|
 |
|


Employers Update - May 2013
Welcome to the latest edition
of Employ!
It’s
great to see that signs of
Spring are finally beginning
to appear and that the days
are getting longer, with
even the odd ray of
sunshine!
It
hopefully bodes well for the
training that some of the
Taylors team are enduring in
readiness for the
Oxfam Trailwalker Challenge in
July in aid of Oxfam and the Gurkha Welfare Trust, which
will see our team attempting
to complete an arduous 100km
route in less than 30 hours.
We’ve set ourselves an
ambitious fundraising target
of £10,000 and thanks to the
generosity and support of
our clients and contacts,
we’re well over half way
there!
We’re
holding the next Manchester
HR Exchange on 9 May and the
next Lancashire event on 20
June; if you haven’t already
done so, make sure you
reserve your place very
soon.
I hope
that you find this edition
of Employ! informative and
if it raises any issues that
you are dealing with and
would like to discuss
further, then please do not
hesitate to get in touch.
Best
wishes

Will Clayton
Partner & Head of Employment
Key
Employment Team Contacts:
 |
Rachel
Charlton
Assistant
Solicitor
Email Rachel
0844 8000 263 |
|
|
|
In This Edition:
Employ! Email
Updates
Employ! is Taylors FREE monthly
employment law newsletter which keeps busy
HR professionals up to
date with developments in the fast-moving
world of work.
Sign up now to have Employ! sent
to you via email each month.
|
|
|
 |
It was nearly
a year ago that we received
instructions from a client who
had dismissed one of their
employees as a result of the
employee’s failure to comply
with their policies relating to
reporting his sick absence from
work on a number of occasions.
On each of those
occasions, the employee had been
issued with a disciplinary
warning and reminded of the
absence reporting procedures
that he was required to adhere
to. Whilst those warnings were
issued without disciplinary
hearings taking place, on each
occasion the individual was
offered the right of appeal,
which he chose not to exercise.
The dismissal of the employee
actually took place without a
disciplinary hearing but the
employee was informed of the
decision in writing and offered
the right of appeal. Following a
referral from an existing client
of Taylors, the Company
concerned contacted our Senior
Employment Associate, Emma Swan
for advice and guidance.
Emma immediately
recognised the risk of a finding
of unfair dismissal due to a
potential breach of the ACAS
Code. However, Emma advised the
client that, provided a full
re-hearing was conducted at the
appeal stage, then there would
be a strong chance that the
client could rectify the
situation and that an Employment
Tribunal would determine that
any subsequent appeal finding
that the dismissal should be
upheld would be a fair
dismissal.
Last week we
were delighted to receive the
Employment Tribunal’s Judgment
that the procedural flaw at the
initial dismissal stage was
cured by the comprehensive
manner in which the Company
dealt with the Claimant’s appeal
against his dismissal. The
client had taken step-by-step
guidance from Emma and
undertaken a thorough re-hearing
at the appeal stage looking
afresh at each instance of
unauthorised absence and the
associated non-compliance with
the absence notification policy.
Whilst the key
message to employers is that it
is far safer to follow a
thorough investigation and
disciplinary procedure in the
first place (and it is also
likely to save time and expense
in subsequently dealing with an
appeal or Employment Tribunal
proceedings), employers should
take comfort in the fact that a
full re-hearing at an appeal
stage may remedy procedural
defects of certain kinds.
Our client in
this case was Dragon Air
Conditioning Limited, a company
based in South Wales that
specialises in air conditioning
design, installation, service
and maintenance. On receiving
the news of the Judgment in
their favour, Kevin and Alison
Markall, the owners and
directors of the business,
commented:
“We were
referred to Taylors by a mutual
client of both ourselves and
Taylors, who had used Taylors’
employment services for some
time. When we first spoke to
Emma, we were in an uncertain
position and did not know how to
deal with the disciplinary
appeal process with the threat
of an employment tribunal claim
looming. Emma guided us through
the appeal process and gave us
real practical advice on how to
deal with the matter; she talked
us through all our options and
explained clearly to us how each
would impact on our business.
Although it
was a difficult and time -
consuming process, it was
certainly worth all the effort.
We were absolutely delighted
with the tribunal's decision
that the appeal process Emma had
assisted us with, remedied the
procedural errors that had
occurred in the initial
dismissal Emma acted for us
throughout the Tribunal process
and was there to support us each
step of the way. She explains
matters in a straight forward
and practical way so that we
knew what to expect and could
take business decisions
accordingly. We cannot recommend
Emma's tribunal expertise highly
enough." |
|
 |
An employee’s obesity was part of a
significant question in the Employment
Tribunal recently when a Mr Walker claimed
that he had been discriminated against on
the grounds of his disability.
Mr Walker had functional overlay, which
was compounded by obesity. He suffered from
numerous conditions that in themselves could
potentially have amounted to disabilities.
These included asthma, dyslexia, knee
problems, diabetes, high blood pressure,
chronic fatigue syndrome, bowel and stomach
problems, chemical sensitivity, hearing
loss, anxiety and depression, persistent
cough, recurrent fungal infections, carpal
tunnel syndrome, eye problems and sacroiliac
joint problems.
The Tribunal was required to decide
whether Mr Walker’s functional overlay meant
that he was a disabled person and the legal
question was whether he had a physical or
mental impairment that had a substantial and
long term adverse effect upon his ability to
carry out normal day to day activities.
Firstly, the Employment Judge decided
that Mr Walker did not have a disability
because there was no evidence of a mental
illness causing a functional overlay and
there was no discernible physical or organic
cause for the condition, other than the
obesity being a contributing factor.
However, the Employment Appeal Tribunal took
a more holistic approach to the problem and
found that Mr Walker did have a disability,
which was probably a combination of both
physical and mental impairments. They said
that it was important to look at the effect
of the impairment rather than it being
necessary to consider how it was caused.
So, how should employers deal with obese
employees, particularly in a society where
we are told by the Government that over 60%
of adults are overweight or obese? If such
employees were found to be disabled by an
Employment Tribunal, then there would be an
obligation on the employer to make any
reasonable adjustments required to support
the employee in their role and if the
workplace relationship were to break down,
then disability discrimination claims may
arise.
So what should you do?
- It would be advisable for employers
to look at their workforce and to
consider whether the organisation can
put policies in place to encourage
healthy living and whether there are any
employee benefit schemes or incentives,
such as “Cycle to Work”, gym membership,
free health checks for example and
whether work places can be accommodated
to provide healthy snacks in any works’
canteens or vending machines, providing
facilities for those who may cycle, walk
or run to work for storage of their
equipment and to provide showers to
freshen up.
- It is also important that employers
consider how any sickness absence is
managed, with a clear absence policy
setting out how absences will be managed
and that they are implemented
consistently for all employees.
- Return to work interviews should be
held for every period of absence and
records kept of the number of absences
and the reasons given for those
absences.
- When considering whether an employee
may be suffering from a disability, you
should look at what the problems they
are suffering with are, rather than how
those problems have been caused.
- Advice should be taken from
occupational health advisers or an
employee’s own GP before making any
decisions, particularly where dismissal
is a possibility.
- Employers should consider and make
any reasonable adjustments for disabled
employees including those who are
severely overweight and/or obese.
A further question that the Employment
Appeal Tribunal considered is what would
happen if an obese person lost weight and
whether they could still be disabled. One of
the principal parts of the definition of
“disability” is that the condition suffered
needs to have a long term (at least 12
months) adverse impact on daily activities.
It may be that a person who is dieting will
have less and less adverse effects on their
ability to carry out daily activities and if
the impairment is likely to last less than
12 months, then there will be no disability.
Clearly obesity is a particularly
sensitive problem and very difficult for
employers to discuss, deal with or manage.
Whilst obesity is not automatically a
disability, it can have a significant impact
on an individual and cause other
medically-recognised illnesses. Obesity,
like stress, appears to be an increasing
problem for the population and it is
imperative that HR gets to grips with
handling grievances that individuals may
raise as a result of jokes directed at their
obesity or managing absence for illnesses
that may arise from that obesity. |
|
 |
A new Guidance from ACAS has now been
published on how employers should handle
collective redundancies following the change
in law on 6 April 2013.
