Retirement Outrage at Longleat

During the past fortnight every employee over the age of 65 has been dismissed on the grounds of retirement from Longleat Estate and safari park. The estate in England (which includes a large Elizabethan mansion), is owned by the Marquess of Bath and previously had a reputation for being staffed by numerous nubile women.

Included in the dismissals were 18 workers who were over the age of 70. Many of those forced into retirement also lived on the estate, resulting in many of them having to find new homes.

These measures appear to be a pre-employment strike in the face of the recent announced change to the retirement age. From October 2011, businesses will no longer be able to retire employees at the age of 65 except in very exceptional circumstances. This means businesses will be obliged to keep their ageing employees, perhaps to the detriment of younger staff who would otherwise have been promoted.

However, businesses can retire those who are already 65, or who will turn 65 before October 2011. In order to do so, they need to follow a set of retirement procedures which involves providing them with a 6 months notice of retirement, and making them aware of their right to request to continue working beyond that age. Currently, businesses are obliged to consider requests to work beyond the age of 65, but they do not have to grant it. If you have an employee who is, or will soon be 65, it's now or never.

If you think you may have any employees who are over 65 or nearing 65, please contact Empire HR for advice on the options available.

Employer Tribunal Nightmares

In the last year, there has been an increase of more than 50% in tribunal cases against employers with the economic downturn being blamed for the unprecedented rise.

Unfair dismissal is one of the most common type of claim but certainly the most expensive for an employer. Over 120,000 unfair dismissal claims were made in the last year, with average pay-outs of £8,000 up to a maximum of £76,700.

Leading Aberdeen-based employment law, HR and health & safety firm, Empire HR, is urging businesses to ensure there are certain procedures in place to avoid potential tribunal claims.

The firm says business leaders and managers should be taking a fresh look at their disciplinary policies and working practices to ensure that the risk of a claim is minimized.

Research has shown there is a increase in the willingness among employees to raise claims against their employer or former employer. Claims can now be made online making the process more accessible and with employees struggling to find another job they are much more likely to resort to litigation.

CEO of Empire HR, Steve Cook, said: “In the current economic climate, the effects of a successful claim could be disastrous for a business. It’s worth bearing in mind that it’s not just the actual compensation that costs the business money, as the time and resources spent on defending the claim can also severely affect the day-to-day running of a business.”

Mr Cook continued: “The rise in the number of dismissals over the past year, combined with the increasing awareness that employees have of their rights in the workplace have had a disastrous impact upon businesses.

“Factors such as the availability of legal information on the internet, the difficulty in finding new jobs, and the resulting poor financial situation of former employees means that people are more likely to file a claim than ever before.”

The good news, however, for employers is that statistics show employers with legal representation are more likely to be successful in defending any claims brought against them by former employees.

Here are ten employment tribunal stories that have been faced by some UK organisations:

Council facing potential pay out of £600m in equal pay case
Birmingham City Council is facing a hefty pay out after around 5,000 mainly female workers won their case for equal pay at a tribunal. Unions claim some female workers may be owed £30m in back-pay for bonuses paid only to their male counterparts. It is estimated the pay out could be up to £600m.

City lawyer awarded millions
A London lawyer who accused her bosses of destroying her career with a sexist bullying campaign accepted a secret pay-out of millions to drop her claim. She had been claiming a record £19million compensation deal over allegations that intimidation and sexual discrimination had left her 'mentally disabled'.

Hospital chief executive awarded £1.2m
The Royal Cornwall hospital had to pay-out £1.2 million to its former chief executive after he won a case claiming he was unfairly dismissed as a ‘whistle blower’.

Gay manager awarded £118,000 after only eight days of employment
A gay media sales manager was sacked after just eight days with a company because he was apparently not ‘psychologically balanced’. A tribunal heard the Glasgow man had been harassed and on one occasion been told he looked like a ‘cream puff’. He was awarded the compensation for discrimination on the grounds of his sexual orientation.

Company director awarded £68,000 for wrongful dismissal
A security company director was sacked under the grounds of the business’s financial difficulties. The director was apparently told by bosses he had to go due to lack of business, but when he was unable to find a new job the case was ruled as unfair dismissal and breach of contract, forcing the company to award him £68,000.

