profession that values skill, safety, and dignity.

What Unichef is calling for is balance and fairness. Immigration sponsorship must not become a mechanism for casualising the wider workforce or sidelining nationalised and settled chefs from secure employment. Agencies that can offer full-time, fixed roles to one group should not routinely deny the same opportunity to others doing identical work. Sponsorship must be used to address genuine shortages, not to entrench inequality or suppress wages.

Unichef believes in a fair, ethical, and sustainable hospitality industry. Immigration sponsorship must be used responsibly, with proper oversight, and must not become a tool for casualising work, suppressing wages, or dividing the workforce.

We will continue to stand up for all chefs — migrant, nationalised, and domestic — and to campaign for a sector built on fair pay, secure work, and professional respect.

Unichef – Supporting Chefs. Championing Fairness. Building the Future.

Quite an astonishing Tribunal decision in the case of a Job candidate who was denied the position simply because the management didn't think she would "fit in " with the team spirit?

The Judge in question decided that if an applicant doesn't fit the profile currently enjoyed within an establishment, then the hirer has the right to refuse an application,which leads to all sorts of issues.

For example,if the team are generally all Geordies, supporting Newcastle United,the hirer now has the right to exclude all Sunderland applicants, and so the list goes on, purely on the basis that they could cause "disharmony" within the establishment.

This is a remarkably bold decision, and we expect an appeal. However, if it stands, you can look forward to advertisements excluding various types of chefs who the propriator feels would bring disharmony to the team by simply supporting another football club or a different culture to the one present.

Another example would be if the kitchen in question is dominated by Heavy Metal devotees, candidates could now be vetted to see what music they prefer, what football team they support or even if they smoke, the list goes on.

This is a hugely dangerous precedent,and one I'm sure will cause great debate.

Does being an AC/DC fan or being an Arsenal supporter now come before your ability to cook ?
 

Denying someone a job over football allegiances is ‘perfectly lawful’

UK.NEWS.YAHOO.COM

---

Football fans can be legally denied jobs if current staff support a rival team, a judge has ruled.

The Black Forest case has been decided, and our chef won her case hands down, in a massive victory.

The Court decided that she had been "substantively" unfairly dismissed and that a second charge of Wrongful Dismissal was also upheld.

We are hugely delighted for our chef Victoria Barker, who now stands to gain a substantial compensation award when we have the remedy hearing in September.

The case has highlighted many issues with the lack of training and qualifications needed to ensure good allergen practice. During the case, we have seen Unichef vocal to both the local EHO and the FSA over the lack of transparency in Allergen responsibility.

The Employer had held that the Chef had sole responsibility In recording allergen information and ensuring allergen safety.

Unichef fought this vigorously, knowing that a part-time chef could not be held responsible for what happened during her absence from the workplace and that the line management was indeed the custodial guardians of all health and safety systems and practices within the unit. Simply passing the buck was never acceptable.

We did everything possible to mediate with the  Employer. Still, he refused to see reason and the impossible odds against him winning the case, once again, pride and sexist ignorance overtook common sense.

We also had the pleasure of winning against the toughest of all HR solution companies, Peninsular, who dominate our industry with HR advice and protection to employers at high cost.

This has been a very long and exhausting case, which has tested Unichef to its fullest.

A year's work of meticulous planning has brought success on a massive scale, with the judge fully vindicating Chef Victoria on every count.

The Employer, Orange Care -Grange Lea ltd had fabricated allegations that could not be proven, destroyed evidence and even tried to deceive the court in a trial that astonished the judge with the careless audacity that they had in even defending the case against the huge and overwhelming arguments that Unichef put forward on Chef Victoria's behalf.

This was truly a case that should never have come to Court but for the narcissistic attitude of its Director, who simply wanted to destroy a loyal and conscientious employee of 5 years’ service. His folly will now cost him dearly.

