Thursday 16 September 2010 1. CASE STUDY A Deathbyhomebrew Ltd - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Thursday 16 September 2010

Deathbyhomebrew Ltd manufacture home brewing equipment. The business has been struggling of late following a decline in demand for products and is looking at making 10 redundancies from its manufacturing staff, all of whom perform inter-changeable functions. One of the manufacturing employees is currently signed off work with stress. The Company would like him to be one of those made redundant but are unsure if they can proceed whilst he is off sick. 1.Summarise what a fair redu ndancy process would involve. 2.How would this change if it was 25 at risk of redundancy? 3.Discuss how that fair process could be adopted for the absent employee. 4.Are there any other issues to consider in relation to that employee? 5.Consider if there is an alternative route if the individual concerned is employed in the sales team and is the sole employee at risk.

• 1. CASE STUDY A

KIDSAFE is a charity providing support services to safeguard the welfare of children, receiving government funding and other funds through fundraising

• activities. It employs 23 staff –

helpline advisers, case managers and

• administrators. KIDSAFE has engaged NotSoClean

Ltd cleaning contractors to perform daily cleaning services. For the past 3 years, NotSoClean Ltd has provided the same cleaner who has worked 2 hours per day, Monday to Friday. Over the past 12 months the cleaner’s behaviour has been questionable, including smelling

• f alcohol, flirting with male staff and there are suspicions that she uses drugs and

is involved in prostitution. The Director of KIDSAFE has now been informed that the cleaner has placed a DVD containing pornographic materials involving the cleaner and other men on the desk of a male colleague asking him to take a look. The male colleague has since passed it on and it is now doing the rounds

• externally. What steps should be taken to permanently remove the cleaner?

Discuss and prepare an action plan.

• 2. CASE STUDY B

• Ensure correctly dated
• Ensure properly addressed with correct address
• Confirm date disciplinary meeting held and decision made
• Expressly state whether summary dismissal or dismissal with notice and

confirm date of termination

• Clearly set out reasons for dismissal and why allegations/issues

found to be substantiated

• Set out mitigating factors raised by employee and response to same
• Confirm minutes of disciplinary meeting enclosed with decision

letter/will be sent shortly

• Confirm right to appeal –

to be in writing with grounds, time period within which to appeal and who to

• 3. WRITING A DISMISSAL LETTER

Gisda Cyf

• v. Barratt

(CA 2009)

• If dismissal is effected by letter, it must have been

read by employee to be effective. Geys

• v. Societe

Generale 2010

• Expressly communicate exercising right to

terminate with immediate effect

• 4. CASE LAW

A worker can be represented by a trade union

• fficial at a disciplinary hearing only if the

employer recognises the relevant trade union. True or false?

• 5. HR MYTH 1?

False.

Section 10 ERA 1999 states workers have the right to be accompanied at a disciplinary or grievance meeting by either a TU official or work colleague. There is no reference to the TU

• fficial being part of a recognised TU. As such, a worker can be

accompanied by an official from a non-recognised TU and must be allowed to bring the chosen official in with him/her. NB. There is no need for the employee to be a member of a TU to be accompanied by a TU official – some solicitors are selling services

• f TU officials as part of process!!

Answer

An employer can reject a candidate for a maternity leave cover role on the basis that she is pregnant and would not be able to work the full cover period. True or false?

• 6. HR MYTH 2?

False.

European case law makes it crystal clear that failing to recruit a woman on grounds of pregnancy – even if the contract is for a fixed term only – amounts to unlawful sex discrimination. The Sex Discrimination Act 1975 (as amended by the 2005 Regulations) expressly states that if an employer refuses to offer a woman employment because she is pregnant, this will amount to unlawful sex discrimination.

Answer

Taylors Solicitors

Employment Team

Oliver McCann – Elaine Hurn – James Bellamy

Rawlings House Exchange Street BLACKBURN BB1 7JN Ninth Floor 80 Mosley Street MANCHESTER M2 3FX

Tel: 0844 8000 263 www.taylors.com