Tees Esk & Wear Valleys NHS Foundation Trust v Harland – WLR Daily

Tees Esk & Wear Valleys NHS Foundation Trust v Harland UKEAT/173/16

‘The claimants, nursing assistants, were employed by the trust as part of a designated team of 27 people providing specialist care to C, who had severe learning difficulties, in his flat. When C’s condition improved and fewer carers were needed to look after him the team was reduced to 11 people, who also provided care to other disabled people living in flats in the same building. The contract to provide care to C was subsequently taken over by a healthcare company and the trust nominated those members of the team who had spent the greatest proportion of their working time looking after C to transfer to the company. The claimants were unwilling to transfer and left to take other posts or were made redundant. On their complaints of unfair dismissal an employment judge considered as preliminary issues whether there was a relevant transfer within the meaning of regulation 3(1) of the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 and whether the claimants had been assigned to an organised grouping of employees prior to the transfer, such that there had been a service provision change in accordance with regulation 3(1)(b). The tribunal found that the trust had initially put together an organised grouping of employees which included the claimants with the principal purpose of the care of C but as C recovered and the number of hours needed for his care was reduced the principal purpose of the group became subsidiary to the dominant purpose of providing care to other disabled people in the building and, accordingly, at the time of the transfer from the trust to the company the requirements of regulation 3(3)(a)(i) were not satisfied and there was no service provision change. The tribunal concluded that as there was no relevant transfer the claimants had been at all times employed by the trust.’

WLR Daily, 3rd March 2017

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Uber granted right to appeal against ruling on UK drivers’ rights – The Guardian

‘Uber has been granted the right to appeal against last year’s landmark ruling that its UK minicab drivers should be treated as employed workers with rights to the minimum wage and sick pay.’

Full story

The Guardian, 19th April 2017

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

Employment tribunal fees ‘barrier’ to justice in human rights cases, say MPs – Legal Voice

Posted April 12th, 2017 in employment tribunals, fees, human rights, news, select committees by sally

‘Employment tribunal fees were ‘a barrier to victims seeking justice when they have suffered human rights abuses’, according to an influential group of MPs. The House of Commons’ joint committee on human rights have added their collective voice to the justice and equalities committees in calling on the Government to cut the charges introduced in 2013.’

Full story

Legal Voice, 11th April 2017

Source: www.legalvoice.org.uk

Lady Hale on indirect discrimination: Essop and Naeem – Law & Religion UK

‘In Essop & Ors v Home Office (UK Border Agency) [2017] UKSC 27, there were two conjoined cases: Essop and Naeem v Secretary of State for Justice. The Supreme Court gave a unanimous judgment on both.’

Full story

Law & Religion UK, 7th April 2017

Source: www.lawandreligionuk.com

No back-peddling – workers’ rights are gaining pace in the gig economy – Cloisters

‘Following the recent decisions of the Court of Appeal in Pimlico Plumbers and the Employment Tribunals in Citysprint and Uber, companies in the gig economy suffered another blow yesterday with the decision in Boxer v Excel Group Services Limited. This case augments the growing number of judgments in which staff that are ostensibly self-employed are found to be “workers” in law, and hence entitled to basic rights such as holiday pay and rest breaks.’

Full story

Cloisters, 24th March 2017

Source: www.cloisters.com

Tribunal fees ‘barrier to justice’, rights committee says – Law Society’s Gazette

‘Employment tribunal fees create impunity to bosses abusing human rights, parliamentarians have said, accusing the Ministry of Justice of complacency on some of the barriers faced by people seeking access to justice.’

Full story

Law Society’s Gazette, 6th April 2017

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Immigration officers who claim promotion tests are discriminatory set to sue Home Office – Daily Telegraph

‘Black immigration officers struggled to pass promotion exams because the tests were racist, a court has heard. A group of 49 Home Office employees is now set to sue the Government over claims that the exams are discriminatory.’

Full story

Daily Telegraph, 5th April 2017

Source: www.telegraph.co.uk

Fine for senior partner who “accidentally” discriminated against colleague on grounds of age and religion – Legal Futures

‘A senior partner who was found by an employment tribunal to have discriminated against, harassed and victimised a former equity partner at his firm, has been fined £2,000 by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT), which found his culpability to be “low” as his behaviour had “just crossed the line into discrimination”.’

Full story

Legal Futures, 3rd April 2017

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

£1,200 cost for unfair dismissal claims is challenged in UK’s highest court – The Guardian

‘Steep rises in fees for bringing unfair dismissal claims at employment tribunals – which have led to a 70% fall in the number of cases – are to be challenged at the UK’s highest court.’

Full story

The Guardian, 27th march 2017

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

Still no time off for religious observance: Gareddu in the EAT – Law & Religion UK

Posted March 10th, 2017 in appeals, employment tribunals, holidays, news, religious discrimination by sally

‘The issue of whether or not attendance at religious festivals in Sardinia could be a genuine manifestation of religion or religious belief been rehearsed again, before an Employment Appeal Tribunal.’

Full story

Law & Religion UK, 10th March 2017

Source: www.lawandreligionuk.com

Museum workers win employment tribunal case against council – Local Government Lawyer

Posted March 9th, 2017 in employment tribunals, local government, news, remuneration by sally

‘Brighton & Hove City Council has lost an employment tribunal case brought by its museum staff over unlawful deductions from wages.’

Full story

Local Government Lawyer, 9th March 2017

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

First Uber, now DX – union brings legal action over “forced self-employed” workers – Legal Futures

Posted March 9th, 2017 in employment, employment tribunals, news, self-employment, trade unions by sally

‘DX has become the latest delivery company to face legal claims that it is taking advantage of the ‘gig economy’ by forcing workers into bogus self-employment, after the GMB union announced it was to start legal action on behalf of members working as couriers.’

Full story

Legal Futures, 8th March 2017

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

BBC reporter Sally Chidzoy’s tribunal struck out for ‘unreasonable conduct’ – BBC News

‘A veteran BBC TV reporter who claimed she was the victim of a “witch-hunt” had her employment tribunal case struck out for unreasonable conduct.’

Full story

BBC News, 2nd March 2017

Source: www.bbc.co.uk

Tax barrister plans to take Uber to court over alleged £20m black hole – The Guardian

‘A leading tax lawyer is planning to challenge Uber in the courts over what he alleges could be a £20m-a-year black hole in its tax payments in the UK.’

Full story

The Guardian, 21st February 2017

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

Plumbing the depths of employment status as the gig economy gathers steam – Cloisters

‘Akua Reindorf analyses Pimlico Plumbers v Smith in the Court of Appeal and provides a round-up of employment status reports and inquiries.’

Full story

Cloisters, 10th February 2017

Source: www.cloisters.com

Martin Fodder on Whistleblowing: The Importance of Asking the Right Questions – Littleton Chambers

Posted February 20th, 2017 in data protection, disclosure, dismissal, employment tribunals, news, whistleblowers by sally

‘The judgment of the EAT in Eiger Securities LLP v Korshunova [2016] UKEAT 0149_16_0212, 6th December 2016 has attracted a fair amount of comment. It concerned the claims by a broker, Ms Korshunova, that 3 client accounts had been allocated away from her and she had then been dismissed because she had made a protected disclosure as to the impropriety of her manager (Mr Ashton) using her password and terminal. The ET upheld claims of detriment and dismissal for whistleblowing. The EAT (Slade J) remitted the case allowing 3 of the 5 grounds of appeal. ‘

Full story

Littleton Chambers, 23rd January 2017

Source: www.littletonchambers.com

Joseph Bryan: High Heels and Workplace Dress Codes – Is Discrimination Law Working? – Littleton Chambers

Posted February 20th, 2017 in employment, employment tribunals, equality, news, sex discrimination by sally

‘In December 2015 Nicola Thorp, employed by reception agency Portico, turned up for her first day of work as a temporary receptionist at PwC. She was wearing smart flat shoes, but was told that Portico’s policy required women to wear heels between two and four inches high. She was given an ultimatum: go out and buy high heels or go home. Ms Thorp refused to buy a new pair. When she challenged the policy, her manager sent her home without pay.’

Full story

Littleton Chambers, 30th January 2017

Source: www.littletonchambers.com

Katherine Apps on New Data Protection Case from Court of Appeal – Littleton Chambers

Posted February 17th, 2017 in data protection, disclosure, employment, employment tribunals, news by sally

‘Following the case of Durant v Financial Services Authority [2004] FSR 573 it became common for an employer to resist providing disclosure to an employee who makes a subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 wholly or mainly in order to obtain material which would assist in pursuing litigation.’

Full story

Littleton Chambers, 16th February 2017

Source: www.littletonchambers.com

Approaching Deposit Orders After H v Ishmail – Littleton Chambers

Posted February 17th, 2017 in deposits, employment tribunals, news by sally

‘Deposit orders can be a useful tool for respondents facing unmeritorious claims. This is particularly true for discrimination or whistleblowing claims, which are notoriously difficult to get struck out. A separate deposit order can be made in respect of each allegation in a claim, not just each claim, and this can be useful where the claims make wide-ranging allegations over a long period.’

Full story

Littleton Chambers, 19th January 2017

Source: www.littletonchambers.com

BBC reporter Sally Chidzoy’s employment tribunal case struck out – BBC News

‘A BBC TV reporter who claimed she was the victim of a “witch-hunt” has had her case struck out by an employment tribunal.’

Full story

BBC News, 13th February 2017

Source: www.bbc.co.uk