In a busy month in the courts and tribunals, an employer was liable for psychiatric injury caused by a flawed disciplinary process. The High Court found that TUPE didn’t transfer an employer’s vicarious liability for an...more
Discrimination-related issues were the hot topic in April. The Supreme Court decision on what the word “sex” means was significant and received much attention. In our view, the equality law call for evidence is likely to be...more
Although there’s been no further progress on the Employment Rights Bill, the courts and tribunals had an active month. The Court of Appeal opined on freedom of expression in the workplace, and the EAT considered injury to...more
The decision makes it harder for employers to act against employees who express protected views to which others object. Disciplinary action in that situation could be discrimination because of an employee’s religion or...more
It’s been all systems go in the second half of January. As the Employment Rights Bill completed its committee stage, the government (finally) confirmed that neonatal care leave and pay will come into force in April. EAT...more
November provided a bit of respite for employers on the legislative front after the Employment Rights Bill’s introduction and the implementation of the duty to prevent sexual harassment in October. Employers will welcome EAT...more
In Cairns v The Royal Mail Group Ltd, the UK EAT held that the possibility of delaying a disabled employee’s dismissal pending a reorganisation was relevant to whether his dismissal was justified. Although the employee was...more
Alongside the constant stream of election related news, there were two EAT decisions in June, dealing with “pool of one” redundancies and ill-health dismissals, which will be of interest. In future, there will be further...more
In the run-up to Christmas, the government confirmed how carer’s leave and new protection against redundancy for pregnant employees and new parents will work. It announced changes to paternity leave in January and said that...more
Employers have to make reasonable adjustments if they apply a provision, criterion or practice that puts someone with a disability at a particular disadvantage. The duty only applies if the employer knows or could reasonably...more
In Hilaire v Luton Borough Council, the UK EAT found that it was not a reasonable adjustment simply to slot a disabled employee into a new organisational structure as part of a redundancy exercise. Although this would have...more
The UK’s Supreme Court has confirmed that “part year” workers are entitled to 5.6 weeks’ holiday. Their holiday entitlement should not be pro-rated to reflect their actual hours of work, even though this means that they get...more
The Court of Appeal in England and Wales decided that an employer was entitled to dismiss and offer to re-engage employees on new terms in order to remove pay protection it had originally referred to as “permanent”. The...more
The Court of Appeal in England and Wales has confirmed that in a wrongful dismissal claim, damages can reflect the least burdensome way of terminating an employment contract. In Mackenzie v AA Ltd, this meant that even if the...more
Dismissing an employee for long term sickness absence could be discrimination arising from a disability if an employer cannot show that the dismissal is objectively justified. The recent UK EAT decision in Department for Work...more
In INEOS Infrastructure Grangemouth Ltd v Jones, the EAT in Scotland found that it was an unlawful inducement relating to collective bargaining for an employer to make a unilateral pay award to employees after pay...more
The long-awaited Employment Bill is no closer to being put before Parliament, after there was no mention of it in the Queen’s Speech. However, in a separate announcement, the UK government has said that it will extend the...more
Difficult employment issues can arise during an international business purchase and what is straightforward in one country can prove challenging in another...more
Overturning a decision of the EAT, in Mercer v Alternative Future Group Ltd the Court of Appeal for England and Wales found that private sector workers are not protected against being subjected to a detriment by their...more
In Smith v Pimlico Plumbers Ltd the Court of Appeal for England and Wales allowed a worker to carry forward statutory holiday he had accrued during the course of his employment, which he had taken but not been paid for, until...more
In Stuart Delivery Ltd v Augustine, the UK Court of Appeal confirmed that a courier who could offer a time slot he had signed up to cover to other couriers was still obliged to perform work personally. This meant that he was...more
In Aleem v E-Act Academy Trust the UK EAT decided that it was not a reasonable adjustment to continue to pay an employee at her previous higher rate when she moved to a different lower-paid job because of a disability....more
The UK Supreme Court decision in Royal Mail Group Ltd v Efobi confirms that employees must still prove facts from which a tribunal could draw an inference of discrimination before their claim can proceed, despite a change of...more
7/28/2021
/ Burden of Proof ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Discrimination ,
Employment Litigation ,
Equality Act ,
Evidence ,
International Labor Laws ,
Race Discrimination ,
UK ,
UK Employment Appeal Tribunal ,
UK Supreme Court
Managing an employee who has persistent short or medium term ill-health absence is difficult for an employer. Dismissing an employee whose attendance is unlikely to improve may be fair, but this will often depend on medical...more
If not now then when? Tribunal should have identified when jurisdiction established -
An employment tribunal only has jurisdiction to hear claims under the Employment Rights Act 1996 and Equality Act 2010 if the claimant...more