Teacher awarded £63,000 after unfair dismissal
A teacher in Blackpool won his case and was awarded £63,000 for unfair dismissal after imposing discipline on a disruptive pupil. The disciplined pupil claimed that she was unfairly treated which cost the science master his job leading to the unfair dismissal case.

£45,000 pay-out for cafe worker after being refused maternity pay
A cafe worker from Northern Ireland was awarded £45,000 for unfair dismissal. The woman
was working as a full time manager in the café for around 40–45 hours per week, however, the
owner had only been putting her down in the books for working 15 hours a week. When the
worker fell pregnant, the owner then claimed she didn’t qualify for maternity pay, prompting
the employee to raise a claim.

Accountant awarded almost £40,000 after unfair dismissal
An accountant from Perth was awarded £40,000 after being fired from his job accused of spending a “ridiculous amount of time” on the internet during working hours. It was later found that the management of the company had no idea how to interpret the internet usage reports and therefore the dismissal was treated as unfair.

Barmaid awarded more than £14,000 after text sacking
A Dundee barmaid who was sacked by text message by her boss was awarded more than
£14,000 at an employment tribunal for unfair dismissal. The barmaid, who had slept in for her
shift during the festive period, had previously worked 11 hours the day before her dismissal.
The barmaid was awarded a further £1,296 for breach of contract after being left alone in the
bar for more than two hours by her employee.

Wheelchair worker awarded £6,000 after being nicknamed by boss
A worker in a wheelchair who was nicknamed ‘Ironside’ after the disabled 1970s TV detective won a £6,000 payout for his ‘violated dignity’. Ironically, the ill-advised quip was made by a manager at a firm that helps people with disabilities return to work. The claimant took the company to a tribunal after finding out that he was being referred to as ‘Ironside’ behind his back.

Empire HR Ltd can assist businesses on all aspects of disciplinary action, from drafting the
disciplinary procedure to representation at tribunal.

For further information, please contact Steve Cook on 01224 701383 or email
s.cook@empirehr.com



Tweet

Winter blues in the workplace

As the winter months loom, the dark mornings and dark evenings leave many people feeling a little under the weather and not in the mood for work which leads to an increase in absence rates in the workplace.

Getting out of bed in the dark mornings can affect moral and have many people reaching for the duvet rather than the alarm clock. Low morale increases at this time of year leading to higher absences from work leaving employers with a costly problem.

The latest research by the CIPD reveals that, on average, sickness absence costs employers £692 per employee every year. Sickness absence also represents 3.1% of working time.

In 2009 absence levels stood at an average of 6.4 days per employee and research indicated that a staggering 180 million working days were lost to absence in 2009.

Leading Aberdeen-based employment law, HR and health & safety firm, Empire HR, is urging businesses to ensure they have the right procedures in place to handle absences at work as the winter months approach.

The current economic climate means that it is increasingly important to ensure that businesses are as efficient as possible. Successfully curbing absence costs could make a real difference to a business – potentially saving jobs.

Empire HR say the poor weather, post-summer and holiday blues along with the long wait for the next break from work creates a lack of enthusiasm for many employees who decide not to turn up for work in the morning.

Research found that two in five workers see less than half an hour of daylight during the winter working day and one in 10 sees no daylight at all, leading to slumps in productivity and motivation.

To combat this issue, some businesses introduce daylight initiatives in the winter months giving employees the option to attend work an hour later or finish an hour earlier and such schemes have seen an increase in staff morale.


Employees pulling sick days out of work are not just costly to the employer but also to their fellow work mates. Workload needs to be allocated to other employees leaving some overworked and this in turn can lead to further absences.

There is growing evidence that the longer the period of absence, the harder it is to return to work.
Most short term absence is self certified but there are a number of effective ways of managing this issue.

• Return to work interviews

• Disciplinary procedures for unacceptable absence

• Use of trigger mechanisms to review attendance

• Involvement of managers in absence management

• Provision of sickness absence information to line managers

• Restricting sick pay Training managers to handle absences

• Involvement of occupational health professionals

Return to work interviews can help ensure that short term absence problems are identified at an early stage. They also provide managers with an opportunity to start a dialogue with staff over underlying issues which might be causing the absence.

