HR Articles

The Employment Appeal Tribunal has found that an employment tribunal was wrong in finding that TUPE did not apply where there had been a lay-off of employees as a result of a commercial dispute with the main contractor leading to termination of the contract before the new contractor took on the services (Mustafa v Trek Highways Services Ltd and others UKEAT/0064/15).

The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has upheld the employment tribunal’s finding in the case of Lock v British Gas that the Working Time Regulations (“WTR”) can be interpreted so as to be compatible with the EU Working Time Directive, with the effect that results-based commission payments should be included in the calculation of holiday pay.

The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has today handed down its judgment in the case of Lock v British Gas and found in favour of Mr Lock.

The Government has announced that from 6 April this year Australians and New Zealanders who spend more than 6 months in the UK will need to pay the Immigration Health Surcharge (IHS).

In August 2015 we blogged on the launch of the Government’s consultation into whether Sunday trading rules should be devolved to local areas in England and Wales.

In the recent case of Khan v HGS Global Ltd, the employment contract of an employee who had opted to take redundancy over relocating was found to have terminated by mutual consent and, as such, there had been no dismissal.

Summary • The rapid development of the internet of things and monitoring technology in the workplace has brought into focus the tension between employees’ right to privacy and employers’ business interests

The government have today published the draft Gender Pay Gap Regulations and further consultation. Below is an initial Q and A.

Starbucks have made the headlines having been found to have unlawfully discriminated and victimised an employee with dyslexia in a judgment issued by the Employment Tribunal this week.

In the case of Bone v North Essex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust [2016], the Court of Appeal reinstated a tribunal’s decision that an employer’s failure to deal with hostility towards a union member was unlawful detriment. Workers are protected against suffering a detriment by any act, or any deliberate failure to act, by their employer if the act or failure to act takes place for the sole or main purpose of preventing or deterring them from taking part in trade union activities at an appropriate time.