Our June 2022 employment law newsletter is out now!

Welcome to June's employment law newsletter

In the June edition of our newsletter, we highlight the government's forthcoming reform of exclusivity clauses and the start in the UK of the world's largest 4-day week trial. 

Case law analysis is provided by our members and pupils:

- Oliver Hirsch analyses Knightly v Chelsea & Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust [2022] EAT 63 in which the EAT considers if an employer who fails to make reasonable adjustments to its dismissal procedure necessarily acts unreasonably for the purposes of unfair dismissal
- Elliott Stenson considers the ET and EAT's decision in Ali v Heathrow Express Operating Company Limited and another [2022] EAT 54 that “Allahu Akbar” security check is not harassment 

- Grace Nicholls analyses Pryce v Baxterstorey Limited, EAT, EA-2020-000323-BA which gives a clear warning to Claimants to obtain the necessary documentation in advance of submission of an ET1
- Finally, Colin McDevitt reviews a case concerned with automatic unfair dismissal under S.100 ERA 1996 in the context of fears around Covid 19 in Rodgers v Leeds Laser Cutting Limited, EAT, EA-2021-000437-VP.

Government reforms of exclusivity clauses to give lowest paid the flexibility to top up their pay

The reforms will benefit around 1.5 million low-paid workers (with a current guaranteed income of £123/week or less), enabling them to work multiple jobs. Legislation for these reforms is due to be laid before Parliament later this year.

World's largest 4-day week trial starts in the UK

More than 3,300 workers at 70 UK companies spanning a wide variety of sectors have started a 4-day week trial. Due to last for 6 months, the trial entails no loss of pay in exchange for a commitment to maintain 100% productivity, monitored by researchers.

Automatic unfair dismissal under S.100 ERA 1996 in the context of fears around Covid 19 

Colin McDevitt considers the case of Rodgers v Leeds Laser Cutting Limited, EAT, EA-2021-000437-VP, in which the ET and EAT concluded that the facts of the case were not
consistent with the Claimant holding a reasonable belief that there were serious and imminent circumstances of danger both at work and in other places outside his home, that prevented him returning to work.

Failure to obtain mandatory ACAS certificate pre-issue results in dismissal of claim

Grace Nicholls analyses Pryce v Baxterstorey Limited, EAT, EA-2020-000323-BA, a case which sets a clear and unequivocal warning to Claimants to obtain the necessary documentation in advance of submission of an ET1.

EAT upholds Tribunal decision that “Allahu Akbar” security check is not harassment  

Elliott Stenson reviews Ali v Heathrow Express Operating Company Limited and another [2022] EAT 54, a case in which the EAT could not overturn the ET's decision as
it was not perverse or insufficiently reasoned. 

Does an employer who fails to make reasonable adjustments to its dismissal procedure act unreasonably for the purposes of unfair dismissal?

Oliver Hirsch analyses Knightly v Chelsea & Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust [2022] EAT 63, a case in which practitioners are reminded to be careful about drawing links between a claimant's unfair dismissal and discrimination claims.

Meet the team

3PB’s employment law group offers expert advisory and advocacy services to private and public sector employers across all areas of employment law including unfair dismissal, discrimination, equal pay, industrial disputes, executive contracts, wrongful dismissals, restrictive covenants, whistleblowing, TUPE, injunctions, pensions disputes and disciplinary proceedings.