Maintaining absence management in the workplace is vital, in order to establish guidelines for staff, whether they are absent for short or long-term illness, maternity or paternity leave, or a staff member takes a few days off work of their own accord, without providing a reason why, or may not even inform their employer.

These absences must be regulated by the employer, in order to maintain order in the workplace.

 The following steps should be taken to achieve quality absence management:

The British Airways employee, Nadia Eweida, who won her claim against the airline for religious discrimination, has began a new employment tribunal claim against her employer for victimisation.

Back in 2006, the 69-year old BA employee, who is a Coptic Christian from South-West London, was told by her superiors at British Airways to hide her religious crucifix chain, whilst on the job. After losing an appeal, Ms Eweida took BA to the European Court of Human Rights, where they ruled that British Airways had violated their employee rights under Article 9 of European Convention on Human Rights. The article states that one of the “foundations” of democratic society is that of religious freedom, and because of this she was awarded £25,600 in costs and compensation.

 Over ten years later, she is now pursuing a fresh claim against British Airways, with accusations of victimisation and harassment, as a result of her claim against the company. Ms Eweida made a statement in relation to the new claim, stating:

Employers should be aware of the risks involved when changing employment contracts, as employers cannot change contracts unilaterally, therefore employers should ensure that they adhere to the lawful processes when considering changing the terms of an employee contract.

An employer should make sure that they go through the correct procedure when making changes to a contract, ensuring that there will be no negative implications for the employee, as they may risk breaching the contract.

If a breach occurs then the organisation could face extensive damages, as well as unfair constructive dismissal claims.

The Equality Act 2010 sets out the rights and responsibilities of disabled workers, who are either mentally or physically disabled, protecting them against discrimination in the workplace.

To clarify, an employee can be categorised as disabled if they have a long-term physical or mental impairment, which hinders them from carrying out everyday tasks in the workplace, which could include: manual handling, Navigating a computer, colleague interaction, etc.

There are various types of disability discrimination, including:

An employer should be vigilant when considering an employee dismissal, ensuring that they carry out an essential enquiry in to the matter at hand, before deciding on a dismissal, as this option should be the last resort.

Before considering a dismissal, an employer should try to resolve any issues on an informal basis, which could involve a private chat with the staff member in question, before deciding the next steps to take.

Employers must ensure that they have written rules regarding disciplinary procedures, and that all staff are aware of these rules and procedures.  

Employment Law is in a constant stream of transition, due to the ever-changing legislation. The more recent changes have focused on attitudes towards sexual harassment, which has come under scrutiny in the form of digital movements from the US, the more prominent been #MeToo and #TimesUp. Although they are US-based movements, other countries also approve of these movements, especially in the UK.

The movements focus on speaking out about sexual harassment, as in the past sexual assaults have been kept quiet to enable the victim to protect their reputation (and often, credibility).

The most recent Equality Act was enforced in 2010, replacing previous legislation including the Equal Pay Act 1970. The Equality Act 2010 covers the equality of terms provisions to ensure that all men and women should receive equal pay when in similar roles.

Currently, there are issues for employees when comparing salary pay, as in accordance with the Equality Act 2010, employees are prohibited from discussing differences in pay with each other.

However, employees can compare their contract of employment with a comparator, which means an employee of the opposite sex with a similar role and equivalent terms. The equivalent terms can include the following:

From the 25^th May 2018, to avoid the risk of breaching the General Data Protection Regulation, employer’s are obligated to take on new responsibilities, as well as updating their contracts, policies and procedures, in order to maintain compliance under the GDPR requirements.

This means employer’s must:

Business Secretary, Greg Clark has announced the implementation of new measures to support organisations, entrepreneurs, and workers, in accordance with the Government’s Modern Industrial Strategy.

One of the more prolific changes is the Government’s plan to ensure that all tips left for employees are given in full, rather than employers taking their staff’s well-earned gratuities.

The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy stated:

It is unlawful to discriminate against anyone for their religion or belief, as well as an individual’s lack of religion or belief, in accordance with the Equality Act 2010.

