HR Articles

As we blogged in June, individuals on zero hours contracts can bring claims for less favourable treatment of part-time workers by comparing to compare themselves to full-time workers even though they have different kinds of contracts. More recently, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (“EAT”) Judgment in Rice Shack Ltd v Obi was published.

In Talon Engineering Ltd v Smith, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (the ‘EAT’) held that an employer’s refusal to postpone a disciplinary hearing for two weeks to enable the Claimant’s union official to accompany her rendered the subsequent dismissal unfair. In this case, the Claimant faced disciplinary action for sending unprofessional emails.

In this recent case, the management of a school in Spain was sub-contracted out by the local authority. In the midst of a dispute the contractor dismissed all of the school’s staff on 27 March 2013.

As a general rule, a lawyer’s advice to their client is legally privileged. However, there is an exception to this, known as the iniquity exception, which applies when advice is given for the purpose of furthering a criminal or fraudulent design.

Many employers will be familiar with the difficulties which arise when an employee alleges numerous legal breaches, citing large numbers of incidents.In the case of Tarn v Hughes & Ors, a GP claimed pregnancy and maternity discrimination, alleging 46 legal breaches of three different kinds. The tribunal was asked to decide 180 issues.

The Court of Appeal held in Office Equipment Systems v Hughes that even where a party is debarred from contesting liability at a hearing, they should normally be permitted to contest remedy.

In July, the Home Office updated its sponsor guidance for businesses sponsoring Tier 2 and 5 workers. HR teams and those responsible for managing sponsorship duties, should ensure they are aware of the updates. The Home Office has also made changes to Appendix D, specifically in relation to the documents which must be retained following a Resident Labour Market Test.

The Supreme Court recently held that employers sued on the basis of vicarious liability for acts of their employees do not owe those employees a duty to defend the proceedings in a manner that protects the employees’ own economic or reputational interests. In James-Bowen & Ors v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis, a terrorist suspect alleged that he had been seriously assaulted in the course of his arrest and brought a personal injury claim against the Police Commissioner for vicariously liability for the police officers’ actions.

In Haydar v Pennine Acute NHS Trust, the Claimant had brought claims against his employer which included unfair dismissal and discrimination. His claim for discrimination was dismissed and, although, the unfair dismissal claim was upheld a finding of contributory fault was made. The claimant alleged that he sent an appeal against this judgment to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) prior to the relevant deadline, however, there was no record of this being received by the EAT.

Before a strike can be lawful, unions have to hold a secret postal ballot of the union members who could take part. Earlier this year, the government offered civil servants a pay increase of 1%.