Once again, the National Chefs Union has stood by its member all the way and will do so again when our chefs are so clearly victimised as Victoria was. Victoria is a wonderful person and a hard-working chef, and we are delighted that she now has the chance to rebuild her life

This is yet another massive victory for Unichef and shows the power that the National Chefs Union can have against dreadful employers when Chefs dare to stand up. You can now read the full transcript of the Judgement here.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/685e5b5ee44db4975be00b1c/Victoria_Barker_-vs-_Orange_Care-Grange_Lea_Ltd_-_1402352.2024_-_Judgment.pdf

The Case of the chef who was accused of not updating an allergens list and was then dismissed has now ended after what was a very long and exhausting trial.

The case has now been “Referred for judgment” so that the judge can review all of the evidence and come to a decision, hopefully within the next few weeks.

Without doubt, this has been the longest and most thorough case we have ever taken part in and one which has seen us have to match our skills against one of the biggest HR companies in the UK, as well as taking on EHOs and the FSA in lengthy arguments.

The FSA has accepted that this case has raised issues that need to be considered, namely who is ultimately accountable and what level of Allergen training is considered suitable, as well as quantifying the Mandatory regulations of which many employers are still unaware.

With more than 300 pages of evidence and supporting documentation as well as a year’s work in bringing this case and supporting it, it has driven us to a level we hadn’t ever imagined, as we have learned and gained so much from it.

At stake is the very fact that ( if proven ) any chef in the UK can be dismissed for 1 single error, and this could have massive repercussions throughout the industry.

Just one mistake in not applying allergens and any chef can be dismissed, the very thought of this is mind-boggling, and one of the main reasons that Unichef decided to fight this case.

Together with our utter belief in the Chef's innocence, this case will be a milestone in Unichefs history, win or lose.

Now we must wait for that decision.  We are still VERY optimistic, we have put up a very strong case, and there are many leading and substantive arguments which the respondent cannot and has not denied.

If that decision is applied in open court (without an” out of court settlement” ) then we will be able to report it to you; either way, we will keep you all updated.

Thank you for your good wishes and kind support in this important case

In a year that sees Unichef dealing with more cases of women "standing up" for their rights than ever before it's great to celebrate the amazing role our female colleagues play in Hospitality.

Staggeringly, in 2015 when we started Unichef only 2% of our members were women. Today we are proud to say that it is now standing at 24% and growing,a sign of the great work we have done in making Unichef a safe place for female chefs to feel supported and cared for, a place where they feel equal and included.

The fact that women have brought our last 4 tribunal listed cases is testimony of the ever increasing empowerment that women now feel in our profession and the growing determination of women not to be mistreated in the workplace.

This can only be good for an industry starved of talent and diversity, and further proof that Inclusion, diversity, and stronger legislation are indeed the answer to the problems of recruitment and attraction to hospitality.

Let's all celebrate and embrace a brighter, safer and healthier culture where our women chefs are proud and that male chefs are proud to work alongside them.

As we start 2025 Unichef is taking a long hard look at the established methods of payment within the Chef Agency sector.

Since the very early days of Chefs being employed by Agency’s it has been common practice for many ( if not all ) Agency’s to pay chefs according to either the clients requests, the chefs abilities, what a particular chef may demand in terms of payment,  or even what the Agent thinks may be a suitable payment .

The whole system with Agency pay has been shrouded in mystery for many, many years, often to the detriment of the chefs concerned.” charge Rates” ( what an agency charge’s the client ) are carefully guarded and transparency within the Agency Recruitment industry is opaque to say the least.

The Recruitment industry is poorly regulated ( they say not ) and is VERY employer orientated, chefs in many cases ( not all ) are treated as fodder for the system and many Agencys avoid and ignore current employment legislation, believing that they are often not the true employers and that the rules do not apply to them,  there are many grey areas that need to be resolved for sure.

We have always known that a chef can be paid at one rate and another chef ( doing the same job, at the same venue ) a completely different rate, this has gone on for years, without chefs being able to complain.

Recent developments in EU law has now enabled Unichef to take a further look at the system of how chefs are paid by Recruitment Agencys and are very much looking into what we believe may be a national scandal that has been going on for many years.

You may well have heard or read about pay discrimination in high profile cases involving Next ,Asda and Tesco and now Morrisons too are coming under the same spotlight.