CEO of Empire HR, Steve Cook said: “Absences in the workplace is costly, and the use of disciplinary procedures leading to dismissal for unacceptable absence may be used if organisations wish to make it clear that unjustified absence will not be tolerated. Overall, employers must have a clear policy in place that spells out rights and obligations when taking time off work due to sickness.”

Sickie Facts:

One in three sick days falls on a Monday

More days are lost in January than any other month

Musculo-skeletal conditions are top cause of all absence

Sick leave amongst women is 24% higher than amongst men

If you need help on any absence management issues contact Empire HR on 01224 701383.

Tweet

Health Questionnaires

Due to the large amounts of phone calls this month relating the health questionnaires we have decided to provide some information on the topic.

The Equality Bill generally prohibits the use of pre-employment questionnaires, although there are some exceptions. These are set out in Section 60(6) of the Bill. Amongst the 5 exceptions is:

S(60)(6)(b) establishing whether the applicant will be able to carry out a function that is intrinsic to the work concerned.

This exception is the one that is likely to have most relevance for employers but it is a narrow exception.

Therefore, I would only advise the use of a pre employment questionnaire intended to fall within this exception where:

1) There is a genuine requirement for the employee to carry out a task of a physical nature.

It would not normally be appropriate to use a questionnaire where the work is office based, or where there are no tasks that are particularly physical. The first stage in considering the use of the questionnaire is to establish what the requirement is (e.g. heavy lifting, running, 20/20 eyesight etc). There should be some evidence that this requirement is genuine, and not simply a speculative requirement.

2)That task requiring the physical work is essential to carry out the job.

If the task resulting in the requirement is not essential, or it could be assigned to a different employee, or is not required to be carried out very often, it would not normally be appropriate to use the questionnaire. For example, even if there is some physically demanding work involved, I would advise carefully considering whether the use of a questionnaire is appropriate if it is possible that they could do most of the job without carrying out the physical work. Therefore, after you have established what the requirement is, you need to consider how important it is that the applicant can fulfill it.

3) The requirement is a proportionate means of achieving the aim.

This means that it is important to carefully consider whether the requirement is the best way to achieve the task. For example, if you are stipulating that the applicant must have 20/20 vision due to the work being technical and intricate you would need to be sure that the requirement for 20/20 vision was proportionate - consider the consequences of an employee without perfect vision carrying out the task – if there would be no serious consequences the requirement for 20/20 vision is not likely to be a proportionate requirement.

4) The questions are designed to ascertain whether there may be a problem in carrying out the particular task.

Therefore, it would not be appropriate to ask questions that will not relate to the particular task in question. For example, it would not be advisable to ask a question about skin problems such as eczema if the task that the questionnaire related to is heavy lifting. This means that it would not normally be appropriate to have a standard format for the questionnaire asking a series of general questions. The questions should be relevant to the specific task necessitating a particular requirement that you have established as being a genuine requirement that is essential to carry out the job.

It is worth noting that any questions should be designed to ascertain current ability to carry out the task. Therefore, questions asking about past health issues are likely to fall foul of the Act. I would recommend steering clear of questions starting with ‘have you ever …..’ and replacing them with ‘do you …’

As a very simple example, the Act’s explanatory notes state that a questionnaire may be relevant where "An applicant applies for a job in a warehouse, which requires the manual lifting and handling of heavy items. As manual handling is a function which is intrinsic to the job, the employer is permitted to ask the applicant questions about his health to establish whether he is able to do the job (with reasonable adjustments for a disabled applicant, if required). The employer would not be permitted to ask the applicant other health questions until he or she offered the candidate a job."

When considering whether to use a pre-employment questionnaire it is worth bearing in mind that while asking an applicant health questions will not in itself amount to discrimination against a job applicant, acting on the answers may well do. Where an unsuccessful job applicant brings a direct disability discrimination claim, and the employer asked a pre employment health question for a non-prescribed reason, the burden of proof will shift automatically to the employer to show that no discrimination took place.

