Following on from last month’s news about the radical proposed changes to increase the qualifying period from one to two years for a claim of unfair dismissal from April 2012 and the introduction of fees in order for claimants to bring Employment Tribunal claims from April 2013; we bring you news of further proposals for change.
'Protected Conversations’
Nick Clegg has pledged to introduce 'protected conversations' as part of the Government's red-tape reform so that employers will be able to challenge unproductive staff or advise them to consider retirement without worrying about the threat of legal action. The notion of ‘protected conversations’ would mean that they could not be produced as evidence in tribunals.
The CBI has long called for the introduction of protected conversations as a means of resolving disputes informally and has welcomed this proposal.
Neil Carberry, director for employment at the CBI, is reported to have welcomed the proposal. "Employment laws should set a necessary minimum standard in the workplace, but they can get in the way of open and frank communication between employees and employers. Protected conversations would provide a safe mechanism which builds confidence in management and helps businesses make better decisions. In countries like France, these enable employers to discuss issues openly with staff without fear of a tribunal."
Nick Clegg has stated that this is one element of a major package of employment law including reforms to the tribunal system to be put forward by the Government this autumn.
It is clear that the current application of the ‘without prejudice’ principle to conversations with a view to reaching an agreement with an employee has significant shortcomings, however, the concern is that ‘protected conversations’ would need to be very carefully defined to avoid them becoming a cover for inappropriate or discriminatory treatment of staff. We will, as usual, keep you updated with its progress.
Only small companies to be exempted from unfair dismissal rules?
Further radical proposals came to light following the leak of the “Beecroft” Report to the Daily Telegraph. The Telegraph reported that 20 recommendations were included within the report many of which focus on lifting employment regulations on small employers as well as advocating the reduction of the impact of laws that will force small companies to provide pensions for workers. Other measures include scrapping the requirement to check the immigration status of workers. The report hints at further changes and calls for the abolition of the concept of unfair dismissal altogether as well as the introduction of "compensated, no-fault dismissals".
According to the newspaper, the report reads: "The rules both make it difficult to prove that someone deserves to be dismissed, and demand a process for doing so which is so lengthy and complex that it is hard to implement. This makes it too easy for employees to claim they have been unfairly treated and to gain significant compensation."
There has been much comment since the leak of just 2 pages of the report. Both David Cameron and Nick Clegg have been forced to make statements rejecting the leaked proposals. Jeremy Heywood, Number 10 permanent secretary, has stepped into the recent public debate over changes to employment law and is allegedly proposing that only new micro-businesses (businesses with less than 10 employees) would benefit from relaxed employment laws, such as no-fault dismissal compensation.
We await Mr Osborne's autumn statement on 29 November 2011 to provide us with further information as to which, if any, of the recommendations of the Beecroft Report are to be taken forward and whether any other measures relating to the reform of any aspects of UK employment law are announced.
Unfair dismissal: claims to be heard over one day within 16 weeks of issue
Our last item of news emanates from the Employment Tribunal itself. Employment Tribunals in England and Wales have adopted a new judicial listing policy, as a result of which standard unfair dismissal claims are being listed for a one-day hearing to take place within 16 weeks of a claim being issued.
The listing policy appears to apply to stand-alone unfair dismissal cases, and unfair dismissal claims combined with other claims categorised by the tribunal as "short-track", including claims for unlawful deduction of wages and for a statutory redundancy payment. Unfair dismissal claims combined with more complex claims such as discrimination or whistleblowing are apparently not subject to the new policy.
And finally…
Hotel boss told to hire sexy blondes wins sacking claim
The manager of a London hotel's restaurant who claimed he was ordered to replace "ugly, fat, old" staff with "young, sexy blondes in short skirts" was celebrating after a tribunal ruled he was unfairly dismissed.
Amia Ismail, 58, claimed he was told to find fault with the older staff there and pressure them to leave – but instead found them to be "very good". He also complained he was moved to different hotel within the chain because bosses wanted a "fresh, funky" image at the branch where he had worked for nine years hence the instruction to encourage his older staff to move on to fresh fields. However the tribunal dismissed the "sexy blondes" claim but upheld Mr Ismail’s claim about inappropriate emails.
The employment tribunal heard that Mr Ismail was accidentally copied in on a racist "joke" email sent by a manager to three senior colleagues. One of whom replied: "Brilliant". Again, Mr Ismail was accidentally copied in. The tribunal agreed that such emails would create an "intimidating, hostile, degrading" atmosphere.
The tribunal added: "The hotel has a multi-racial workforce and serves an equally diverse clientele. In this context the sending of the email and the endorsement by the operations director are particularly shocking."
Mr Ismail hoped to return to the hotel once a settlement is agreed in January.
If you would like to sign up to receive our monthly email updates please complete our online sign up form.
