Archives: Employment

This category can only be viewed by members.

Childcare – ETs must take account

July/August 2021 | Employment

The claimant worked five days a week as a community nurse. Her employer wished to introduce more flexible working, including a requirement that community nurses worked at weekends. The claimant was unable to comply due to her caring responsibilities for her three children, two of whom are disabled. She was dismissed. She brought claims for …

This article is only available to subscribers.

Offensive word – not unfair dismissal

July/August 2021 | Employment

The claimant worked for the London Borough of Redbridge from 1988 until his dismissal without notice in July 2020. The basis of the claim was that his dismissal was unfair within s98 ERA 1996 which the respondent contested. Its case was that the claimant was fairly dismissed for misconduct for saying the ‘N word’ during …

This article is only available to subscribers.

Flexible working – practical issues

July/August 2021 | Employment

An interesting article considers a topic high on the agenda for many employers, that of balancing flexible working with a return to the office. The basic position is that employees do not have a legal right to work remotely unless: a workplace policy or the contract of employment provides for this; it is legally required …

This article is only available to subscribers.

Worker – status

July/August 2021 | Employment

Much has been written in recent times about the ‘gig economy’ and, in particular, the status of those working within it. Working in the gig economy means that instead of a regular wage, a worker is paid for the individual job (‘gig’) that they do. People working in delivery and taxi services in particular are …

This article is only available to subscribers.

NMW – updated guidance

July/August 2021 | Employment

We reported in our April 2021 edition (p13) on the case of Mencap v Tomlinson-Blake [2021] in which the SC held that for the purposes calculating the NMW, the hours that an employee is permitted to sleep on a shift do not form part of their hours for NMW purposes (unless they are woken for …

This article is only available to subscribers.

No detriment – extended to workers

July/August 2021 | Employment

Section 44 ERA 1996 gives an employee the right not to be subjected to any detriment and dismissal by leaving or refusing to return to work if they acted to protect themselves (or others) in circumstances of danger which the employee reasonably believed to be serious and imminent and which they could not reasonably have …

This article is only available to subscribers.

Discrimination – shared parental leave

June 2021 | Employment

The EAT has heard a case regarding maternity rights and parental leave. The issue in the appeal was whether it is discriminatory for a male employee on shared parental leave to be paid less than a female comparator on statutory adoption leave. The claimant worked for the respondent county council and when the claimant and …

This article is only available to subscribers.

LiPs – duty to establish claim

June 2021 | Employment

A useful article considers a recent EAT case which has provided guidance on how ETs should deal with litigants in person, specifically in relation to strike-out applications. Rule 37(a) of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013 provides that: ‘At any stage of the proceedings, either on its own initiative or on the application of …

This article is only available to subscribers.

Covert camera – not necessarily unfair dismissal

June 2021 | Employment

A helpful article considers an interesting case in which the EAT held that the dismissal of an employee who installed a surveillance camera at work without permission (and without telling anyone) was unfair. Mr Anderson was a board director, shareholder and employee of Northbay Pelagic. His relationship with another director broke down irreparably. He was …

This article is only available to subscribers.

Covid – risk in the workplace

June 2021 | Employment

The ET has heard one of the first cases to consider the application of the statutory protections under the ERA 1996 when the employee’s concerns relate to the risks presented by Covid-19 in the workplace. The claimant started working for the respondent on 14 June 2019 as a laser operator. He did not have a …

This article is only available to subscribers.