If you are proposing to make 100 or more
redundancies, you now have to start
consultation at least 45 days before any
dismissals take effect (which is a reduction
from the former requirement of 90 days).
The ACAS Guidance does not set out a
procedure that employers must, by law,
follow but employers should be mindful that
if they are dealing with collective
redundancy situations, Employment Tribunals
will consider the Guidance and may be
persuaded by employees arguing that a
failure to follow the ACAS Guidance may
render a procedure unfair if it is not
followed.
We would not recommend, however, that you
simply follow the Guidance in the belief
that this will guarantee a fair procedure,
but consider the process as a whole
carefully and take specialist employment
advice before proceeding. In particular, the
ACAS Guidance does not in our view provide
enough detail on how to elect employee
representatives, who need to be in place
before consultation can even start.
The Employment Team at Taylors has
regularly and recently advised clients in
collective redundancy situations and would
be pleased to provide you with the practical
advice needed to comply with the legal
obligations. |
|
 |
We are proud to be associated with
Accrol Papers Limited, which is one of
Europe’s largest independent companies of
its kind.
Accrol Papers Limited has instructed
Emma Swan on a number of recent Employment
Tribunal claims that have been successfully
concluded to the client’s satisfaction
within a short time frame to ensure that
managers within the business can remain
focussed on running their business rather
than becoming embroiled in time-consuming
and lengthy litigation.
We would like to take the opportunity to
congratulate Acrrol’s Majid Hussain, who has
been named as a finalist for this year’s
North West Entrepreneur of the Year and wish
him all the best of luck. |
|
|
 |
We are delighted that so many of you
continue to support
The HR Exchange and we were
delighted to receive the following feedback
from Rebekah Tapping, Group HR Director of
Daisy plc:
"My team has been to a number of the
HR Exchange meetings and found it really
useful for their own development, to
understand what other businesses are
focusing on in HR and how they are managing
similar situations to the ones that are
facing. They feel that the HR Exchange is
safe environment to learn and share in.
We’ve recently enjoyed being able to
share our own experiences as a HR function
with other members of the HR Exchange when
we delivered a presentation on ‘A Day in the
Life of Daisy HR’. This was a great
development opportunity for the team as well
as being a good discussion point for the
rest of the HR Exchange.”
We look forward to Daisy’s continued
support at the
The HR Exchange and from all of you who
commit your time to attending.
The next HR Exchange events – 9 May (Manchester)
and 20 June (Lancashire)
will feature a mock employment tribunal, as
well as our popular employment law update.
We’ll be joined by Employment Judges from 9
St John Street Chambers in Manchester, so
the events promise to be as close to a real
life Tribunal as you’ll get – without all
the stress of course!
|
|
 |
How should you deal with an employee
who alleges that they had been targeted for
bullying by a colleague because they were of
a lower caste to their colleague?
The employment team says...
This gives rise to a complex area of law
under the Equality Act 2010 and careful
consideration needs to be given to planning
how to deal with the complaint. Whilst under
current employment law caste is not defined
in the Equality Act as a protected
characteristic, there is an arguable case
that it would be covered as ethnicity, which
is a protected characteristic under race.
There is a potential risk that if the
complaint is found to be true, then there
may be grounds for the employee to bring a
claim of discrimination on the grounds of
their race and/or religion or belief.
Regardless of there not being a clear
legal position on whether caste is covered
by the Equality Act, there is still an
obligation on an employer to ensure that all
employees are protected from bullying and
harassment on whatever grounds. Accordingly,
you should follow the company’s grievance
procedure and any related equal
opportunities or bullying and harassment
policies in investigating and considering
the grievance raised.
It should also be highlighted that Vince
Cable, Business Secretary, has announced
that caste discrimination will be outlawed
in the UK; this is a change in direction by
the Government. Mr Cable has indicated that
in the future, caste will be treated “as an
aspect of race”.
Proposals for such a change to
discrimination law have not yet been set out
in any detail and we will update you in due
course.
If you have any queries in relation to
this problem or a question that you would
like to ask the team and share with our
other readers, please send it to us and we
would be delighted to use it in a future
edition of Employ! |
|
Copyright 2006 - 2013 Taylors Solicitors
»
Print
» |
|
|
|
|
|