In a work environment, all employees should be protected against discrimination of their religious faith or philosophical belief. This ensures that all aspects of religion and philosophy are equal, and that one employee’s faith or belief does not dominate another, including their superiors’ religion or belief.

In respect of philosophical beliefs, an individual or group must show substantial evidence of their belief system being a dominant aspect in their lives. This should also ensure that their belief does not conflict with the fundamental rights of their colleagues. The main focus areas to consider when dealing with religion or belief discrimination include:

Under the Equality Act 2010, It is deemed unlawful to discriminate against someone based on their gender. Sex discrimination usually occurs in work environments; therefore, employers should ensure that their policies and procedures in place to deal with any complaints regarding discrimination.

There are four different types of sex discrimination, including:

• Direct Discrimination, which occurs when someone treats you unfairly in comparison to someone of a different gender. An example of this would be if a pregnant employee was apprehended for being off sick because of her morning sickness. This is direct discrimination against pregnant women.

• SOCIAL MEDIA SECURITY FOR BUSINESS.

   

  

  Experts believe that the greatest threat to an organisation is not its lack of cybersecurity, it is actually the employees who tend to cause the most damage.

  This comes after 77% of survey respondents indicated that regardless of training and adherence to company policies, it is actually employees that are the main source of cyber-attacks, as they may be unaware of the warning signs. Therefore, it is vital that companies improve cybersecurity training by implementing ways for staff to protect, as well as how to conduct themselves online, especially on social media.

  As social media is an integral part of engagement - and with that comes an inherent level of trust - meaning it is vital that everybody is aware of what is safe when positing content. This is particularly the case for employees who are responding to their customers, as they must be aware of online actors who utilise fake accounts in order to pose as customers and purposely target staff and the organisation.

• THE NEW GENERAL CONDITIONS OF ENTITLEMENT

  

  Ofcom have amended and implemented the new General Conditions of Entitlement, which were enforced from the first of this month (01/10/2018).

  The General Conditions are in place in order to regulate all providers of “electronic communications networks” and services within the UK. Although there is actually no law in place that permits these providers to obtain a specific license, the General Conditions must be adhered to.

  Talks of amendments first began in December 2016, with the new rules focusing closely on simplification and Ofcom’s current concerns regarding communication providers.

  Changes include the following:

• TRANSFERRED REDUNDANCY

  

  Transferred redundancy also known as bumping occurs when an employee is dismissed, as their job is taken over by another staff member who was originally made redundant.

  The discussion surrounding transferred redundancy is problematic for employers, as there is evident uncertainty regarding whether or not bumping should be discussed with employees during a redundancy consultation, and whether or not the employer or the employee is the first to it up in conversation, there is not actually a legitimate set of language that is currently in place for such discussion.

  In the case of Mirab v Mentor Graphics (UK) Ltd, the Employment Tribunal concluded that as the claimant employee did not discuss the idea of bumping or taking on a new role, they decided in favour of the employer.

• “WORKING MUMS” AWARDED £16,000 FOR SEX DISCRIMINATION.

   

   

  Essex-based Dental nurses, Billie-Jo Janes and Jessica Rowley have recently been awarded a total of £16,000 for unfair redundancy, due to their inability to work full-time, as working mothers.

  In July 2017, the two women were informed of their redundancy, with the explanation that their employer had no need for part-time workers, and as working mums they could not adhere to the dental practices demands. 

  Both Miss Janes and Miss Rowley contacted their union, Unite, working together to bring the surgery to an Employment Tribunal, after being offered insufficient compensation from the surgery.

  The employer was taken to an employment tribunal for unfair dismissal regarding gender discrimination, where Judge Foxwell ruled that the dental practice was guilty of “unlawful indirect sex discrimination”.

  The Employment Tribunal awarded a pay-out each of £6,000 plus £498 interest for “injury to feelings for unlawful indirect sex discrimination”, with added payments for statutory rights and loss earnings, resulting in a total of £7,500 awarded to Miss Jane, 26 and £8,159 awarded to Miss Rowley, 29.

  After the ruling, Miss Rowley, who has now found a position at another dental surgery, stated: