Tag: #flexibleworking

banner services

News & Views

Employment Law General Update – January 2025

  • Anne-Marie Pavitt,

  • 24th January 2025

Employment Law

This article summarises the main developments that will affect employment law in 2025 and beyond.

Employment Rights Bill and related consultations

Other employment measures

Employment Rights Bill and related consultations

Prior to its success in the general election that took place on 4 July 2024, the Labour Party proposed wide-ranging and fundamental reform of employment law. It promised that several of its reforms would be contained in an Employment Rights Bill (ERB), which was introduced on 10 October 2024.

Together with the draft ERB, on 10 October 2024, the government published a policy paper, Next Steps to Make Work Pay (Next Steps paper), which set out the steps the government intends to take following the publication of the ERB. It confirms that further detail on many of the policies contained in the ERB will be provided through partnership with business, workers and trade unions, regulations, and in some cases codes of practice, after the ERB has received Royal Assent, which is expected to be in 2025.

The ERB makes provision for wide-ranging changes to be made to employment law, including in relation to unfair dismissal, fire and rehire, collective redundancies, zero hours and low hours contracts, trade unions and industrial action, sexual harassment and third-party harassment, statutory sick pay (SSP), flexible working and family leave. In October 2024, the government published four consultations as part of its first phase of consulting relevant stakeholders. Further consultations are expected in 2025, which will deal with matters to be included in supporting regulations.

Back to the top

Bereavement leave

The existing right to two weeks’ parental bereavement leave following the death of a child under 18 or a stillbirth will be extended to be an entitlement to more general “bereavement leave”, which will apply to the loss of a wider group of persons (clause 14, ERB). Like the current provision for parental bereavement leave, bereavement leave will be a day-one right. Regulations will specify the relationships with a person who has died that will qualify an employee to take bereavement leave, and the government will consult on the details to be set out in secondary legislation.

Back to the top

Collective redundancies

The ERB strengthens redundancy rights and protections by removing the “at one establishment” test for collective redundancies, meaning that the threshold of 20 or more redundancies will be met when that number is impacted across the entire business, rather than at one site. This will increase the obligations on multi-site employers to collectively consult and will require them to keep rolling records of redundancies proposed across their multiple sites. In addition, the government is consulting about raising the current level of the protective award from 90 to 180 days’ pay, or to an uncapped amount and allowing employees to claim interim relief where they have a claim for a protective award or a claim for unfair dismissal in a fire and rehire scenario. During 2025, the government also plans to consult on increasing the minimum collective consultation period when an employer is proposing to dismiss 100 or more employees from 45 to 90 days.

Back to the top

Dismissal and re-engagement (fire and rehire)

The practice of fire and rehire has received widespread negative press coverage in recent years following a number of high-profile cases. These include the dismissal of almost 800 employees by P&O Ferries in 2022, to be replaced by lower-paid agency staff, and also a case where Tesco (unsuccessfully) sought to use the practice to overturn preferential pay rates it had agreed on a “permanent” basis with staff who agreed to relocate.

The ERB would restrict the ability of an employer to use dismissal and re-engagement (known as “fire and rehire”) as a lawful means of changing an employee’s contractual terms, save where there is genuinely no alternative, due to financial difficulties which threaten the employer’s ability to carry on business as a going concern. It does this by making any dismissal automatically unfair where the reason for dismissal is that the employee did not agree to the employer’s attempt to vary their terms and conditions, or because they intended to employ another person to carry out substantially the same role. On 21 October 2024, the government published a consultation on strengthening the remedies against abuse of the fire and rehire and collective consultation rules (see above). The consultation closed on 2 December 2024.

It is not clear what the government’s intentions are with regard to the Statutory Code of Practice on Dismissal and Re-engagement which was introduced under the previous Conservative government but only came into force on 18 July 2024. Despite its previous strong criticisms of the Code as being “inadequate”, it remains in force for now. It is possible that the government still intends to replace the Code with another one containing more stringent obligations on employers, as envisaged in the Plan to Make Work Pay, although any new Code of Practice would need to be consulted on before it could receive parliamentary approval.

Back to the top

Equality action plans and menopause support

Future regulations made under clause 26 of the ERB will require employers with 250 employees or more to develop and publish equality action plans showing what steps they are taking in relation to prescribed matters related to gender equality and to publish prescribed information relating to their plans.

Matters relating to gender equality will be those concerning the advancement of equality between male and female employees and will include addressing the gender pay gap and supporting employees going through the menopause. In November 2024, proposed amendments to the ERB were published which will be considered by the Public Bill Committee. An amendment proposed by the government would require employers to include an explanation in their equality action plans on how they are supporting employees with menstrual problems and menstrual disorders.

The government will consult the Equalities and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) on the content of the regulations before they are published.

Back to the top

Fair Work Agency

The ERB contains provisions permitting the Secretary of State to delegate their labour market enforcement functions to a public authority and to appoint enforcement officers. The Next Steps paper confirms that this will be the new Fair Work Agency (FWA), which will bring together the existing enforcement functions of HMRC (in relation to the national minimum wage (NMW)), the Employment Agency Standards Inspectorate (EASI) and the Gangmasters and Labour Abuse Authority (GLAA). The introduction of a single enforcement body has long been on the cards and was one of the government’s key manifesto pledges. However, whether the FWA succeeds in improving enforcement is likely to depend on the level of financial resources it is allocated, which is not yet clear. It is not yet known when the FWA will be established, although it is likely to be a number of years before it is fully operational.

Back to the top

Family leave

Paternity leave and unpaid parental leave will become a day-one right for eligible employees. The government also stated in the Next Steps paper that it intends to make it unlawful to dismiss employees who have been pregnant within six months of their return to work, except in specific circumstances. Regulations are awaited to define what these specific circumstances will be. The government also stated in the Plan to Make Work Pay that it would conduct a review of the current parental leave system during the first year of the Labour government, so this is expected by July 2025.

Back to the top

Flexible working

The existing day-one right to request flexible working under Part VIIIA of the ERA 1996 (sections 80F to 80I) (as amended) together with the Flexible Working Regulations 2014 (SI 2014/1398) (Flexible Working Regulations) (as amended) will remain, but the ERB will introduce a reasonableness test into the regime, providing that employers will only be able to rely on one of the statutory reasons to refuse a request for flexible working where it is “reasonable for the employer to refuse the application on that ground or those grounds”. In addition, employers will be required to state and explain what the ground for any refusal is and why the refusal is considered reasonable. The Next Steps paper confirmed that there will be a consultation to develop the detail of the approach to be taken on flexible working.

Back to the top

Sexual harassment

The ERB will amend section 40A of the EqA 2010 to require employers to take “all reasonable steps” to prevent sexual harassment, reflecting the wording originally contained in the Worker Protection Bill. Currently, employers are required to take reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment of their employees during the course of their employment under the Worker Protection (Amendment of Equality Act 2010) Act 2023, which came into force on 26 October 2024. Employers will also be under a duty to take “all reasonable steps” to prevent third-party sexual harassment, and to prevent third-party harassment in relation to the other relevant protected characteristics.

In addition, the ERB will amend the whistleblowing provisions of the ERA 1996 to make it clear that reporting sexual harassment will amount to a qualifying disclosure.

Back to the top

Statutory Sick Pay (SSP)

The ERB provides employees with the right to SSP from the first sick day rather than from the fourth day and removes the requirement for the employee’s earnings to be not less than the lower earnings limit to be eligible for SSP.

On 21 October 2024, the government published a consultation on SSP. The consultation, which closed on 4 December 2024, sought views on what the percentage of average weekly earnings should be for the purposes of calculating the rate of SSP for some low-earning employees.

Back to the top

Trade unions

The ERB will repeal the Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Act 2023. While nearly all of the restrictions placed on industrial action and picketing by the Trade Union Act 2016 will be removed, the time-limited mandate for industrial action following a ballot will remain. The ERB will introduce the right to a statement of trade union rights and the right for trade unions to access workplaces, it will simplify the rules on trade union recognition, introduce protection against detriment for taking industrial action and increase protection against dismissal for taking industrial action. These are summarised below.

Back to the top

Right to a statement of trade union rights

The Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 (TULRCA 1992) will be amended to require employers to give workers a written statement advising that they have the right to join a trade union at the same time as providing the worker’s section 1 statement and at other prescribed times.

Back to the top

Right of trade unions to access workplaces

Unrecognised unions will be provided with the opportunity to recruit and organise within a workplace with the aim of gaining recognition. Trade unions and employers will be able to enter “access agreements” providing union officials with access to the employer’s workplace for the purposes of meeting, representing, recruiting or organising workers, or facilitating collective bargaining (but expressly not to organise industrial action). The union may apply to the Central Arbitration Committee (CAC) to determine workplace access if the employer fails to respond to its request for an access agreement. Either party may make an application where negotiations are unsuccessful.

Back to the top

Simplifying statutory trade union recognition

The statutory scheme for trade union recognition set out in Schedule A1 to TULRCA 1992 will be amended to:

  • Enable the 10% membership threshold for the CAC to accept a trade union recognition application (and at other stages of the recognition scheme) to be reduced to between 2% and 10%.
  • Remove the requirement at the application stage (and at other stages of the recognition scheme) for a union to demonstrate that there is likely to be majority support for trade union recognition.
  • Remove the 40% support threshold from recognition ballots.

Back to the top

Protection against detriment for taking industrial action

TULRCA 1992 will be amended to provide workers with the right not to be subjected to detriment of a prescribed description by any act (or any deliberate failure to act) by their employer, if the act (or failure) takes place for the sole or main purpose of preventing or deterring the worker from taking protected industrial action, or penalising the worker for doing so.

Back to the top

Dismissal for taking industrial action

TULRCA 1992 will be amended to provided that for the full duration of an official, lawful strike and after that strike has concluded, an employee will be automatically unfairly dismissed where the reason (or, if more than one, the principal reason) for the dismissal is that the employee took such protected industrial action.

Back to the top

Consultation on further proposals

The government’s consultation, Making Work Pay: creating a modern framework for industrial relations, which closed on 2 December 2024, sought views on strengthening provisions to prevent unfair practices during trade union recognition, simplifying industrial action ballots, reducing notice of industrial action, extending the permitted duration of industrial action, updating the law on repudiation of industrial action and on prior call, and on enforcement of the trade union right to access workplaces.

Back to the top

Tribunal time limits

In a set of amendments to the ERB published in November 2024, the government confirmed that it would extend the time limits for bringing all tribunal claims from three to six months. It is not yet clear when this measure will take effect.

Back to the top

Unfair dismissal

Under the ERB, the right to bring a claim for unfair dismissal will become a day-one right for employees, subject to a new modified “light-touch” dismissal procedure applicable in most cases during an initial period of employment, which will be set by regulations but must be between three and nine months. It removes the two-year qualifying period for ordinary unfair dismissal protection by repealing section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA 1996). Much of the detail will be contained in regulations and is as yet unknown, but this will represent a hugely significant change in the unfair dismissal landscape. To allow for full consultation and a substantial period for employers to prepare and adapt, the unfair dismissal reforms will take effect no sooner than autumn 2026.

In November 2024, proposed amendments to the ERB were published which are being considered by the Public Bill Committee. A government amendment will allow the Secretary of State to specify a cap on the compensatory award for employees unfairly dismissed during the initial period of employment provided for in the ERB.

Back to the top

Zero hours and “low hours” contracts

Employee representative bodies and trade unions have long condemned the use of zero hours contracts as a means of abusing vulnerable, low-income workers, and providing no job security, rights or guaranteed income. There is very limited protection for workers on such contracts. The ERB will introduce a duty on employers to offer a guaranteed hours contract that reflects the hours qualifying workers regularly work over a reference period (to be specified in regulations, but the government suggested in the Next Steps paper that in its view it should be 12 weeks). The ERB also places a duty on employers to provide reasonable notice of shifts, with workers being entitled to compensation if their shift is cancelled, moved or curtailed at short notice.

On 21 October 2024, the government published a consultation on the application of the zero hours contracts provisions to agency workers. The consultation, which closed on 2 December 2024, explored who should be responsible for offering guaranteed hours to eligible workers: the agency or the hirer. The government notes that a difficulty of making agencies responsible is that they have little or no control, since the demand for hours is largely dictated by hirer. Hirers would, therefore, be in a better position to forecast and manage the flow of work. However, requiring hirers to offer guaranteed hours might effectively make them the agency worker’s employer.

In November 2024, proposed amendments to the ERB were published which are being considered by the Public Bill Committee. Substantial government amendments were put forward in relation to zero hours and “low hours” contracts, including new requirements for employers to take reasonable steps to ensure that workers are given specified information in relation to their rights to guaranteed hours during an “initial information period” and to give workers a notice where they consider an exception to the duty to make a guaranteed hours offer applies, or where a guaranteed hours offer that has been made is treated as having been withdrawn.

