We value your privacy

We use cookies to enhance your browsing experience, serve personalised ads or content, and analyse our traffic. By clicking "Accept All", you consent to our use of cookies. Cookie Policy

Subscribe

Twitter Linkedin

Blog

facebook post

Dismissal for inappropriate Facebook post found to be fair

Continuing our review of social media and tribunal claims, an Employment Tribunal (in the case of Plant v API Microelectronics Limited) recently considered whether the decision to dismiss fell within the range of reasonable responses. The Claimant had been employed by the Respondent for 17 years and at the time of her dismissal she had a clean disciplinary record. In 2015, the Respondent introduced a social media policy which clearly stated the things that employees should not do when using

Read Full Article Here »
18th May 2017
age discrimination

Does your employment documentation discriminate on the grounds of age?

When was the last time you reviewed you employment documentation to ensure you aren’t discriminating against age? Age discrimination occurs when you unfairly disadvantage someone on the grounds of age for reasons that you can’t objectively justify. Examples include: Stipulating age restrictions on job advertisements Forcing employees to retire at a certain age Only recruiting employees from specific age groups Using ageist language such as referring to someone as a “youngster” or “old timer” Asking for a date of birth

Read Full Article Here »
17th May 2017
health & safety offences

Fines for H&S offences on the rise following introduction of new sentencing guidelines

The increase follows a change in legislation made effective February 2016 by the Sentencing Council, under the Coroners and Justice Act 2009. The new guidelines were imposed for health and safety, food hygiene and corporate manslaughter offences. The court must now consider culpability, seriousness and likelihood of harm as well as the size of a business / its turnover when imposing fines. Health and Safety offences are concerned with failures to manage risks to health and safety and do not

Read Full Article Here »
16th May 2017
gender pay gap

Gender pay gap data now accessible online

Further to the implementation of the Gender Pay Gap Regulations, the information published by organisations is now publically accessible via the gender pay gap viewing service. This can be accessed here. By way of a reminder, the Regulations required large private and voluntary sector employers (i.e. those with 250 employees or more) in England, Wales and Scotland to take a snapshot of pay and bonuses as at 5 April 2017 (although it was 31 March 2017 for public sector organisations).

Read Full Article Here »
8th May 2017
mediation

Mediation – An efficient and effective means of managing conflict in the workplace

  How do you deal with conflict in your workplace? What do you do when employees fall out and can no longer work together? Workplace conflict, if not dealt with effectively, can quickly escalate to more serious problems, such as stress-related absenteeism, grievances and even tribunal claims. Endeavouring to resolve workplace conflict via formal procedures can be time consuming, costly and will often fail to resolve matters to the satisfaction of all parties. So what alternative do you have as

Read Full Article Here »
30th March 2017
employment tribunal decisions

Selected employment tribunal decisions now freely accessible online

The Government has established a new webpage with links to recent employment tribunal decisions. It provides access to first-instance judgments from England, Wales and Scotland via a free-text search and drop-down menus. Previously, such decisions were only accessible by attendance in person at the Bury St Edmunds regional office. There is currently a selection of decisions from the last 3 years, although HM Courts and Tribunals Service has already stated that there are no plans to make older decisions available

Read Full Article Here »
14th February 2017
Christmas party

Christmas parties – How far does employer liability extend?

In the recent case of Mohamud v WM Morrison Supermarkets plc, the Supreme Court broadened the scope of the employee acts for which employers can be held vicariously liable. However, the case of Bellman v Northampton Recruitment Ltd provides a useful reminder that liability does not extend beyond work-related activities. In the Bellman case, the High Court considered the question of whether an employer was vicariously liable for an assault that took place at a gathering which followed the work

Read Full Article Here »
12th December 2016
sex discrimination, flexible working

Indirect Sex Discrimination in relation to flexible working requests

The case of XC Trains LTd v CD and ASLEF concerned “indirect discrimination.” Indirect discrimination is where: A non-discriminatory requirement (“Provision, criterion or Practice” or PCP) has a disproportionately adverse effect on people with a protected characteristic which puts them at a particular disadvantage as compared with people without that protected characteristic; and The Employer cannot show that that PCP is a “proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim”. [Ref: s19, Equality Act 2010] The Claimant was a female train

Read Full Article Here »
21st November 2016
employment law

Are you status conscious?

Self-employed, worker, employee, the status of individual’s and their respective rights, has often been a cause for confusion and debate, whether considering the appropriate procedures to follow or if companies are liable for income tax and national insurance contributions. The recent case considered within the London Employment Tribunal put forward by two Uber drivers, argued that due to the levels of control maintained by Uber, drivers are not self-employed but ‘workers’. The drivers have won this round, with the result being dubbed

Read Full Article Here »
28th October 2016
bullying and discrimination

The dilemma of upholding a complaint of bullying or discrimination in the context of a grievance

The sixty-four-thousand-dollar question: How does an employer uphold a complaint of bullying or discrimination without risking further exposure to a related Employment Tribunal claim? As is invariably the case in respect of grievances that include complaints of bullying, harassment and discrimination, the employer is caught between the devil and the deep blue sea in this regard. Should it try desperately not to make any admissions for fear of providing further evidence in support of the employee’s allegations and thereby facilitating

Read Full Article Here »
23rd September 2016
Employment contract

Restrictive Covenants – High Court decision provides further guidance on enforceability

Employers seeking to protect their business in the event of a key employee leaving who may be able to take customers with them will normally include restrictive covenants in employment contracts in order to reduce the scope for this occurring. Such restrictions will be considered void in law as being “in restraint of trade” unless they protect a legitimate interest and are deemed reasonable in the circumstances. The protection of a legitimate interest usually applies where employees either have  access

Read Full Article Here »
5th September 2016
Team meeting

Government investigates contractual non-compete clauses

As part of the Government’s pledge to make Britain the best place in Europe to innovate and start up a new business, Business Secretary Sajid Javid has announced plans by the Department of Business Innovation and Skills to look into restrictive covenants following suggestions (from whom exactly, we don’t know at this stage!) that they could be hindering start-up businesses from hiring the best and brightest talent. The theory put forward is that contractual non-compete clauses (which can prevent individuals

Read Full Article Here »
6th May 2016
employment law

Reasonable restrictive covenants deemed enforceable

In Croesus Financial Services v Bradshaw Restrictive, the High Court held that covenants prohibiting an ex-employee from soliciting or dealing with his former employer’s customers for a year post-termination were not an unreasonable restraint of trade. On the facts, the Court was satisfied that the 12-month non-solicitation and non-dealing covenants did not extend any further than was reasonably necessary in order to protect the employer’s business. The Defendants argued that the restrictions were excessive and therefore unenforceable because they applied

Read Full Article Here »
3rd December 2013

Case revisits the question of when to suspend

A recent Court of Appeal case revisits the responsibility placed on employers to ensure that suspension is appropriate in the circumstances, and again warns against knee jerk reactions in this regard. In cases of alleged gross misconduct, employers generally suspend as a matter of course. However, in Crawford v Suffolk Mental Health Partnership NHS Trust, the Trust’s decision to suspend was criticised as being heavy handed in the circumstances, notwithstanding the fact that the allegations – which related to the

Read Full Article Here »
28th February 2012

Subscribe to our employment law updates

Don't miss new updates on your email

Privacy Notice - Cookie Policy - Terms & Conditions

EML Limited ©2018. Website managed by Beech Web Services