A few years ago the European Court of Justice ruled ( in the Asda case ) that the test for wage discrimination should be the “value to the firm” placed upon an employee and that all employees of a similar job description are of equal value to that firm, irrelevant of talent, experience or what a third party client wishes to pay the firm for that service.

In the Asda case the Court found that employees stacking shelves on the shop floor were paid less than employees stacking shelves in the Wherehouse, effectively the same job. The Court ruled that they both had an “equal value “ to Asda and further ruled that this “test” should be applied when looking at any case of wage discrimination.

That Judgement has now been “handed down” to the British Courts and is indeed now on our statue books, it is now British Law that all employees of “equal Value “ to the film employing them that they be paid equally.

Turning this into a culinary environment and certainly into an Agency situation, the law as interpretated by Unichef means that any chef employed by an agency whether working in a 5* hotel or a care home should receive the same pay rate regardless of where they work or what a client is prepared to pay that Agency for their services.

Our view,  which we are now consulting on, is that if a Agency chef is cutting carrots in a Care Home or school or is cutting carrots in a Hotel then the job is effectively the same and the pay rate should be also the same. What a client has been charged is irrelevant and the Agency’s should pay the same to each chef.

Just how right we are remains to be tested and as part of that consultation we really need to hear the stories of Agency chefs across the country who know of case where they have been paid unfairly and their views on what we have said.

Chefs can have there say here on this site or they can contact us by email admin@thechefsunion.co.uk

For all those who have followed this incredible story, here is the latest news.

As you recall, our Member, A devoted Care Home Chef was dismissed for allegedly not completing an Allergen report. The Employer fabricated everything in order to dismiss her and Unichef submitted a massive 10 page IT1  to the Tribunal.

So strong was the case and legal merit put forward by Unichef that the employer has not submitted a defence and the case hase been won by default.

This is fantastic news for our member and our team who worked so hard to put a strong claim in for her. The case is now with a judge for evaluation on compensation.

This chef did no wrong, was a valued employer for more than 5 years and supported the Care Home though the pandemic at risk to herself and family. She had no previous warnings or disciplinary's and was an exemplary employee. The owner is a narcistic sexist bully who thought he could do as he wished with his employees.

Unichef has shown once more that we are afraid of no one, we take on those who hurt and harm our members, no matter who they are.

It's no surprise that Leeds fated Michelin-listed Man Behind the Curtain has finally closed its doors after what can only be described as one man's egotistical culinary adventure.

Michael O'Hare has gained not fame but notoriety by often challenging the culinary norms with Avant Garde perceptions of what people want to eat and experience. If there was ever a reason just why Michelin must look deeply at its criteria for culinary awards then it is indeed this venture.

That this chef thought it perfectly acceptable to serve his paying customers a Red Sea Prawn on the top of an old-fashioned telephone beggars' belief clearly indicated that this chef thought more about his ego than his customer's satisfaction, the opposite of a gourmet Michelin experience. 

Once again the demands of creating and keeping a Michelin starred Restaurant have shown that the best and only the very best deserve this accolade and proof yet again that the deliberate lowering of standards by Michelin in giving awards to the masses for the sake of delivering the brand has shown the catastrophic damage it creates.

It's this" Moral Compass" that Unichef has demanded from Michelin and the Hospitality Industry and the fact that the vast majority of the money owed is to the Inland Revenue shows just that. Half a million quid that could have been used to help those in poverty, those in need, and even our chefs and waiters with Mental Health Issues are all now down the drain. Half a million pounds of Taxpayers' money, squandered away all for a Michelin Star?

The list of Michelin accredited Restaurants that have closed or have entered Bankruptcy is simply breathtaking and has sent a shockwave through the business community, Banks no longer borrow and suppliers demand cash on delivery, simply anyone with a Michelin Restaurant is no longer considered a "cash cow" but a severe liability. 

Chefs who only service their own ego do nothing for our industry or our profession and are happy for others to pick up the pieces and should never again be allowed to open any restaurant let alone be associated with Michelin.

Their talent is never in doubt and we make that clear but many lack basic business and people skills, their focus on obtaining and then maintaining a star is the only thing they become obsessed with and they seem to often forget that first and foremost when they switch on their lights each morning that they are employers, not superstars.
 

Michael O’Hare’s Man Behind the Curtain 'wound up voluntarily' due to £1m debt

WWW.THECATERER.COM

---

The company behind the Man Behind the Curtain in Leeds, which traded as Psycho Sandbar, was shown to have owed almost £1m when it entered liquidation last month.

We warned in 2022 that the concept of Michelin Starred dining was fast fading and the shocking news that Purnell's in Birmingham has closed after 17 years will send shock waves through the industry
This highly acclaimed and hugely successful restaurant is yet another in the now growing list of Michelin Starred Restaurants to shut up shop due to the massive costs of maintaining prestige.
This is now on the backs of recent announcements by Micheal Cains,Michel Roux jnr,Nick Nairns, Micheal O'Hare,Tom Brown and many others and we warned that many more would follow.
 

The reasons are many and complex but one thing they all have in common is the massive wish to diversify and capitalise on their award by getting involved in more work other than concentrating on the core business that made them what they are?

Books,TV shows guest appearances, award ceremonies, you name they do it..anything other than cook?

Seems that once you get a Michelin Star, that's it..feet up, let's get another 5 restaurants, cafes, street foods, and the rest..the money starts rolling in ? the temptation to "cash in " is just too great for many of them,one restaurant doing great just isn't enough.

We have said for a long time that greed is at the heart of the Michelin system.Greed by Michelin themselves and greed by the chefs and Restaurants that get the award.

For sure the Michelin Gravy Train is grinding to a halt,not just in the UK but many more countries also..It was always a French Creation for the French Gastronome , perhaps it should have stayed that way?





 

A new tipping law, which has made it illegal for companies to withhold tips from employees, has been welcomed by workers and industry bodies but could lead to a headache for employers.

Until today, Employers were able to choose whether to keep tips made on cards, or whether to pass the earnings on to employees.

The new regulation will give staff the right to see their employer’s tipping policy and a record of the tips provided by customers.

Lawyers have urged Employers to be careful about following the policy and said that the regulation could lead to significant costs related to compensation. The legalisation enables workers to bring claims in an employment tribunal of up to £5,000 if they believe they are not receiving the tips they are entitled to.

This could result in “significant sums” being paid to all affected workers at a pub or restaurant for example, 

The law, which will put an end to “controversial practices” like deducting ‘administrative fees’ or using tips to supplement managerial salaries, will lead to significant changes in the industry, Rodgerson said.

 The practical application of the law will be the true test of its efficacy as the hospitality industry adapts to these changes, the full impact of the act remains to be seen.

Powner added that employers will need to be careful to “ensure that what is agreed is  ‘fair’ and that there is rational reasoning in place, whilst avoiding any potentially discriminatory rules like whether payments of tips should be shared with those on maternity leave or sickness absence and if so, for how long.

The act also widens the scope for potential claims for unlawful deduction of wages claims, as it incorporates tips in the definition of wages.

The onus is on businesses to ensure tips are allocated fairly between workers taking into account the principles of fairness set out in the accompanying statutory Code of Practice… Businesses are required to and should be prepared to respond to workers requests on tipping 

Some have also said that it will lead to an increased burden of costs for businesses already struggling with high taxes and increases in the minimum wage.

As of 2021, around 80 percent of tips were made via card, although this number is likely to have increased since then.

The government has estimated that an extra £200m may be taken home by the three million staff set to benefit from the law.

We are celebrating success for the 3rd time in 2 months and we are delighted to have worked with such an inspirational member once again. Yet another female Chef who has stood up to her Employers and demanded better treatment.

The case involved a female Chef on the Autistic Spectrum who had been wrongfully accused of Food poisoning and bad practices, all of which were false but a male-dominated management once again had thrown all caution to the wind and reprimanded her without witnesses and a thorough investigation, their male ego’s getting in the way of common sense and good practice.

Once the matter was brought to the attention of the company's HR department, it was clear that the Executive Chef and Manager had acted unfairly and unlawfully in disciplining our member.

They accepted liability and agreed on substantial compensation and costs within weeks of us being involved and the matter was all over and agreed upon within a very short space of time and our member has moved onto better things with an even better job and a great caring company.

Once again, the National Chefs Union has shown its teeth and supported a member in their time of need. Her award of more than £14,000 plus cost shows employers that they aren’t always right and that there is a Union that will protect our chefs against uncaring and unethical companies.

 

Few would ever think that a chef could be sacked over a Black Forest Gateau but this is strangely the case we have currently ongoing.

We would normally wait until the case is over before reporting on it but such is the nature of this episode that we’d like to tell you about it as an ongoing situation.

Simply, the chef was dismissed without notice for not applying the Allergens for the gateau in the daily listings. Extreme you might think but this is a hugely complex case.

The Chef denies the allegations of Gross Negligence that were in her contract but not defined, she also denies the incident ever took place and that the employer was hasty in dismissing her without warning or notice.

The employer denies any wrongdoing ( they always do ) and is fighting the case but is shocked that the chef had the common sense to call in Unichef, he thought she would be unsupported ( they always do ).

Summary Dismissal ( without notice ) is a minefield for employers, they risk not being right in the dismissal, and having won 3 court cases this year we are extremely confident that we will this one too. The case is currently with the Tribunal Court and the respondent and it is just one big game of chess now, and we are "Grand Masters" at this so let us see how it progresses, it's an unusual one for sure?

We will continue to keep you updated on the” Black Forest” case as it moves forward..

The results of our survey into bullying in Commercial Kitchens have now been compiled and show some interesting results.

Almost 70% of Chefs questioned said they had been the target of bullying in the past.,and 30% more recently.

50% of Chefs said they had witnessed bullying in their kitchens although they were not the target

Almost 80% of bullying came from either their Head Chef,Manager or Sous Chef

The situation was split when asked if things regarding Bullying were getting better with 40% saying they were better but almost 60% believing things hadn't canned and was still a major issue.

Staggeringly 80% said that leadership and lack of experienced staff was also a major concern with almost 60% believing that a lack of knowledge and understanding was a contributing factor to bullying in kitchens and a further 60% also believing that the bad portrayal of chefs on TV had also become a factor in bullying.

We sincerely thank all of those who contributed their time in taking this survey and we leave you all to consider the results.

 

So sorry to have been neglecting our media post of late but we’ve been so busy with case work. 4 big cases that all ended up with success for us and our members.

Case 1

Involved a female member who had been accused of violent misconduct. Her job and her family were on the line but we managed to step in at the right time and prove mitigation on her behalf.  We worked with her employer to show she had been unfairly supervised and was under great pressure.  The sanction was rightfully downgraded to a misdemeanour, first offense and the member continues with her work as normal now. Great result we felt under the circumstances.

Case 2

Involved a female chef in London who had been bullied and very badly managed by her superiors all of whom were very unsupportive of her mental Health Issues.
The case involved a very well-known employer and the case had been poorly handled right from the start by male dominance of the entire operation and only when their female led HR became involved was our member given the support and compassion she deserved.
The case has been settled out of court with substantial damages of around £14,000 plus costs.

Case 3.
Involved well known London Michelin rated chef Victor Garvey who dismissed our member unfairly .This was a long and complex case in which Mr Garvey did everything possible to avoid court action but was clearly in breach as the court agreed. Unichef stood by our member and supported him throughout his case and trial.
Our member was awarded more that £15000 in damages and compensation.

Case 4
This is still continuing and will be known as the “Black Forest Gateau” case. The female chef has been dismissed unfairly without good reason after 5 years of loyal service because of an allegation that she did not correctly fill out an allergen report on the gateau.  With no evidence and no investigation the case will undoubtedly now go to a tribunal and once again Unichef is highly prepared and motivated to take rogue employers on,  no matter who they are.

One thing these case all have in common is the male dominance of the situation and how male egotism once again plays an important part in the proceedings

Big mouthed Chefs and big mouth employers are now finding out that they can act as tough as they want but there is now a strong Union dedicated to supporting UK chefs and that we will win against the injustice they hand out.