Back to the top

Other employment measures

Draft Equality (Race and Disability) Bill

A draft Equality (Race and Disability) Bill (Race and Disability Bill) was announced in the King’s Speech 2024, to be led by the Government Equalities Office (GEO). It will be published in draft form for consultation and deliver Labour’s manifesto commitment to “enshrine the full right to equal pay in law” for ethnic minorities and disabled people. There is expected to be significant consultation on the draft Race and Disability Bill and so it is anticipated that it will progress more slowly than the ERB.

The Race and Disability Bill will tackle two main issues:

  • Enshrine in law the full right to equal pay for ethnic minorities and disabled people. This will make it easier for them to bring unequal pay claims, given the existing barriers when bringing pay discrimination claims on the grounds of ethnicity or disability.
  • Introduce mandatory ethnicity and disability pay reporting for employers with 250 or more employees. This will help to close the ethnicity and disability pay gaps, enabling employers to constructively consider why they exist and how to tackle them.

The Next steps paper also states that the government will create a new regulatory enforcement unit for equal pay.

Back to the top

Neonatal care leave and pay

The Neonatal Care (Leave and Pay) Act 2023 received Royal Assent in May 2023 and was expected to come into force in April 2025 under the previous Conservative government. The government has confirmed this will come into effect on 6 April 2025. HMRC has published a policy paper on the tax treatment of statutory Neonatal Care Pay (see HMRC: Income Tax: tax treatment of Statutory Neonatal Care Pay). The Act will introduce statutory neonatal leave and pay for up to 12 weeks for parents of babies requiring neonatal care, which must be taken within 68 weeks of birth.

Back to the top

Right to disconnect

The Plan to Make Work Pay stated that a new “right to switch off” would be introduced, providing workers with the right to disconnect from work outside of working hours and not be contacted by their employer. This would follow similar models to those that are already in place in Ireland and Belgium, giving workers and employers the opportunity to have constructive conversations and work together on bespoke workplace policies or contractual terms that benefit both parties.

There is nothing on this new right in the ERB, and in the Next steps paper, the government confirmed that it would take forward the right to switch off through a statutory Code of Practice. It is expected that a consultation on the new code of practice will be issued in 2025.

Back to the top

Gender identity and gender critical beliefs

Gender identity is a highly charged issue with polarised views about, on the one hand, a transgender person’s right to have their identity recognised, and on the other hand, so-called “gender critical beliefs” that a person’s sex is an immutable biological fact and that someone’s gender is different from their sex.

Recent case law has recognised gender critical beliefs as being capable of protection under the Equality Act 2010 (EqA 2010) as a philosophical belief (Bailey v Stonewall and others ET/2202172/2020). This provides scope for conflict with other protected characteristics under the EqA 2010, including the protected characteristic of gender reassignment (Fischer v London United Busways Ltd ET/2300846/2021), and poses a challenge for employers who are responsible for preventing discrimination and harassment in the workplace. In For Women Scotland Ltd v Scottish Ministers, the Inner House of the Court of Session confirmed that the definition of “woman” in section 212(1) of the Equality Act 2010 includes trans women with a gender recognition certificate. The case has been appealed and was heard by the Supreme Court on 26 and 27 November 2024.

In May 2024, the Minister for Women and Equalities issued a “call for input” seeking examples of policies or guidance issued by public bodies, or those that advise public and private organisations, which might wrongly suggest that people without a gender recognition certificate (GRC) have a legal right to access single-sex spaces and services according to their self-identified gender. The call for input on incorrect guidance on single-sex spaces closed on 26 June 2024.

Back to the top

Artificial intelligence (AI) in the workplace

Modern workplaces are increasingly receptive to and reliant on tools powered by artificial intelligence (AI) such as machine learning, GenAI and automated decision-making to perform certain human resources and employee management functions. In addition, the development of GenAI applications, which can be used to perform a variety of work-related tasks, means that AI is more accessible to the workforce than in the past.

Back to the top

AI reform

In terms of reform in this area, the government’s Next Steps paper, promised that a consultation would be issued on how to implement measures on surveillance technologies and negotiations with trade unions and staff representatives.

Prior to this, the King’s speech, which was delivered in July 2024, announced that the government:

“… will seek to establish the appropriate legislation to place requirements on those working to develop the most powerful artificial intelligence models”.

Labour’s manifesto (Labour: Change), published in June 2024, promised that Labour would create a new Regulatory Innovation Office, bringing together existing functions across government, to help regulators update regulation and to co-ordinate issues that span different sectors, as it considers that regulators are currently ill-equipped to deal with the dramatic development of new technologies. It also promised to ensure the safe development and use of AI models by introducing binding regulation on the companies developing the most powerful AI models.

Labour’s Plan to Make Work Pay, noted that new technologies such as AI have the potential for positive change, including boosting wages, improving productivity and empowering workers. However, given the risks posed, Labour’s approach will be to protect good jobs and ensure good future jobs. It plans to put in place appropriate rights and protections to keep pace with technological change, while safeguarding against discrimination. At a minimum, Labour stated that it will ensure that proposals by employers to introduce surveillance technologies will be subject to consultation and negotiation, with a view to reaching agreement with trade unions or elected staff representatives. This would not override the provisions of any collective agreement relating to surveillance.

Labour’s New Deal green paper, which was first published in September 2021, had previously stated that proposals by an employer to introduce surveillance technologies would be subject to consultation and agreement by trade unions or elected staff representatives, although it was subsequently reported that this new “right” could be implemented by way of best practice advice or secondary legislation, in a perceived watering down of the original pledge.

Back to the top

TUC AI taskforce

Labour has been involved with the TUC’s AI taskforce, which in April 2024 published its draft Artificial Intelligence (Employment and Regulation) Bill, setting out recommended regulation of the use of AI in the workplace.

Back to the top

EU position

The EU is taking a more interventionist approach than the UK. A new Regulation, the EU AI Act, was formally adopted by the Council of the EU on 21 May 2024. The EU AI Act applies to public and private actors inside and outside the EU if the AI system affects individuals in the EU, and categorises AI systems into risk levels.

The Platform Workers Directive entered into force on 1 December 2024. Member states will have two years to incorporate the provisions of the Directive into their national legislation. The Directive provides new rights aimed at promoting transparency, fairness and accountability in algorithmic management used in platform work.

Back to the top

International convention on AI

Since coming to power, on 5 September 2024, the Labour government signed the new international treaty, the Council of Europe’s Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law. The AI treaty has also been signed by the European Commission.

Back to the top

Managing AI risk

Due to the increasing use of AI in the workplace, there is a greater need to assess and manage the associated risks. In March and November 2024, new guidance was published by the government and the ICO specifically aimed at AI use in the HR and recruitment sectors. There are several actions that an employer can take to mitigate the risks, such as undertaking risk assessments and carrying out due diligence with suppliers of AI systems.

Back to the top

Immigration

From 31 December 2024, the sponsor licence guidance was updated to prohibit Skilled Worker sponsors from passing on the cost of the sponsor licence fee or associated administrative costs or the Certificate of Sponsorship (CoS) fee (for CoS assigned on or after 31 December 2024). 
Back to the top

Further Information

If you would like any additional information, please contact Anne-Marie Pavitt or Sophie Banks on: hello@dixcartuk.com

Back

The data contained within this document is for general information only. No responsibility can be accepted for inaccuracies. Readers are also advised that the law and practice may change from time to time. This document is provided for information purposes only and does not constitute accounting, legal or tax advice. Professional advice should be obtained before taking or refraining from any action as a result of the contents of this document.

Related News

banner services

News & Views

Employment Law General Update – October 2024

  • Anne-Marie Pavitt,

  • 30th October 2024

Employment Law

Big changes are afoot this month with the introduction of the new Labour government’s Employment Rights Bill, aiming to fix problems perceived by the Labour party during their long stint in opposition, such as addressing one-sided flexibility, supporting more family friendly rights and prioritising fairness, equality and wellbeing of workers, ensuring fair pay, modernising trade union legislation and improving enforcement of employment rights. Consultation over the Bill will start now and continue in 2025, with the aim to implement the changes in 2026. We also bring you updates on sexual harassment, proposed employment rights for parents of still-born children and those born prematurely, guidance on the new Tipping Act, and a change in equality office.

  • Legislation: Government publishes Employment Rights Bill
  • Protection at Work: The Worker Protection (Amendment of Equality Act 2010) Act 2023 to comes into force on 26 October 2024 and EHRC updates its harassment guidance and publishes eight-step guide for employers on preventing sexual harassment at work
  • Parents: New private members’ bill on Still-Birth and leave for Neo-natal care
  • Pay: New Tipping Act and supplementary Code of Practice comes into force –  guidance available
  • Equality: Office for Equality and Opportunity replaces the Equality Hub

Legislation: Government publishes Employment Rights Bill

Background: In September 2021, the Labour Party first introduced its plan for working people in its ‘A new deal for working people’, launched at the Labour Party Conference. The document underwent several iterations, with the final version, Labour’s Plan to make work pay: Delivering a new deal for working people (New Deal), published just prior to the release of the manifesto in June 2024. The Labour Manifesto reiterated a number of the promises set out in the New Deal document and stated that the New Deal would be implemented in full within the first 100 days of the Labour government. The King’s Speech on 17 July 2024 confirmed that Labour’s plans would be implemented through the Employment Rights Bill 2024 (Bill) and the Equality (Race and Disability) Bill 2024. The Employment Rights Bill 2024 was published on 10 October 2024.

When will the Bill come into force? Commencement regulations will be required to bring provisions into force, with the exception of provisions on trade unions and industrial action, which will come into force two months from the day on which the Act is passed, and the repeal of the Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Act 2023 and related provisions, which will come into force on the date the Act is passed.

What does the Bill plan to do? The Bill implements a large number of the reforms promised in the Labour Party’s New Deal document. Alongside the Bill, the government has also published a policy document entitled Next Steps to Make Work Pay (Next Steps) and a set of explanatory notes. The document sets out the government’s plan generally as well as the next steps in implementation for many of the measures.

Laid out below is a summary of the current position, the changes promised prior to the Bill and the expected reforms in relation to the measures set out in the Bill.

Zero hours and ‘low hours’ contracts: Zero-hour contracts are contracts of employment which lack a minimum number of guaranteed working hours and which do not require a minimum commitment from the employee. This means the working hours of an individual are unpredictable and may vary wildly from week to week. Although, individuals on zero-hour contracts do have a number of statutory protections, these are based solely on employment status. At present there is no definition as to what ‘low hours’ means. This will be the subject of consultation.

In order to provide more security for individuals on zero-hour contracts, the Labour Party promised to:

  • ban ‘exploitative’ zero hours contracts;
  • ensure a right to a contract reflecting the number of hours regularly worked and is likely to be based on a 12-week reference period;
  • ensure workers get reasonable notice of any shifts or working time changes, with proportionate compensation for cancelled or shortened shifts;
  • introduce anti-avoidance measures; and
  • end ‘one sided’ flexibility by ensuring all jobs provide a baseline level of security and predictability.

The Bill sets out a right to guaranteed hours where a worker regularly works more than those hours. The guaranteed hours are calculated according to a reference period, which is expected to be 12 weeks. Employers will be required to make an offer of guaranteed hours to workers at the start of employment and at the end of each reference period. Workers can also submit claims to the employment tribunal where an employer has failed to comply with their duty to offer guaranteed hours, or where that offer does not comply with the necessary requirements.

The Next Steps document states that the government intends to consult on the details and to ensure the Bill’s provisions on zero hours contracts are effectively and appropriately applied to agency workers.

Fire and re-hire: Currently, employers wishing to introduce changes to the terms and conditions of an employment contract have the option of terminating the contract (with the requisite notice) and offering immediate re-engagement to the affected employee on new terms. While in government, the Conservative party introduced a statutory Code of Practice on dismissal and re-engagement with guidance on engaging in meaningful consultation and exploring alternatives. However, the Labour Party have since committed to ending ‘fire and rehire’ practices entirely in addition to reforming the existing fire and rehire Code and introducing more effective remedies against abuse.

In place of the Code of Practice, clause 22 of the Bill inserts a new section 104I into the Employment Rights Act 1996, which makes a dismissal unfair where the reason for the dismissal is that:

  • the employer sought to vary an employee’s contract and the employee did not agree, or
  • the employer sought to employ another person or re-engage the employee under a varied contract to carry out substantially the same duties.

This will not apply where the employer shows that the reason for the variation was to eliminate, prevent or significantly reduce, or significantly mitigate the effect of, any financial difficulties which at the time of the dismissal were affecting, or were likely in the immediate future to affect, the employer’s ability to carry on the business as a going concern or otherwise to carry on the activities constituting the business, and in all the circumstances the employer could not reasonably have avoided the need to make the variation.


Unfair dismissal qualifying period: Under section 108(6) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 the right not to be unfairly dismissed generally only arises where the employee has been continuously employed for a period of at least two years; however the rule is subject to a number of statutory exceptions. The Labour Party has promised to remove the two-year qualifying period for unfair dismissal claims, making it a ‘day one’ right.

The Bill will repeal s.108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and remove the two-year qualifying period. However, there will be a new ‘initial period of employment’ (or ‘probationary period’) during which the employer can dismiss an employee for certain reasons, subject to following a specified procedure. The length of the initial period and the details of the procedure will be subject to consultation—see Probationary periods below.

Sick pay (SSP): SSP is currently available to employees who are deemed to have been too ill to undertake any work for a period of at least four consecutive days. Employees must also earn above the lower weekly earnings limit (currently at £123) in order to qualify for SSP. The Labour Manifesto laid out the Party’s commitment to removing the qualifying period for statutory sick pay making it also a ‘day one’ right and removing the lower earnings limit. The Bill reflects both these promises in clauses 8 and 9.

The government will consult on the percentage replacement rate for those earning below the current flat rate of SSP, before bringing it into force as an amendment to the Bill. Furthermore, the Next Steps document states that the new Fair Work Agency will be given responsibility for ensuring SSP enforcement.

Parental leave: Parents of a child (whether born to the parents or adopted) are entitled to take up to 18 weeks of unpaid leave to care for that child at any time before the child’s 18th birthday. Currently parents must have worked continuously for an employer for at least one year to qualify for parental leave. The Bill will make parental leave a ‘day one’ right.

Probationary periods: As noted above, the Bill introduces the concept of an ‘initial period of employment’ (or ‘probationary period’) where dismissals for specified reasons will not be considered unfair. The government has further committed in the Next Steps document to consulting on the length of that initial statutory probation period and to consult on how it interacts with ACAS’s Code of Practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures to ensure that ‘day one’ rights will not be affected by the statutory probation period.

Flexible working: The Employment Rights Act 1996 provides employees with a statutory right to request certain specified changes to their employment contract. However. employees must have had at least 26 weeks’ of continuous service in order to qualify for the right. Earlier legislative changes were made from 6 April 2024, including making the right to request a day one right. However, the grounds upon which an employer can reject a request remain broad.

The Bill introduces a reasonableness requirement into an employer’s decision not to grant flexible working requests, and requirement for the employer to explain to the employee why they consider it reasonable to refuse the request.

Protection for new mothers: Currently, dismissal on the grounds of pregnancy or maternity will be deemed to be an automatically unfair dismissal. This means that an employee dismissed under these circumstances does not require the two years of continuous employment ordinarily needed to bring a claim in the employment tribunal. A woman who takes ordinary maternity leave is also entitled to return to the ‘same job’ at the end of that leave unless that job is no longer available.

The Plan to make work pay also included a promise to strengthen these protections by making it unlawful, except in specified circumstances, to dismiss a woman who has had a baby for six months after she returns to work.

The Bill provides the Secretary of State with the power to make provision for regulations restricting dismissal of an individual during pregnancy or for a period after pregnancy.

Paternity leave: Currently an employee may take paternity leave to support a mother or adopter in taking care of a new child, subject to (among other things) having at least 26 weeks’ qualifying employment. Under the Bill, paternity leave will become a ‘day one’ right.

Bereavement leave: Employees are entitled to Parental bereavement leave (PBL) following the death of a child if they meet the requisite parental relationship conditions and comply with the notice requirements. PBL is a ‘day one’ right; however it is currently only available to employees. The Bill extends the right to take PBL to any ‘bereaved person’. PBL will no longer be limited to circumstances involving the death of a child. A bereaved person will be entitled to take leave for the death of any person as long as they meet the other relevant conditions set out in the regulations.

Equality action plans: Amendments to the Equality Act 2010 made by the Bill will require large employers (with 250 employees or more) to publish equality action plans showing the steps that the employer is taking in relation to their employees with regard to prescribed matters related to gender equality, and to publish prescribed information relating to the plan. These will need to cover addressing the gender pay gap and supporting employees going through the menopause.

Fair Work Agency: The Labour Party has committed to amalgamating the HMRC National Minimum Wage unit, the Employment Agency Standards Inspectorate and the Gangmasters Labour Abuse Authority into a single enforcement body known as the Fair Work Agency. The Bill establishes the Fair Work Agency which will be responsible for:

  • minimum wage and statutory sick pay enforcement;
  • the employment tribunal penalty scheme;
  • labour exploitation and modern slavery; and
  • enforcement of holiday pay policy (a new responsibility, which was not originally included in the New Deal document).

Fair pay agreements for social care workers: The Labour Party promised to consult on a new Fair Pay Agreement to create a New Deal for Social Care Workers. The Bill provides for the creation of an Adult Social Care Negotiating Body with a remit over remuneration, terms and conditions of employment and any matters specified by the Secretary of State, for social care workers. Agreements over remuneration which have been ratified by the Secretary of State must be paid in accordance with the agreement and any other term will have effect as a term of a worker’s contract. A consultation on how the Fair Pay Agreement should work is promised ‘soon’.

School support staff: The School Support Staff Negotiating Body, the pay body for school support staff, was abolished some time ago. The Labour Party stated that it would reinstate the Body, and task it with establishing a national terms and conditions handbook, training, career progression routes and fair pay rates for support staff to help to address the recruitment and retention crisis. The Bill re-establishes the School Support Staff Negotiating Body.

Trade unions: The Employment Rights Bill makes provision for changes to trade union law relating to:

  • a worker’s right to a statement of trade union rights;
  • a trade union’s right of access to a workplace;
  • trade union recognition;
  • members’ contributions to political funds, and public sector check-off arrangements;
  • time off rights for trade union officials, learning representatives and union equality representatives; and
  • blacklisting.

An employer will be required to give a worker a written statement that the worker has a right to join a trade union at the same time as the employer gives the worker a written statement of employment particulars. Secondary legislation will stipulate what information must be included in the statement, the form the statement must take and the manner in which the statement must be given.

The Employment Bill introduces a new framework for trade unions to request physical access to an employer’s workplace for the purposes of meeting, representing, recruiting or organising workers, and/or facilitating collecting bargaining. Access agreements are to be negotiated in the first instance between the employer and the trade union, with a referral to the Central Arbitration Committee provided for if agreement cannot be reached.

Thresholds required for a trade union to qualify for, and achieve, statutory recognition will be amended, with double thresholds removed where relevant and replaced by a simplified requirement for unions to demonstrate appropriate levels of support. In relation to individual contributions to a political fund of the trade union, the default position will be that individual members will be contributors to the political fund unless they specifically opt out (rather than the other way around, which is the current position.

Changes to the check-off arrangements for public sector workers introduced by s.15 of the Trade Union Act 2016 on 9 May 2024 are to be repealed.

Where an employer permits an employee or a learning representative to take time off for carrying out their duties under the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 (ss.168 and 168A), it will also be expected, if requested, to provide reasonable accommodation and other facilities for carrying out those duties.

A new right for reasonable time off for union equality representatives is introduced to support duties related to promoting equality in the workplace.

Secondary legislation will be introduced to extend blacklisting protections; it will be unlawful not only to compile lists of trade union members etc, but also to use such lists for the purposes of discrimination in relation to recruitment or in relation to the treatment of workers, and/or to sell or supply such lists for those purposes.

Industrial action: Changes are proposed in relation to:

  • balloting and notification requirements for lawful industrial action
  • lawful picketing;
  • detriment and dismissal for participating in lawful industrial action; and
  • restrictions on those working in regulated services from participating in industrial action.

Ballot participation thresholds will be done away with and support thresholds for industrial action will be the majority of those voting in the ballot. Additional balloting thresholds for those engaged in public services will also be done away with. Information that must be included on the voting paper in a ballot is to be significantly reduced and simplified. Provision is made for electronic balloting to be introduced.

The period of notice to be given to an employer to notify it of industrial action is to be reduced from 14 days to seven days.

Lawful picketing will no longer be dependent on the union supervision requirements contained in s.220A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, which is to be done away with.

A new right for workers to be protected from detriment for participating in protected industrial action, or to deter them from doing so, is to be introduced, and protection against dismissal for participating in protected industrial action is to be extended.

The Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Act 2023 is to be repealed, and industrial action restrictions on workers working in services that have been designated ‘relevant’ services under the Act are accordingly lifted.

Further reform: In addition to the anticipated reforms announced in the Labour Party’s New Deal and Manifesto, the Bill includes some measures which had not previously been anticipated. Clauses 16–18 of the Bill contain new provisions on sexual harassment, expanding the duty to prevent sexual harassment set to come into force on 26 October 2024 under the Worker Protection (Amendment Of Equality Act 2010) Act 2023. The new sections introduce:

  • liability for harassment by third parties;
  • provision for disclosures about sexual harassment qualifying as a protected disclosure under S.43B of the Employment Rights Act 1996; and
  • the addition of specified steps that an employer must take to demonstrate that they have taken reasonable steps in the prevention of sexual harassment for the purposes of the legislation.

The government will also consult on lifting the cap of the protective award if an employer is found to not have properly followed the statutory collective redundancy processes and on the role interim relief could play in protecting workers in these situations.

As stated above, the Next Steps document provides a general timeline on the implementation of the measures and reforms set out in the Bill. The majority of the measures in the Bill are set to be brought in through commencement legislation, and a number will go through a consultation process before their eventual implementation. According to the Next Steps document, the government expects to start consulting in 2025, although the government is ahead of itself in this regard and launched four consultations on 21 October 2024. The four consultations, which run until early December 2024, seek views of the Bill’s measures relating to a new right to guaranteed hours for zero or low hours workers, collective redundancy consultation and ‘fire and rehire’ practices, trade union legislation and statutory sick pay.  This means that any substantive reforms are unlikely to take effect much before 2026. This also means the Bill is likely to see some amendment before all the measures fully come into force.

The Next Steps document also refers to a number of reforms not included in the Bill which the government is nevertheless committed to introducing. These are:

  • a full review of the parental leave system;
  • a review of the implementation of carer’s leave and an examination of the benefits of introducing paid carer’s leave;
  • a consultation on workplace surveillance technologies;
  • consultations on the creation and implementation of a single ‘worker’ status;
  • a call for evidence on TUPE 2006 regulations and processes;
  • a review of health and safety in the workplace aimed at modernising guidance and regulations;
  • a joint consultation with ACAS on collective grievances;
  • the introduction of a new National Procurement Policy Statement aimed at reforming the public procurement ahead of the commencement of the Procurement Act 2023 in February 2025; and
  • an extension of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 to private companies that hold public contracts and publicly funded employers.

Back to the top

Protection at work: The Worker Protection (Amendment of Equality Act 2010) Act 2023 to comes into force on 26 October 2024 and EHRC updates its harassment guidance and publishes eight-step guide for employers on preventing sexual harassment at work

The Worker Protection (Amendment of Equality Act 2010) Act 2023 comes into force on 26 October 2024. The Act will:

  • Introduce a duty on employers to take reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment of their employees.
  • Give employment tribunals the power to uplift discrimination compensation by up to 25% where an employer is found to have breached the duty to prevent sexual harassment.

At present it’s only a duty to take ‘reasonable steps’, the new Employment Rights Bill already includes a change to ‘all reasonable steps’ which no doubt will come into force in due course.  The Employment Rights Bill will also re-introduce employer liability for third party harassment in relation to all relevant protected characteristics under the Equality Act (sex, sexual orientation, age, disability, etc.)

Sexual harassment occurs where both:

  • A engages in unwanted conduct of a sexual nature.
  • The conduct has the purpose or effect of either violating B’s dignity, or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for B.

The EHRC has published an updated technical guidance for employers on the steps they can take to prevent sexual harassment in the workplace. The EHRC has also published an eight-step practical guide to assist with this preventative duty, including developing an effective anti-harassment policy, using a reporting system that allows workers to raise an issue either anonymously or in name, and regularly monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of an employer’s actions.

Back to the top

Parents: New private members’ bill on Still-Birth and leave for Neo-natal care

The Still-Birth (Definition) Bill (a Private Members’ Bill sponsored by Liberal Democrat peer, Baroness Benjamin) received its first reading in the House of Lords on 14 October 2024. The Bill would amend the definition of still-birth to apply from 20 weeks into a pregnancy, rather than from 24 weeks as currently is the case, including for the purposes of entitlement to maternity allowance under section 35 of the Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992.

Currently under the Neonatal Care (Leave and Pay) Act 2023 (which received Royal Assent on 24 May 2023) employees with responsibility for children receiving neonatal care will be entitled to receive up to 12 weeks of paid leave per year. Regulations bringing into force its main provisions are awaited.

The latest edition of HMRC’s Employer Bulletin confirms that from 6 April 2025 HMRC will begin to administer statutory neonatal care pay (SNCP). The Bulletin informs employers that SNCP:

  • is claimable in the first 28 days following the birth of a child after they have spent seven consecutive days in neonatal care
  • can be paid for a maximum period of 12 weeks but will allow some flexibility dependent upon individual parental circumstances and other statutory payments to which they may be entitled.

Back to the top

Pay: New Tipping Act and supplementary Code of Practice comes into force –  guidance available

On 1 October 2024, the Employment (Allocation of Tips) Act 2023 and statutory Code of Practice on fair and transparent distribution of tips came into force. Under the Act, employers must distribute tips in a ‘fair and transparent’ manner, passing all tips, gratuities, and service charges on to workers, without deductions. Failure to do so could result in employment tribunal claims by workers seeking to enforce their rights.

The Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (ACAS) has published guidance on tips and service charges in relation to the Act and supplementary Code of Practice which are both now in force. The guidance explains what the new law says, sharing tips fairly, and the obligation to have a written policy and to keep records. The guidance also covers which tips the law applies to, when tips must be paid, tronc systems and what happens if tips are not being paid correctly.

The DBT has also published non-statutory guidance for employers for employers on distributing tips fairly. The guidance is aimed at helping employers apply the statutory code of practice on fair and transparent distribution of tips, and applies to all sectors and businesses where tips are received. The guidance is not part of the statutory Code of Practice, legal advice or an exhaustive account of what is acceptable under either the Employment Rights Act 1996 or the statutory Code of Practice.

Back to the top

Equality: Office for Equality and Opportunity replaces the Equality Hub

The Equality Hub has been replaced by the Office for Equality and Opportunity. The Office for Equality and Opportunity will cover the overall framework of equality legislation in the UK, including disability policy, ethnic disparities, gender equality and LGBT+ rights.

Back to the top

Further Information:

If you would like any additional information, please contact Anne-Marie Pavitt or Sophie Banks on: hello@dixcartuk.com

Back

The data contained within this document is for general information only. No responsibility can be accepted for inaccuracies. Readers are also advised that the law and practice may change from time to time. This document is provided for information purposes only and does not constitute accounting, legal or tax advice. Professional advice should be obtained before taking or refraining from any action as a result of the contents of this document.

Related News

banner services

News & Views

Employment Law General Update – January 2024

  • Anne-Marie Pavitt,

  • 26th January 2024

Employment Law

Welcome back to another year of invaluable insights and updates in the dynamic world of employment law. This month, discover the upcoming changes and trends that will shape employment law in the early months of 2024, stay compliant with the most recent holiday pay regulations by accessing the latest government guidance, and learn about ACAS’s updated Code of Practice for handling flexible work requests and adapt to the evolving landscape.

As ever, stay informed and up-to-date with Dixcart Legal.

What’s in store for Employment law in early 2024?

There are four pieces of legislation that came into effect on 1 January 2024.

First, the Employment Rights (Amendment, Revocation and Transitional Provision) Regulations 2023 amends the Working Time Regulations in relation to paid holiday for irregular hours workers and part-year workers from 1 April 2024, plus in relation to the calculation of normal pay, the carrying forward of paid holiday and record-keeping requirements. These regulations also expand the information and consultation obligations on small businesses under TUPE for transfers on or after the 1 July 2024.

The second piece of legislation was the Equality Act 2010 (Amendment) Regulations 2023. They make various changes to the Equality Act 2010 to reproduce certain interpretive effects of retained EU law which would otherwise cease to apply in the UK after the end of 2023. They include amending the definition of disability to take into account a person’s ability to participate in working life on an equal basis with others, providing an express right to claim indirect discrimination by association and preserving the single source test for equal pay comparisons.

The third and fourth pieces of legislation are the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Act 2023 (Commencement No. 1) Regulations 2023 and the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Act 2023 (Consequential Amendment) Regulations 2023. They make fundamental changes including abolishing the principle of supremacy of, and general principles of, EU law, as well as replacing references to ‘retained EU law’ with the term ‘assimilated law’ in UK legislation (including the Equality Act 2010).

A significant change which came into force on 6 January 2024 (under section 1 of the National Insurance Contributions (Reduction in Rates) Act 2023) was the reduction from 12% to 10% in the employee primary Class 1 National Insurance Contributions rate, as announced in the government’s recent Autumn Statement.

From 22 January 2024 the maximum civil penalty for the illegal employment of an adult who is subject to immigration control will triple, from £20,000 to £60,000 for each offence pursuant to the Immigration (Employment of Adults Subject to Immigration Control) (Maximum Penalty) (Amendment) Order 2023.

Looking forward to April 2024, there will be two sets of regulations affecting the national minimum wage coming into force on 1 April 2024. The first, the National Minimum Wage (Amendment) Regulations 2024, will increase the minimum rates for workers, including the new rate of the national living wage of £11.44 an hour for the first time to all those aged 21 and over. The second set of regulations, the National Minimum Wage (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2023, will remove the exemption for live-in domestic workers so that nannies and au pairs will have to be paid the national minimum wage.

Then, on 6 April 2024, the right to request flexible working will become a day one right (under the Flexible Working (Amendment) Regulations 2023) and the rate for Statutory Sick Pay will increase to £116.75 per week (under the Social Security Benefits Up-rating Order 2024). In addition, on that date, two family-friendly pieces of legislation will come into force:

  1. the Maternity Leave, Adoption Leave and Shared Parental Leave (Amendment) Regulations 2024 will extend existing protections if an employee is on maternity, adoption or shared parental leave when a redundancy arises, so that those protections also apply during pregnancy, and for a period of time after the relevant leave has ended; and
  2. the Carer’s Leave Regulations 2023 will allow employees to take up to one week of unpaid leave per year to provide, or arrange, care for a dependant with a long-term care need.

Also in April 2024, the rate of Statutory Maternity Pay (and other family related statutory payments) will increase to £184.03 per week (also under the Social Security Benefits Up-rating Order 2024).

Finally in this round-up, on 9 May 2024, two sets of regulations relating to trade unions will come into force (the Trade Union Act 2016 (Commencement No. 6) Regulations 2023 and the Trade Union (Deduction of Union Subscriptions from Wages in the Public Sector) Regulations 2023). These will have the combined effect of restricting when relevant public sector employers can make deductions from their workers’ wages in respect of trade union subscriptions.

As if that was not enough, other legislation to look out for that is not Employment law-related but relevant for all companies is the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 in relation to the failure to prevent fraud. Companies House has published a blog post on 22 January 2024 detailing the initial changes which will apply from 4 March 2024: Get ready for changes to UK company law – Companies House (blog.gov.uk)

Back to the top

Holiday Pay: Government publishes new guidance on pay and entitlement

The government has published new guidance on the holiday pay and entitlement reforms from 1 January 2024. The guidance covers the meaning of an irregular hours worker and a part-year worker, holiday entitlement for these workers, carry-over of leave and holiday pay calculations.

The government has now published guidance to accompany the changes made to the Working Time Regulations 1998, SI 1998/1833, by the Employment Rights (Amendment, Revocation and Transitional Provision) Regulations 2023, SI 2023/1426, with effect from 1 January 2024.

The guidance is arguably of more limited impact than anticipated because:

  • it expressly states that:

‘It does not provide definitive answers to all individual queries. It is not intended to be relied upon in any specific context or as a substitute for seeking advice (legal or otherwise) on a specific circumstance, as each case may be different.’

  • in relation to some grey areas, the guidance just restates the legislation and does not provide any examples of what factually would meet the requirements set out (e.g. in relation to what an employer must do to give a worker a reasonable opportunity to take their leave and encourage them to do so);
  • it does not expressly address the issue of whether or not annual bonuses should be included in holiday pay calculations.

The guidance does, however, include illustrative examples of who would, and would not, fall within the definitions of an irregular hours worker and a part-year worker. In relation to the latter category, the guidance states that a worker with an annualised (flat) salary over 12 months would not qualify as a part-year worker even though there are periods of one week or more when they are not working as there are no weeks in which they are not receiving pay.

What does the guidance cover?

The guidance covers:

  • the definitions of an irregular hour worker and a part-year worker
  • holiday entitlement for these workers
  • carry-over of leave, and
  • holiday pay calculations.

Some particular points worth highlighting are set out below.

Irregular hours and part-year workers

The guidance gives examples as to who would fall within or outside these definitions.

The examples demonstrate that a truly zero hours (casual) worker would count as an irregular hours worker whereas a worker on a rotating (but fixed) two-week shift pattern, for which the number of hours alternates, would not.

The guidance explains that part-year workers with fixed hours, for example, teaching assistants who only work during term-time, and who are paid only when working, would count as part-year workers. However, workers with an annualised (flat) salary over 12 months (e.g. most teachers) would not count as a part-year worker as there are no weeks where such a worker is not receiving pay.

Holiday pay rates and order of leave

The guidance explains that in respect of full-year workers who are legally entitled to 5.6 weeks of paid statutory holiday entitlement per year:

  • the first four weeks of this entitlement must be paid at a worker’s ‘normal’ rate of pay
  • the remaining 1.6 weeks’ entitlement can be paid at ‘basic’ rate of pay.

The guidance notes that:

‘The regulations do not state which entitlement should be used first. Many employers choose not to distinguish between the 2 pots of leave, and to pay the entire 5.6 weeks at the ‘normal’ rate of pay. If an employer wishes to pay different holiday rates for different periods of leave, then they should consider explaining this clearly and consistently to the worker, for example in the worker’s contract or staff handbook.’

Annual bonuses

The guidance does not expressly deal with the question of whether annual bonuses should be included when calculating holiday pay. However, the principles set out in the guidance may assist in how this issue is to be determined. For example, the guidance states that:

‘Holiday pay is based on the legal principle that a worker should not suffer financially for taking holiday. The amount of pay that a worker receives for the holiday they take depends on the number of hours they work and how they are paid for those hours. Pay received by a worker while they are on holiday should reflect what they would have earned if they had been at work and working.’

This would support the exclusion of an annual bonus when calculating holiday pay in circumstances where the annual bonus (and its amount) is paid irrespective of the number of weeks of annual leave taken, as to do otherwise would result in the worker being paid more for the period of holiday than their normal pay.

The position is not so straightforward, however, where bonuses are linked to performance which is related to time worked, as in that scenario a worker taking their full entitlement to annual leave may get a reduced bonus compared to a worker who took no annual leave.

It may be that employers will choose to make it clear in their bonus policies or schemes that workers are encouraged to use their full entitlement to annual leave and will not be penalised in terms of bonus for doing so, in an effort to clearly put themselves into the former rather than the latter category, and exclude annual bonuses from holiday pay calculations.

Starting to use rolled-up holiday pay

For irregular hours and part-year workers, for holiday years starting on or after 1 April 2024, employers can choose to use rolled-up holiday pay.

In terms of practicalities, the guidance states that:

‘If employers intend to start using rolled-up holiday pay, they should check their workers’ contract in case this amounts to a variation of contract. Employers should tell their workers if they intend to start using rolled-up holiday pay and for this payment to be clearly marked as a separate item on each payslip. The holiday pay should be paid at the same time as the worker is paid for the work done in each pay period. Employers of agency workers must include this information in the agency worker’s Key Information Document.’

The guidance also notes that if the employer chooses to use rolled-up holiday pay then the entire amount of leave for irregular hours and part-year workers will be paid at the ‘normal’ rate of pay.

The Government guidance can be found here: Holiday pay and entitlement reforms from 1 January 2024

Back to the top

Flexible Working: ACAS publishes a revised Code of Practice on requests for flexible working

The Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (ACAS) has published its revised Code of Practice on requests for flexible working. The revised Code of Practice will come into effect in April 2024. Until then the current Code of Practice will continue to apply. The Draft Code of Practice was originally published as part of an ACAS consultation in July 2023. The consultation closed on 6 September 2023.

Following the consultation, ACAS has made a number of changes to what is now the revised Code of Practice. These are:

  • providing that guidance on consulting with an employee about a flexible working request recommends that where the original request cannot be fully met, employers discuss with the employee any potential modifications
  • ensuring that formal meetings following the acceptance of a flexible working request are no longer required
  • providing an extended list of categories of companions allowed to accompany an employee to a request meeting. However, the Code of Practice makes clear that there is not statutory right of accompaniment
  • recommending that all organisations (not just larger ones) ensure a different manager deals with an appeal over a flexible working request.

All other areas proposed in the initial draft Code of Practice will remain.

The ACAS consultation can be found here.

Back to the top

Further Information:

If you would like any additional information, please contact Anne-Marie Pavitt or Sophie Banks on: hello@dixcartuk.com

Back

The data contained within this document is for general information only. No responsibility can be accepted for inaccuracies. Readers are also advised that the law and practice may change from time to time. This document is provided for information purposes only and does not constitute accounting, legal or tax advice. Professional advice should be obtained before taking or refraining from any action as a result of the contents of this document.

Related News

banner services

News & Views

Employment Law General Update –  July 2023

  • Employment,

  • 25th July 2023

Employment Law

This month there has been a lot of movement in rights at work – with a new jobs ‘passport’ for injured or disabled veterans, a private member’s bill to bring in a definition of ‘bullying’ at work, a consultation launched on the Disability Action Plan, the government’s response to the ethnicity pay reporting consultation and ACAS is consulting on a new draft Code of Practice to cover flexible working requests. There is also a consultation from the DBT on the future of the labour market enforcement strategy and ACAS’s latest annual report on how much it is needed.

  • Labour Market: MoD and DWP announce new jobs ‘passport’ for injured or disabled veterans
  • Labour Market: DBT launches consultation on Labour Market Enforcement Strategy for 2024 to 2025
  • Disability: DWP launches consultation on proposals for Disability Action Plan
  • ACAS: New consultation published on new draft Code of Practice on flexible work requests
  • ACAS: Annual ACAS report for 2022 to 2023 reveals dispute resolution ever necessary

Labour Market: MoD and DWP announce new jobs ‘passport’ for injured or disabled veterans

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) and Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has announced a new Adjustment Passports scheme to help smooth the way for injured or disabled Armed Forces to re-enter civilian work life. This scheme aims to remove barriers to the labour market by providing a transferable record of workplace adjustments, removing Access to Work assessments and reassessments, thus unlocking a pool of talent for employers and businesses to assist in economy growth. Guidance for the scheme has also been published.

Back to the top

Labour Market: DBT launches consultation on Labour Market Enforcement Strategy for 2024 to 2025

The Department for Business and Trade (DBT) has published a consultation seeking responses to assist the Director of Labour Market Enforcement, Margaret Beels, in putting together the labour market enforcement strategy for 2024-25. The role of Director of Labour Market Enforcement was created in 2017 to bring together a coherent assessment of the extent of labour market exploitation, identifying routes to tackle exploitation and harnessing the strength of the three main enforcement bodies: HMRC National Minimum Wage; the Gangmasters and Labour Abuse Authority (GLAA); and the Employment Agency Standards Inspectorate (EAS).

Each year the Director submits a Labour Market Enforcement Strategy to Government to set priorities for the three main enforcement bodies.

Both the interim DLME Strategy 2022 to 2023 (published in March 2023) and the full DLME Strategy for 2023 to 2024 (awaiting clearance from government) proposed four themes as a structure for thinking about identifying and tackling labour market non-compliance. These four themes are:

  1. Improving the radar picture to have a better understanding of the non-compliance threat.
  2. Improving focus and effectiveness of the compliance and enforcement work of the three bodies under my remit
  3. Better Joined-up Thinking to minimise the opportunities for exploitation of gaps in employment protection.
  4. Improving engagement with employers and support for workers

The DLME Strategy for 2024 to 2025 will continue to build on these themes and this call for evidence seeks information about a number of these areas and provides an opportunity for respondents to draw to our attention evidence that they have of other areas where they observe significant risk of worker exploitation.

The consultation closes on 8 September 2023.

Back to the top

Rights at Work: Parliament introduces bill to define bullying at work

Labour MP Rachael Maskell recently introduced a Private Members’ Bill to define workplace bullying and introduce legal duties on employers to prevent it, and it passed its first reading in Parliament on 11 July 2023.

She cited research from the Trades Union Congress in 2019 that estimated one quarter of employees are bullied at work, with most people who say they are bullied never reporting it. Maskell told the House of Commons. ‘There’s no legal definition, no legal protection, no legal route to justice, and without protection, many will leave their employer’.

If adopted, the Bill would provide a legal definition of ‘bullying’ in the workplace for the first time in the UK. Employees would be able to bring bullying claims to an employment tribunal and employers that fail to implement a statutory ‘respect at work code’ would face sanctions. The Equality and Human Rights Commission would also have powers to investigate systemic bullying damaging workplace cultures.

Maskell said the Bill would mean the definition of bullying by the workplace mediator ACAS as ‘offensive, intimidating, malicious, insulting or humiliating behaviour’ would be extended into statute and the usual method of determining compensation for injury to feelings would be applied. But its main goal is establishing a minimum standard for workplace conduct and discouraging managers who use their power over colleagues to ‘denigrate and destroy’, Maskell said.

The Bill follows bullying claims against former Justice Secretary Dominic Raab, who resigned after an investigation found he had belittled staffers. Lawyers said at the time that the lack of a legal definition of bullying made it hard but necessary to set expectations around workplace conduct.

Back to the top

Disability: DWP launches consultation on proposals for Disability Action Plan

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has launched a consultation on the government’s Disability Action Plan. The plan involves raising awareness of technology for disabled people, mandatory disability awareness training for taxi drivers, autism-friendly programmes for cultural and heritage sites and ensuring businesses are aware of disabled people’s needs. The plan is designed to make the UK a more inclusive society in the long term and to facilitate immediate and practical measures to improve disabled people’s lives for the better. The consultation will close on 6 October 2023.

Back to the top

Ethnicity Pay Reporting: Government publishes response to ethnicity pay reporting consultation

The UK government has published a response to the ethnicity pay reporting consultation which aimed to gather views on what information should be reported, who should report it, and the next steps for consistent and transparent reporting. The government has concluded that, while ethnicity pay gap reporting can be a valuable tool to assist employers, it may not always be the most appropriate mechanism for every type of employer. Therefore, the government has confirmed that, as set out in the ‘Inclusive Britain’ report in 2022, it will not be legislating to make ethnicity pay reporting mandatory at this stage. Instead, the government has produced guidance (which was published in April 2023) to support employers who wish to report voluntarily.

Back to the top

ACAS: New consultation published on new draft Code of Practice on flexible work requests

The Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (ACAS) has published a consultation on a new draft Code of Practice on handling flexible working requests. The new draft code is aimed at addressing the significant changes in ways of working since the current ACAS code was published in 2014. It is also designed to take into account anticipated changes to the Employment Rights Act 1996 around flexible working. The consultation closes at 11:59pm on 6 September 2023.

Back to the top

ACAS: Annual ACAS report for 2022 to 2023 reveals dispute resolution ever necessary

ACAS has published its annual report for 2022 to 2023, revealing a greater demand for its dispute resolution services. Key facts and figures include highlighted in this year’s report include:

  • ACAS’s intervention in 621 collective disputes between employers and groups of workers, a 22% increase to the previous year
  • 105,754 notifications for early conciliation and ACAS staff finding a resolution in over 72,000 cases
  • over 14.4 million visits to the ACAS website
  • 649,179 calls from employers and employees across Great Britain to the ACAS helpline

Back to the top

Further Information:

If you would like any additional information, please contact Anne-Marie Pavitt or Sophie Banks on: hello@dixcartuk.com

Back

The data contained within this document is for general information only. No responsibility can be accepted for inaccuracies. Readers are also advised that the law and practice may change from time to time. This document is provided for information purposes only and does not constitute accounting, legal or tax advice. Professional advice should be obtained before taking or refraining from any action as a result of the contents of this document.

Related News

banner services

News & Views

Employment Law General Update – May 2023

  • Employment,

  • 29th May 2023

Employment Law

This month’s news provides an update on the effect of the Retained EU Law Bill and the scrapping of the sunset clause, a new smart regulation from the DBT, a report on the post-pandemic economic growth in the UK labour markets, new guidance from ACAS on both managing stress at work and making reasonable adjustments for mental health at work, a new podcast from the HSE to support disabled people in the workplace and a consultation from the EBA on the benchmarking of diversity practices. Lastly, we have the results of research carried out on unfair treatment of parents following fertility treatment.

  • Brexit: Government scraps the proposed sunset clause from the Retained EU Law  Bill and Minister confirms effect of the Bill on equality and employment rights
  • Employment Law: Department for Business and Trade – Smart regulation unveiled to cut red tape and grow the economy
  • Flexible Working: House of Commons Committee report on post-pandemic economic growth in UK labour markets
  • Health at Work: ACAS publishes new guidance on managing stress at work and making reasonable adjustments for mental health at work
  • Disability: HSE launches podcast to support disabled people in the workplace
  • Diversity: EBA publishes consultation on guidance on benchmarking of diversity practices
  • Sex Discrimination: Research reveals unfair treatment at work after fertility treatment

Brexit: Government scraps the proposed sunset clause from the Retained EU Law  Bill and Minister confirms effect of the Bill on equality and employment rights

On 10 May 2023, the government announced that it will scrap the proposed sunset clause from the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill. As we have previously reported in our Employment Law News, the sunset clause would have meant that most retained EU law in secondary legislation would have been revoked at the end of 2023. Instead at least 600 pieces of retained EU law will be set out in a revocation schedule, which can be found here. Any laws not listed in the revocation schedule will be retained automatically.

Meanwhile, the Department for Business and Trade has published a response to a letter by the Rt Hon Caroline Nokes MP, Chair of the Women and Equalities Committee, requesting further explanation about the Retained EU Law Bill’s effect on equality rights and protections. The response by the Rt Hon Kemi Badenoch MP, Minister for Women & Equalities, confirms that the Retained EU Law Bill does not intend to undermine equality rights and protections, employment rights or maternity rights in the UK. It sets out that most equality protections will remain unaffected, as they are provided for in primary legislation, in particular the Equality Act 2010 (to which no changes are expected because of the Bill) and any relevant secondary legislation and additional instruments will be considered.

It also highlights that where additional provision is required, the Bill enables the UK Government and the devolved governments to protect the rights and protections of UK citizens. This includes a restatement power which allows departments to codify rights into domestic legislation. The response emphasises that this power will secure rights and protections, by laying them out accessibly and clearly in statute.

Employment rights

The response sets out that the government does not intend to amend workers’ legal rights through the Bill, that the UK provides for greater protections for workers than are required by EU law and that the government remains committed to making sure that workers are properly protected in the workplace.

Parental leave

The response emphasises that the repeal of maternity rights is not and has never been government policy, and that the UK is in fact further along than the EU when it comes to maternity rights.

 Back to the top

Employment Law: Government’s “Smart regulation unveiled to cut red tape and grow the economy”

On the 10 May 2023 the Department for Business and Trade published its paper “Smarter regulation unveiled to cut red tape and grow the economy” which the government describes as “the first dynamic package of deregulatory reforms to grow the economy, cut costs for businesses and support consumers …”

 The governments announcements include the following proposed amendments to employment law:

  • The government is proposing to remove retained EU case law that requires employers to record working hours for almost all.
  • Making rolled-up holiday pay lawful. Rolled up holiday pay is where an employer includes a sum representing holiday pay in an enhanced hourly rate rather than continuing to pay workers as normal when they actually take leave. This was ruled to be in breach of the Working Time Directive by the ECJ well over a decade ago.
  • The merger of annual leave (20 days derived from the EU’s Working Time Directive) and additional leave (being the additional 8 days holiday provided under the Working Time Regulations). Whilst this appears to be sensible it will be interesting to see how the European case law which specifically applies to the 20 days annual leave, such as what constitutes holiday pay and taking such holiday in the year in which it falls, is dealt with.
  • TUPE – there are proposals to do away with the need for elections of employee representatives for businesses with fewer than 50 employees or transfers of fewer than 10 employees.

 The government has launched consultation on these points.

 The government has also proposed limiting the length of non-compete clauses to three months. This will require the passing of legislation, which, the government says will be dealt with when parliamentary time allows.

So we wait to see exactly what legislative changes come about following these announcements.

 Back to the top

Flexible Working: House of Commons Committee report on post-pandemic economic growth in UK labour markets

A House of Commons Committee report says the government must reconsider the need for an Employment Bill in the upcoming King’s Speech to address gaps in employment protections. The government has two months to respond to the committee’s proposals which are on topics including the machinery of government with responsibility for labour market policy; technology and skills development; workers’ rights and protection; and older workers.

The report, which follows on from a Call for Evidence on the state of play in the UK Labour market post-Brexit and the COVID-19 pandemic, highlights that:

  • with 500,000 people having left the British workforce since the start of the pandemic, a shortage of labour weighs heavily on the potential for economic growth;
  • economic inactivity has risen among people aged 50 to 64 years;
  • the way in which the recommendations of the Taylor Review have been implemented has been fragmented and drawn-out;
  • the enforcement of labour market rules is under-resourced.

It calls on the government to:

  • consider establishing a Ministry of Labour and appoint a new Minister of State for Labour in the Cabinet, as well as a Cabinet Committee on Labour;
  • take various actions in respect of technology and skills;
  • reconsider the need for an Employment Bill in the upcoming King’s Speech to address gaps in employment protections;
  • consider new legal structures for flexible work that include appropriate rights and protections for workers;
  • provide more protection for workers from any damaging effects of night-time working;
  • pursue the creation of the planned single enforcement body which would clarify rights of redress for those most in need;
  • continue and expand support for older workers.

It also calls on businesses to:

  • be more open to create more flexible constructions of work;
  • offer more flexible working opportunities to benefit from a huge untapped pool of older workers and to assess whether their recruitment practices and workplaces are ‘ageist’.

Back to the top

Health at Work: ACAS publishes new guidance on managing stress at work and making reasonable adjustments for mental health at work

Managing stress at work:

ACAS has published new advice for employers on managing stress at work after YouGov revealed 33% of British workers disagreed that their organisation was effective at managing work-related stress. YouGov was commissioned by ACAS and surveyed just over 1,000 employees in Great Britain. ACAS sets out that stress can be caused by demands of the job, relationships at work, poor working conditions and life events outside of work such as financial worries. An ACAS poll in March 2023 revealed that 63% of employees felt stressed due to the rising cost of living.

Advice for employers on managing stress at work include:

  • looking out for any signs of stress among staff. Signs include poor concentration, tiredness, low mood and avoiding social events;
  • being approachable available and have an informal chat with staff who are feeling stressed;
  • respecting confidentiality and being sensitive and supportive when talking to staff about work-related stress;
  • communicating any internal and external help available to staff such as financial advice if the cost of living is a cause of stress.

ACAS states that creating a positive work environment can make employees healthier and happier at work, reduce absence levels and improve performance.

ACAS advice on managing stress can be accessed here.

Back to the top

Making reasonable adjustments for mental health at work:

ACAS has published new guidance for employers and workers on reasonable adjustments for mental health. ACAS states that ‘employers should try to make reasonable adjustments even if the issue is not a disability’. The guidance covers:

  • what reasonable adjustments for mental health are;
  • examples of reasonable adjustments for mental health;
  • what reasonable adjustments can be made for mental health;
  • requesting reasonable adjustments for mental health;
  • responding to reasonable adjustments for mental health requests;
  • managing employees with reasonable adjustments for mental health;
  • reviewing policies with mental health in mind.

ACAS has also published case studies exploring how different organisations have helped staff with reasonable adjustments for mental health.

Back to the top

Disability: HSE launches podcast to support disabled people in the workplace

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has launched a new podcast aiming to help employers support disabled workers and those with long-term health conditions in the workplace. The podcast features discussion by host Mick Ord, former BBC Radio journalist, Moya Woolley, Occupational Health Policy Team Leader at HSE and Rebecca Hyrslova, Policy Advisor at Federation of Small Businesses (FSB); and offers advice for employers on how to create a supportive and enabling workplace, take an inclusive approach to workplace health, understand the work barriers that impact on workers, make suitable workplace adjustments or modifications, develop skills, knowledge and understanding, use effective and accessible communication, and support sickness absence and return to work.

Back to the top

Diversity: EBA publishes consultation on guidance on benchmarking of diversity practices

The European Banking Authority (EBA) has launched a consultation on guidelines on the benchmarking of diversity practices including diversity policies and the gender pay gap pursuant to Articles 75(1) and 91(11) of the Capital Requirements Directive IV (Directive 2013/36/EU) (CRD IV) and Article 34(1) of the Investment Firms Directive (Directive (EU) 2019/2034). The EBA has been collecting data on diversity since 2015 based on information requests. The EBA hopes that the issuance of these guidelines will lead to a higher level of transparency regarding the EBA’s work on the topic of diversity and gender equality and will help improve the quality of the collected data as well as the awareness of all stakeholders on these topics. The new reporting format is expected to apply for the collection of data in 2025 for the financial year 2024. Responses are sought to the consultation by 24 July 2023.

Back to the top

Sex Discrimination: Research reveals unfair treatment at work after fertility treatment

Pregnant Then Screwed published a press release during Infertility Awareness Week revealing the unfair treatment women face in the workplace due to their reproductive health. Research has revealed that of the 43% of women who informed their employer of their fertility treatment, one in four did not receive any support from their employer. One in four women also experienced unfair treatment because of undergoing fertility treatment. Unfair treatment was also experienced by 22% of women who disclosed their pregnancy loss to their employer while 6% of partners who disclosed the same faced negative treatment.

The press release confirms Pregnant Then Screwed will be launching a new programme to help employers deal with reproductive health issues in the workplace better. They will be hosting a Women in the Workplace seminar for businesses to find out more about the new training and accreditation scheme which signals fertility friendly employers. This free event will take place in June 2023.

Back to the top

Further Information:

If you would like any additional information, please contact Anne-Marie Pavitt or Sophie Banks on: hello@dixcartuk.com

Back

The data contained within this document is for general information only. No responsibility can be accepted for inaccuracies. Readers are also advised that the law and practice may change from time to time. This document is provided for information purposes only and does not constitute accounting, legal or tax advice. Professional advice should be obtained before taking or refraining from any action as a result of the contents of this document.

Related News

banner services

News & Views

Employment Law General Update – February 2023

  • Employment,

  • 27th February 2023

Employment Law

We bring you a month of reports and inquiries. Two reports from a think tank and the IES into how women’s finances are affected by their working life and what impact this can have on the gender pension gap. A new Bill has been given government backing to give zero hours workers more certainty by requesting a more predictable work pattern. A troubling and impactful inquiry has been published into the TSSA, with stark consequences, and a study finds that despite having whistleblowing policies in place, many require better implementation and training.

  • Pensions: Think tank publishes two reports on the gender pension gap with recommendations
  • Zero Hours Contracts: Government backs law to give workers right to request more predictable work pattern
  • Trade Unions: Inquiry finds Sexual harassment rife at TSSA
  • Whistleblowing: Majority of firms have whistleblowing policies, but lack formal training for those handling concerns, study finds

Pensions: Think tank publishes two reports on the gender pension gap with recommendations

Two reports from think tank Phoenix Insights and the Institute for Employment Studies (IES) exploring women’s finances through the lens of the workplace, set out a number of recommendations to assist women’s ability to save thereby closing the gender pension gap. The gender pay gap already disadvantages women’s future finances because it means they are more likely to contribute less to their retirement savings than their male peers. The research found that this disparity is made worse by life events, including motherhood, menopause, divorce, childcare, menstruation and caring responsibilities which can all disproportionately affect a woman’s earnings, and therefore pension contributions.

Some of the key findings in the reports include that the gender pay gap is a significant contributor to the gender pension gap, yet women on average contribute a larger proportion of their salary to their pension. On average, women are contributing a higher percentage of their monthly income into their pension than men up until middle age – 6.1% compared to 5.8% aged 35-44 by middle age – where care responsibilities fall to one in four women in the UK – men are paying almost £80 more per month into their pension than women. Women are more likely than men to fall under the auto-enrolment threshold (women 35% : men 11%). Automatic enrolment closed the contribution gap in participation but increased the gap in terms of contribution. Women are more likely to be economically inactive due to long-term health conditions than men. There is limited awareness among employers of the causes and consequences of the gender pension gap, resulting in a lack of action over and above the statutory minimum allowances that seek to improve the savings capacity of women across the different life stages.

The think tank report recommends employers should be required to inform employees about the pensions impact that changes to their working hours and earnings may have, to help close the gender pension gap.

The opportunity for employers – five key recommendations:

  • re-enrol workers into pension schemes annually, rather than the statutory three years, to give workers the opportunity to re-engage if they have taken career breaks or have opted out because of a lack of affordability
  • ensure employer pension contributions continue during periods of parental leave
  • adopt a minimum of five days unpaid leave per year for those with childcare responsibilities, and where possible, five days paid carer’s leave
  • make flexible working the norm from day one and highlight this across all job roles
  • ensure workplace health policies offer explicit and visible support for reproductive conditions such as miscarriage, fertility treatment, for those diagnosed with endometriosis and managing menopause symptoms

The role of government – five key recommendations:

  • legally require employers to provide information on how contractual changes impact pension contributions
  • revisit the Carer’s Leave Bill to ensure that unpaid careers can access up to ten days statutory paid leave
  • the legal right to flexible working should be available from the first day of employment, and the number of reasons to reject flexibility should reduce from eight to two
  • widen the coverage of auto-enrolment by lowering age and earnings eligibility threshold to 18 years and £0, respectively
  • review the advice and guidance boundary so that a larger population can access tailored and reliable financial support

Back to the top

Zero Hours Contracts: Government backs law to give workers right to request more predictable work pattern

The Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (BEIS) has announced that the government is backing Blackpool South MP Scott Benton’s Workers (Predictable Terms and Conditions) Bill. The Bill seeks to ensure that all employees, even agency workers, receive more predictable working patterns.

‘Hard working staff on zero hours contracts across the country put their lives on hold to make themselves readily available for shifts that may never actually come’ said Labour Markets Minister, Kevin Hollinrake. ‘Employers having one-sided flexibility over their staff is unfair and unreasonable. This Bill will ensure workers can request more predictable working patterns where they want them, so they can get on with their daily lives.’ The Bill provides that if an employee’s existing working pattern lacks certainty in terms of the hours they work, the times they work, or if it is a fixed term contract for less than 12 months, they may make a formal application to change their working pattern to make it more predictable. The move comes as part of a package of policies designed to further workers’ rights, such as:

  • paid neonatal care leave
  • requiring employers to ensure that all tips, gratuities, and service charges are paid to workers in full
  • entitling unpaid carers to a period of unpaid leave
  • providing employees with a day one right to request flexible working, and a greater say over when, where, and how they work

Back to the top

Trade Unions: Inquiry finds sexual harassment rife at TSSA

A misogynistic, ‘mafia-like’ culture of sexual harassment, bullying and violent language has permeated one of Britain’s transport unions, a new independent inquiry has revealed. An investigation by Baroness Helena Kennedy KC into the Transport Salaried Staffs’ Association (TSSA) concluded on 8 February 2023 that ‘there has been sexual harassment, discrimination and bullying within the TSSA and that the leadership and culture has enabled these behaviours through wilful blindness, power hoarding and poor practices’.

Kennedy’s report called for sweeping changes in an organisation where absolute power was concentrated in ‘a very small number of hands’, and called for new leadership at the TSSA. The TSSA opened the investigation in September 2022 after its General Secretary at the time, Manuel Cortes, was accused of sexual harassment by several women. Cortes, who has since retired with an undisclosed payout, denies the allegations. Kennedy pointed out in her report that neither the internal leadership of the TSSA nor the executive committee understood that to say they had not witnessed inappropriate behaviour is not an acceptable response to an ‘atmosphere of fear’ and an environment of ‘open secrets’.

Only two of the 50 people who volunteered to speak to Kennedy as she carried out her inquiry had any positive words to say about the TSSA’s culture, according to her report. The rest described a ‘dysfunctional’ and ‘mafia-like’ culture across the TSSA. The organisation was sexist, racist and homophobic, they said.

Kennedy said that a ‘distressing element’ of her inquiry was realising how little senior leaders at the TSSA seemed to have ‘moved with the times’. Their approach to management was ‘controlling’ and described by many staff members as bullying. The barrister said that, combined with governance failings, meant the ‘outdated attitudes of scepticism and disbelief of women’ formed a ‘dangerous mixture’.

Kennedy noted that the recent history of ‘wage suppression’, particularly in the public sector, and the ‘casual erosion of employment rights’ through precarious work points to an urgent need for healthy trade unions. She recommended a sweeping change of leadership, a realistic time-frame for reform and ‘serious investment of time in culture change’ to make a success of the TSSA.

TSSA said in response that the report made ‘difficult reading’ and highlighted serious problems that the union had to tackle. A spokesperson said the TSSA recognised the need for sweeping reform and stated its commitment to tackle institutional issues and drive through a culture change. ‘As a union, TSSA fights for equality, fairness and social justice for all, regularly winning on equality issues for our members’, the spokesperson said. ‘But it is clear from this report that our union has not followed the values we aspire to for our members.’

The President and Treasurer of the TSSA have stood down with immediate effect and interim replacements had been appointed, the spokesperson added. The TSSA has confirmed it is committed to take comprehensive, considered and meaningful action to address [the report’s] findings, and to enable the necessary further investigation and decisions to be made, the TSSA has suspended all five senior members of staff named in the report, including former General Secretary, Manuel Cortes.

