Anonymity currently remains conflicted in the early life of employment tribunals especially in relation to more delicate circumstances, such as sexual harassment in the workplace. Although when it does not involve criminal proceedings, anonymity is used to protect the reputation of all parties.

In some circumstances, employers facing an employment tribunal can claim for an anonymity order to protect their organisation. However, they must give valid reasoning for waving their right to anonymity and avoiding open justice.

Facing an employment tribunal claim can be problematic for employers, due to the negative press they may receive as a result, which may impact the organisations reputation, which is why applying for anonymity may be something to consider.

The question of whether an employer grievance should disrupt disciplinary proceedings is one up for debate, as the answer is not definitive. As all cases are unique, therefore it is not all grievances cause disruption to disciplinary proceedings , as there may be some proceedings that are affected by a grievance, whereas others are not.

In some cases, the Employment Tribunal may decide to suspend proceedings to allow the employer to attend to any grievance issues raised by the employee.

On other occasions, the disciplinary procedure can run simultaneously with the grievance procedure, as usually the grievance is raised as a response to the disciplinary proceedings brought against the employee. Therefore, the grievance can be dealt with in the disciplinary hearing.

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.  

In July of this year, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) promised to inject money in to organisations, in order to provide the essential adjustments needed to increase employment opportunities for workers with disabilities.

The DWP is now acting on this promise alongside Watford MP, Richard Harrington, who recently announced an increase in funding to the Watford area, which will benefit disabled workers. This comes after Mr Harrington invited fellow MP Sarah Newton, the Disabilities Minister, to the Watford Workshop to discuss the end of the Work Choice employment programme, alongside its Chief Executive, Linda McIntyre, who stated:

“I am thrilled by this announcement, as it clearly shows the government’s commitment to supporting disabled people in work”.

Mr Harrington added:

Following the closure of the Gender Recognition Act consultation, many people have voiced their opinions regarding the need to reform the act, due to a variety of problematic issues.

The Employment Lawyers Association (ELA) have discussed the negative implications of the Gender Recognition 2004 act and have called for a repeal of section 22 of the act, which they believe inadvertently criminalises innocent members of staff, especially HR employees who assist trans job seekers.

Section 22 of the Gender Recognition Act 2004 states:

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: