Mark is demanding justice for Woolworths staff in the former Stockbridge store [pictured opposite] who have been denied redundancy compensation awarded to colleagues in larger stores by an Employment Tribunal.

It is understood that whilst staff in the Leith branch will receive compensation because it had more than 20 staff, those in the Stockbridge store will not.

Mark has been approached by former Woolworths employees who live locally and is pursuing the issue on their behalf in Parliament.

Mark said:

“This is a matter of simple justice. Staff at Stockbridge won’t qualify just because the store had less than 20 staff even though they may have worked for Woolworths longer than someone at the larger store in Leith or even worked at both stores while employed by the company.

“It’s a double slap in the face for staff who learnt that they had lost their job on the news rather than through their company as it should be. Now they are being denied compensation as well.

“All the staff worked for the same company and worked just as hard but are being treated differently.

“I have signed a Motion in Parliament and will be pressing the Business Secretary to take action to close the loophole and make sure the Stockbridge staff are treated fairly.”

The Tribunal awarded staff in larger stores compensation on the grounds that the company failed to consult their union, USDAW, on redundancies when Woolworths went bust in November 2008.

But, it ruled that staff in stores like Stockbridge with less than 20 people didn’t qualify because the legislation - dating from 1992 under the then Conservative Government – didn’t require consultation in their case.

The Court’s ruling was based on the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 passed by the then Conservative Government of John Major.

About 30,000 people lost their jobs when Woolworths went into administration. Staff eligible will receive 60 days pay, up to a limit of £330 a week.

The shop workers' trade union, Usdaw, which brought the original case, is now intending to appeal against the exclusion of staff in smaller stores from compensation.