Responding to the report, the TUC stated that ‘sexual harassment and bullying have no place in the trade union movement or any workplace. The TUC believes the women who came forward to share their experiences’. The TSSA have been asked to meet with the TUC General Secretary and the TUC President to discuss next steps.

The Kennedy report comes after a similar 2020 investigation into the GMB, conducted by Karon Monaghan KC, concluded that the GMB is institutionally sexist, and bullying, misogyny, cronyism and sexual harassment are endemic within the GMB.

Back to the top

Whistleblowing: Majority of firms have whistleblowing policies, but lack formal training for those handling concerns, study finds

On 16 February 2023, an article by People Management reported that a study by whistleblowing and compliance services provider Safecall, which surveyed HR managers and directors from 222 organisations, found that that while 17 per cent of respondent organisations lacked a whistleblowing policy, the majority (83 per cent) did have one in place, and for those companies that provide internal whistleblowing services, only 58 per cent of their investigators had been formally trained.

The report also discovered:

  • more than two fifths (42 per cent) of employees responsible for managing whistleblowing complaints have either self-taught, learned their skills through experience, or have no experience at all
  • more than half (57 per cent) of HR professionals surveyed believed that their employees were actively encouraged to report wrongdoing.
  • however, just 42.6 per cent said employees “generally feel safe” to do so, 
  • the majority (74 per cent) of HR professionals could not be certain that whistleblowers were confident in raising concerns, and
  • one in five (20 per cent) organisations have whistleblowing processes that their employees would find to be “highly untrustworthy”.

The article goes on to discuss various aspects of having whistleblowing policies. A policy that emphasises how employees can bring matters to their employer’s attention, which may help employers avoid or at least reduce the risk of employment claims by increasing the likelihood that disclosures will be readily identified as qualifying as a protected disclosures.

However, problems arise where there is a fundamental lack of trust between an organisation and its workforce. Having a whistleblowing policy that ensures there is a clear procedure that must be followed by all staff when a complaint is made can support businesses in fostering a transparent and open company culture. The policy should also demonstrate that staff should not be victimised or subjected to any detrimental treatment as a result of bringing a complaint.

Last year, legal experts warned HR professionals of the consequences of workers whistleblowing on their former and current employers for coronavirus job retention schemes, with law firm Pinsent Masons reporting that 13,775 furlough fraud whistleblowing reports were made to HMRC.

Meanwhile, a previous People Management report found that one in five (20 per cent) employees who had gone to their bosses with concerns over furlough fraud and breaches of Covid-19 safety rules were sacked as result. 

Back to the top

Further Information:

If you would like any additional information, please contact Anne-Marie Pavitt or Sophie Banks on: hello@dixcartuk.com

Back

The data contained within this document is for general information only. No responsibility can be accepted for inaccuracies. Readers are also advised that the law and practice may change from time to time. This document is provided for information purposes only and does not constitute accounting, legal or tax advice. Professional advice should be obtained before taking or refraining from any action as a result of the contents of this document.

Related News

banner services

News & Views

Employment Law Case Update – February 2023

  • Employment,

  • 27th February 2023

Employment Law

This month’s review covers a range of issues. We look at sex discrimination involving a lack of a private toilet for a female employee, how an employee who worked term time should have had her holiday pay calculated to take account of the national minimum wage, a potential revision of couriers’ holiday pay following the Pimlico Plumbers case, how not to deal with a flexible working request, and an appeal to reconsider a dismissal related to the pandemic.

  • Sex Discrimination: Risk of seeing man at urinal was direct sex discrimination
  • Pay: Contractual terms of salaried term-time worker entitled her to NMW for 52 weeks of the year
  • Holiday Pay Claims: Tribunal decision remitted following Court of Appeal decision in Pimlico Plumbers
  • Indirect Discrimination: Rejection of flexible working request is application of PCP
  • COVID-19: Sales rep wins bid to dispute firing over COVID-19 home working

Sex Discrimination: Risk of seeing man at urinal was direct sex discrimination

In Earl Shilton Town Council v Miller [2023] EAT 5, the EAT has rejected Earl Shilton Town Council’s case that it did not treat ex-clerk Karen Miller worse than men in its shared toilet arrangement. The council launched its appeal after the employment tribunal ruled in 2020 it failed to provide appropriate toilet facilities to ex-clerk Karen Miller for almost two years between 2016 and 2018. The tribunal concluded that Ms Miller had been treated less favourably because she ran the risk of seeing men using the urinal. The council argued in its appeal that Ms Miller was not treated less favourably than men because they were just as much at risk of being seen at the urinal as she was of seeing them. The Judge Tayler rejected its case, concluding that Ms Miller’s sex discrimination claim did not fall apart just because a man could also make a similar complaint. It was enough to establish that Ms Miller had a worse experience than a man would seeing another man at the urinal, he said.

‘Taken from her perspective the claimant was treated less favourably than men in that she, a woman, was at risk of seeing a man using the urinals’, Judge Tayler said. ‘While a man might see another man use the urinals, the treatment of the claimant, as a woman, was less favourably.’

The judgment details how the council, which was based in a Methodist Church that it shared with a playschool, only had access to a female toilet that was in the school’s half of the building. Female staff would have to check with playschool workers that no children were using the toilet first because of child safety concerns, according to the judgment. The toilets were not always immediately accessible as a result. The council offered her the use of the men’s toilet, which has a single cubicle and a multi-person urinal. But there was no lock on the external door, creating the risk that a woman might walk in on a man using the urinal or leave the cubicle to find a man using it. The council also contended in its appeal that the sharing arrangements could not be discriminatory because they were caused by child safety concerns.

Judge Taylor ruled that the arrangements were not good enough, citing the lack of a sanitary bin and suggesting that installing a lock on the toilet door may have made it compliant.

‘The facilities were inadequate for the claimant because she is a woman’, he said. ‘Accordingly, the safeguarding issue could only go to motive and could not prevent direct discrimination being established.’

Back to the top

Pay: Contractual terms of salaried term-time worker entitled her to NMW for 52 weeks of the year

In Lloyd v Elmhurst School Limited [2002] EAT 169, the claimant was employed by the respondent, a private school, as a teaching assistant. She initially worked two days a week and then this was increased to three days a week (21 hours per week). She was paid monthly in equal instalments. The claimant’s contract did not set out hours of work. However, it stated that during term time she would work as directed by the Head Teacher and be entitled to the usual school holidays as holidays with pay. The respondent calculated the claimant’s salary based on 40 weeks of the year. The claimant brought a claim in the employment tribunal for unlawful deduction from wages based on an underpayment of the National Minimum Wage (NMW). She argued that her hours over the year should be calculated as 52 weeks x 21 hours, and not 40 weeks x 21 hours. If her method of calculation was accepted as correct there was an underpayment of the NMW.

A salaried worker is entitled to receive the NMW for their ‘basic hours’ which, by virtue of regulations 3, 21(3), 22(5) of the NMW Regulations 2015 (NMWR 2015), are determined by the terms of their contract of employment, even if those basic hours are greater than the hours actually worked. On the facts of this case, even though the claimant only worked term-time as a teaching assistant, she was entitled to the NMW for 52 weeks of the year rather than just her working weeks plus statutory holiday, because her contract provided that ‘… she was entitled to the usual school holidays as holiday with pay’, according to the EAT.

The employment tribunal dismissed the claimant’s claim. It found that the claimant worked term-time only; when the claimant accepted her job it was on her and the school’s understanding that she would work term time only; the contract did not explicitly set this out but this was consistent with clause 3(b) of the contract; the wording of clause 4 of the contract did not mean that these hours were deemed to be working hours for the purposes of the NMW legislation; the wording ‘the usual school holidays as holidays with pay’ did not mean that the 12 weeks of school holiday should be paid at the same rate as when the claimant was working/on statutory leave and included in her basic hours worked calculation for NMW purposes.

The claimant appealed to the EAT. In relation to the construction of ‘basic hours’ in NMWR 2015, it was not in dispute that the claimant was a permanent employee, who was employed throughout the school year and who was engaged in ‘salaried hours work’ for the purpose of NMWR 2015, nor that the claimant met the four conditions in regulation 21, including the second condition in regulation 21(3) that she was entitled to be paid in respect of a number of hours in a year and that those hours necessarily could be ascertained from her contract.

The principal point of dispute on statutory interpretation was which non-working hours of absence or holiday count towards basic hours. The claimant argued that, while it depends on the individual contract, basic hours include all the hours which are paid as contractual holiday. While the respondent argued that the only periods of absence which count towards basic hours are those which are absences from days when the worker would otherwise be working.

The EAT allowed the appeal. It agreed with the claimant on the issue of statutory interpretation and held that the code, Act and regulations were a poor guide to what hours are to be treated as basic hours, and the ascertainment of the claimant’s ‘basic hours’ depended on the meaning of her contract: the statutory question was not answered by looking at the hours which she in fact worked. Her annual basic hours, as ascertained from her contract, would then fall to be divided by 12 to give the hours of salaried work for each one-month pay reference period. It held that as a matter of general principle, some periods of fully paid absence count towards the ‘basic hours’ of salaried hours work, e.g. if the worker’s contract said they were entitled to a salary of £400 a week for a 40-hour week and to seven weeks’ holiday at full pay their annual basic hours would be based on a multiplier of 52 weeks.

In relation to the individual grounds of appeal, the EAT held that the tribunal erred in examining the hours the claimant in fact worked, to which it added her statutory entitlement to paid annual leave; failing to ascertain the number of hours in the year for which the claimant was entitled to salary in accordance with her contract, as to which the meaning of clause 4 of her contract was of central importance; examining whether the claimant was engaged in ‘working activity’ outside term-time, rather than asking whether those periods of contractual holiday could form part of her basic hours; inconsistently including statutory leave but excluding contractual leave; and relying regulation 27 (whether a worker is ‘available at or near a place of work’ for the purpose of doing work) and not to regulation 21(3), and, in doing, so wrongly focused on when the claimant was in fact engaged in working or working activity.

The EAT remitted the matter to a freshly constituted employment tribunal for the determination, in light of its judgment, of all the issues relevant to the claimant’s claim of unlawful deduction from wages.

Back to the top

Holiday Pay Claims: Tribunal decision remitted following Court of Appeal decision in Pimlico Plumbers

In Alston and 44 Ors v The Doctors Laboratory Ltd and Ors [2023] EAT 13 a group of couriers have successfully applied to the EAT to set aside by consent an employment tribunal decision on an application of time limits in holiday pay claims under the Working Time Regulations 1998 (WTR 1998) which had ruled that they could carry over paid holidays between years only if they had not already taken unpaid leave, after arguing that a Court of Appeal decision voided the employment tribunal judgment on this point.

Forty-five claimants, 38 of them represented by trade union Independent Workers of Great Britain (IWGB), argued before the EAT that the Court of Appeal’s decision in Smith v Pimlico Plumbers Ltd in February 2022 removed restrictions on how much paid leave they are due. The Honourable Mrs Justice Eady, current President of the EAT, agreed, saying that an employment tribunal’s 2020 decision in the couriers’ case ‘cannot stand and must be set aside’. The couriers ‘were and remain entitled to carry over any untaken paid annual leave’ until their contracts end or the employer, The Doctors Laboratory Ltd, allows them to take the paid holidays they have accrued, Mrs Justice Eady ruled.

It is one of the first cases to rely on the Pimlico Plumbers precedent, which allows people who were wrongly denied paid holiday to claim up to 5.6 weeks’ worth of pay—the equivalent of statutory annual leave—for each year of their employment. For people who have been misclassified as self-employed rather than workers, the precedent removed a previous two-year limit to compensation claims—now, they can stretch back as far as 1996.

The Doctors Laboratory, the UK’s largest independent clinical lab, did not give its couriers paid holiday until 2018, when it conceded they were entitled to up to four weeks a year as ‘limb (b) workers’, a legal category of worker under section 230(3) of the Employment Rights Act 1996.

The company argued before the employment tribunal in 2020 that unpaid leave the couriers had taken before 2018 should be subtracted from their holiday entitlement going forward.

The tribunal agreed the couriers’ right to carry over leave year-on-year ‘exists subject to qualification’.

Employment Judge Elliott ruled that unpaid leave was ‘capable of amounting to annual leave’ because it fulfils the health and safety objective of the European Working Time Directive, which is the root of UK working time law. But the couriers’ counsel argued before the EAT that Pimlico Plumbers allows workers to accumulate paid holiday if they have taken unpaid leave for reasons beyond their control.

The couriers and The Doctors Laboratory remain at odds over whether the couriers count as workers. If so, they could be entitled to the full 5.6 weeks’ statutory annual leave. Judge Eady remitted the matter to the employment tribunal for further directions.

Back to the top

Indirect Discrimination: Rejection of flexible working request is application of PCP

In Glover v (1) Lacoste UK Ltd (2) Harmon [2023] EAT 4 the EAT dealt with the question of when a provision, criterion or practice (PCP) can be said to have been ‘applied’ to an employee, for the purposes of a claim of indirect discrimination under section 19 of Equality Act 2010. The EAT held that once an application for flexible working (eg to work on a limited number of days only each week) is determined, following an appeal process, the PCP (eg to be fully flexible as to working days) has been applied, and may therefore have put the applicant at a disadvantage, for the purposes of an indirect discrimination claim. That is the case even if the applicant is away from work when the request is made and never returns to work. It remains the case even if the employer subsequently agrees to the terms of the original application.

Back to the top

COVID-19: Sales rep wins bid to dispute firing over COVID-19 home working

The EAT has agreed to hear arguments from a salesman fired after asking to work from home or be granted a leave of absence during the COVID-19 lockdown, that the employment tribunal failed to consider his belief that these were reasonable steps to avoid infection. The EAT granted Francesco Accattatis permission to challenge a decision in favour of his former employer Fortuna Group, which sells protective medical equipment like face masks and gloves. The company said Accattatis had failed to ‘support and fully comply with company policies’, which included working from its office in Enfield, North London, when it fired him in April 2020, approximately a month into the first national coronavirus lockdown. But Accattatis argued a 2021 employment tribunal ruling only considered the company’s belief that it was not possible for him to work from home or be placed on furlough. ‘To focus exclusively on the respondent’s view of the situation was an error’, his counsel, told the EAT. ‘I don’t see that the respondent’s view of whether something is feasible, or whether it was feasible, was a relevant matter’.

Under the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA 1996), it is unlawful to fire an employee for refusing to return to a workplace because they believed there was a ‘serious and imminent danger’ they couldn’t reasonably avoid. Whether the steps the employee took were appropriate to avoid that danger must be judged ‘by reference to all the circumstances, including, in particular, his knowledge and the facilities and advice available to him at the time’.

The employment tribunal ruled Accattatis’ requests were not appropriate steps because the company ‘reasonably and justifiably concluded’ that he could not work from home or claim furlough.

But Judge James Tayler agreed at a hearing on 9 February 2023 that it is arguable the tribunal misinterpreted the law and allowed the appeal to proceed. Accattatis will also be able to argue that the reason Fortuna gave for his dismissal was not properly distinguished from managers’ low opinion of him.

He had asked his bosses several times about working from home, which he felt was possible. Fortuna and the tribunal disagreed that Accattatis was needed in the office to manage deliveries of equipment and use specialist software, the 2021 judgment noted. He sent several emails throughout April 2020 while on sick leave for a suspected case of Covid-19 urging managers to place him on furlough. ‘I can assure you I already received confirmation from several sources that [the] coronavirus job retention scheme is easily accessible, by any company still actively trading during this time of emergency, without any downside to it’, one email reads. His counsel said this demonstrated Accattatis’ belief that furlough was possible and that urging Fortuna to reconsider was an appropriate step. ‘It’s the manner of the demands, that they were impertinent, that was the reason for the dismissal’, he said.

Back to the top

Further Information:

If you would like any additional information, please contact Anne-Marie Pavitt or Sophie Banks on: hello@dixcartuk.com

Back

The data contained within this document is for general information only. No responsibility can be accepted for inaccuracies. Readers are also advised that the law and practice may change from time to time. This document is provided for information purposes only and does not constitute accounting, legal or tax advice. Professional advice should be obtained before taking or refraining from any action as a result of the contents of this document.

Related News

banner services

News & Views

Employment Law General Update –  December 2022

  • Employment,

  • 12th December 2022

Employment Law

This month’s law update brings you a variety of ways to improve the workplace to make life better for employees and move the workforce forward. We have proposals on the reform of flexible working, a report advising the UK Financial Services sector on how to support and improve the under-representation of ethnic minorities in its sector, advice on supporting the health of male staff, and a report on inclusion of socio-economic diversity in the financial and professional services. And the changes don’t stop there – new company car rates apply from 1 December and various employment benefit rates are to be increased from next April.

  • Flexible Working: BEIS publishes consultation response on proposal to reform flexible working regulations
  • Equality: Race to Equality in UK Financial Services report by Reboot
  • Health at Work: Mental and physical health support for male staff beyond Movember
  • Inclusion: Socio-Economic Diversity taskforce publishes class barrier report
  • Employment Benefits: Rates of SMP, SSP, Maternity Allowance etc to be increased in April 2023
  • Company Cars: Advisory fuel rates from 1 December 2022

Flexible Working: BEIS publishes consultation response on proposal to reform flexible working regulations

The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) has published the government response to the consultation on its reform to make flexible working the default which was launched in September 2021. Following the changes to working during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, the consultation included a set of proposals which were built around the principle that working arrangements were best decided through a constructive, open-minded discussion between employer and employee. The government response confirms its intention to introduce several different measures in relation to flexible working. A total of 1611 responses were received for this consultation, of which 83% were from individuals.

Measures to be implemented by the government include:

  • removing the 26-week qualifying period before employees can request flexible working, making it a day-one right;
  • adding a new requirement for employers to consult with their employee when intending to decline the request for flexible working;
  • allowing employees to make two flexible working requests in any 12-month period, rather than only one as currently allowed;
  • reducing the time limit for an employer to respond to a flexible working request from three to two months; and
  • removing the requirement for employees to detail the effects of their flexible working request on the employer and to include ways on how it might be dealt with.

Back to the top

Equality: Race to Equality in UK Financial Services report by Reboot

Reboot, a campaigning group of senior financial services industry professionals, has published its 2022 report on addressing the under-representation of ethnic minorities in the UK financial services sector. The report shows that 68% of ethnic minority employees have experienced discrimination and a shocking 82% have experienced unwelcome comments or conduct at their organisation based on their background in the last 12 months. The report provides financial services businesses with a three-point plan for the support of ethnic minority employees and to form a diverse workspace:

1. Leaders take charge

To remove barriers to progress, leaders have to set the tone and not outsource diversity and inclusion. By championing the cause from the top and supporting ethnic minority role models within the business, it will help to empower workforces and create an environment where employees feel comfortable to talk about race, just like we have observed with gender diversity.

2. Challenge negative office cultures

Poor attitudes in the workplace are still hindering progression. Racism has no place in the modern workplace, and it is telling that ethnicity-related jokes are still heard in offices across the industry. These behaviours need to be challenged and extinguished if we are to create a safe working environment for those of every background.

3. Close the gap and be transparent

The majority of all respondents believe ethnicity pay gap reporting should be mandatory. More transparency on ethnicity data reporting will therefore mean companies will have to become more accountable – and this will help build a sustainable roadmap. Furthermore, organisations that can show that they are fair will be more attractive to employees, customers, and investors.

Back to the top

Health at Work: Mental and physical health support for male staff beyond Movember

People Management has published an article by Dr Bernard Yew about how employers need to take care of their male employees because research shows they are falling behind, despite a whole month highlighting specifically male health issues – Movember is all about raising money and awareness for the prostate cancer charity. According to the article:

  • Male employees are still twice as likely as female employees to feel that their employer doesn’t care about their wellbeing.
  • 16 per cent of men feel work provides little or no wellbeing support, compared to just 8 per cent of women.
  • One in two also say that working for their employer has undermined their health or caused them to become sick (despite two-thirds of male employees believing their employer has responsibility for their health and wellbeing).

One of the causes given is that gendered stereotypes persist, with men sometimes seen to be less in need of emotional support at work, despite two-fifths (40 per cent) of men saying emotional worries are their biggest wellbeing concern. Financial worries are the second biggest wellbeing worry after emotional health, with two-fifths of men saying their ability to manage finances is one of their biggest wellbeing challenges. This is closely followed by concerns about their weight, risk of developing cancer and not getting enough sleep. Given that the Samaritans claim that ‘Middle-aged men are more likely to die by suicide than any other age group’ it should give employers cause for reflection.

Critical to transforming this is encouraging managers to make a habit of conducting ‘check-in chats’ with men, as well as women, to ask them how they are, instead of just talking about goals and targets. Although these conversations can feel a little awkward at first, 28 per cent of men say a supportive manager is important for helping them to stay healthy. Men are also much more likely to utilise support services at their managers’ suggestion, than if left to initiate asking for support themselves, the article continues.

Given the long hours spent in work means employers have a vital role to play when it comes to supporting men to reduce health risks. Dr Yew suggests strategies such as:

  • Enabling employees to access healthy food during the day, with education on how to batch cook and quickly reheat healthy food.
  • Encouraging employees to go out during their lunch break to stay active.
  • Offering simple finger-prick blood tests to help men identify risk factors, such as diabetes and high cholesterol, which can increase the risk of cancer and heart disease.
  • Enabling men to access healthcare easily (47 per cent of men find it difficult to access their doctor or GP, while 56 per cent have been personally affected by delays accessing NHS support, add to that the general reluctance of men to see support and brush concerns aside).
  • Using occupational health services, ranging from virtual GP and physiotherapy services to onsite clinicians.

To read the article in full, click here.

Back to the top

Inclusion: Socio-Economic Diversity taskforce publishes class barrier report

The Socio-Economic Diversity taskforce has published a Five Point Pathway aimed at tackling the lack of socio-economic diversity at senior levels in the financial and professional services sectors. The Pathway, which is the culmination of two years’ work, consists of recommendations from the employers, sector bodies, regulators, and government on how to break the class barrier and create a more welcoming environment for a more diverse pool of talent.

The five points (or steps) on the pathway are leadership, assess, take action, set goals, and publish and involve different processes depending on which set of institutions an organisation belongs to. For employers:

1. Leadership

The starting point step is appoint creating clear accountability and responsibility for socio-economic diversity within an organisation. The Taskforce recommends appointing a senior champion as well as a system of reporting on ongoing strategy and progress in increasing socio-economic diversity at senior levels. Employers should aim to incentivise senior leaders and managers to meet targets.

2. Assess

Step two revolves around the collection of data to understand the current socio-economic make-up of the workforce. The taskforce recommends collecting data from the entire workforce on an annual basis and analysing this against different levels of seniority. Transparency is also important in this step as showing employees how the data is used and handled is more likely to build trust in the process.

3. Take action

Step three of the pathway is about taking positive action to increase inclusion and support the progression of those from non-professional backgrounds into leadership positions. The taskforce recommends the development of role models and ‘champion networks’ within an organisation as well as analysing recruitment and promotion processes to ensure they do not involve barriers to progression.

4. Set goals

Step four involves setting targets once data has been collected to incentivise actions which increase an organisation’s socio-economic diversity. The taskforce recommends setting targets for employee self-disclosure and taking a holistic view of data collected alongside other characteristics such as gender and ethnicity.

5. Publish

The final step is about public accountability. The taskforce recommends that employers publish their data on socio-economic gaps publicly and share any progress made towards closing the gaps with employees, investors and clients.

Co-Chair of the Socio-Economic Diversity Taskforce and Chair of Progress Together, Alderman Vincent Keaveny, commented “Socio-economic diversity is key to all sectors. It is vital that firms take action to create a more equitable pathway to the top for people from all backgrounds. I am excited to continue this great work as Chair of Progress Together so we maximise the potential of talented people and boost productivity.” The full report can be read here.

Back to the top

Employment Benefits: Rates of SMP, SSP, Maternity Allowance etc to be increased in April 2023

According to a Statement to Parliament by Mel Stride, the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, and proposals set out in a Department for Work and Pensions policy paper, in April 2023, State Pension and benefit rates will increase in line with the Consumer Prices Index (CPI) for the year to September 2022. This means that they will increase by 10.1% from 10 April 2023. Accordingly, the following employment benefits will apply from that time:

  • the rates for Statutory Maternity Pay, Statutory Paternity Pay, Statutory Adoption Pay, Statutory Shared Parental Pay, Statutory Parental Bereavement Pay and Maternity Allowance will all increase from £156.66 to £172.48 per week, and
  • the rate for Statutory Sick Pay will increase from £99.35 to £109.40 per week.

Back to the top

Company Cars: Advisory fuel rates from 1 December 2022

HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) has published revised advisory fuel rates for company cars which apply from 1 December 2022. The full information can be read here.

Further Information:

If you would like any additional information, please contact Anne-Marie Pavitt or Sophie Banks on: hello@dixcartuk.com

Back

The data contained within this document is for general information only. No responsibility can be accepted for inaccuracies. Readers are also advised that the law and practice may change from time to time. This document is provided for information purposes only and does not constitute accounting, legal or tax advice. Professional advice should be obtained before taking or refraining from any action as a result of the contents of this document.

Related News