In addition, the EHRC will be able to take enforcement action in relation to prohibited questions even where no discrimination is alleged to have taken place.

This prohibition only relates to pre-employment questionnaires. Once an applicant has been offered a job, an employer can ask questions relating to health in order to ensure health & safety obligations are being met, that appropriate reasonable adjustments are met etc.

If you find that you still require more information or guidance on this matter please contact our advice helpline on 01224 701383.

Technology…the biggest distraction in the workplace?

Businesses are being warned to ensure they have guidelines in place for misuse of technology in the workplace after reports that people are spending more than half the day using technology.

Scotland’s leading HR and employment law firm, Empire HR, say although computer technology has transformed today’s workplace it’s vital that a business is geared up for managing the impact upon staff.

The increase in technology usage has been blamed on the popularity of smart phones, the report claims there has been an 81% increase in the number of people owning a smart phone in the last year. These phones make it easier to surf the net which is fast becoming the most popular form of mobile media activity.

Although businesses are often quick to embrace the benefits of new technology, software and telecoms, Empire HR say many are failing to get to grips with the impact on their business and how much it distracts staff in the workplace.

Aberdeen based Empire HR, which provides advice to over 500 businesses throughout the UK, advises businesses to consider adopting a detailed change management plan prior to the implementation of new technology.

Businesses should provide clear guidance to staff on what is, and what isn’t acceptable use of technology at work. For example, are they allowed to use the internet during working hours? Can they update their Facebook page whilst at work? Should they take laptops home? What about pen drives, disks, Company mobile phones? A business should consider all these issues.

Of course, it isn’t just the technology at work that can lead to problems. External influences can also be a big headache. Social networking is a major issue, with many employees failing to realise that their social networking pages effectively link the personal and professional lives.

This has led to some employees being dismissed for posting something on a personal blog page, a practice now being referred to as ‘Facebook Fired’ or ‘Twerminated’. With new technology and social networking very much a way of modern life, businesses clearly need to adapt to up-to-date workplace issues.

Steve Cook, CEO of Empire HR advises the following:

Have a clear, detailed Information Computer Technology (ICT) Policy

This should include details of what the rules relating to Company technology are. It should also outline the consequences of failing to adhere to the policy. Employees should be advised that an email is the same as a letter in terms of representing the Company, and presenting an image.

Therefore, spend as much time and attention on an email as you would with a letter. Most importantly, circulate the policy! You would be surprised at how many businesses take the time to draft a good policy, and then forget to circulate it!

Make sure staff know what is, and is not appropriate.

The increasing use of technology, and in particular emails, has led to a blur in the distinction between what is and is not appropriate in the workplace. It’s all too easy for staff to circulate material that would not have previously been available at work such as pornography and insulting jokes.

Although light hearted, these emails can lead to costly discrimination claims and bring a Company into disrepute. For example, the Empire HR bulletin recently highlighted a case where a Deliotte trainee had to resign after circulating a ‘fittest man’ email.

Include Social Networking

We come across a lot of ICT Policies that fail to refer to social networking. This should always be included because it’s very difficult to take disciplinary action where there is no clear Company policy on the issue.

It doesn’t have to be long, but it should stipulate that social networking sites should not be accessed during working hours, and that negative references to colleagues, the Company or clients will result in disciplinary action.

Monitor IT usage

Put systems in place to monitor all usage. Some employers hesitate to do this because they are worried about privacy and data protection issues. However, it is perfectly acceptable to monitor all usage during Company time. It might be worth carrying out spot checks or instructing your IT provider to let you know when an employee spends an excessive amount of time on the internet. In my experience, this is very valuable.

For example, an Empire HR client recently identified an employee who was setting up their own business during Company time by carrying out a spot check on his emails. Of course, a policy should stipulate that emails, internet usage etc are not private and will be subject to monitoring.

Include it in the Contract

If you are going to issue staff with mobile phones, laptops, pen drives or any other IT equipment, make sure refer to these in their contract of employment. If you don’t, you might unexpectedly find your staff are entitled to keep this equipment during maternity leave, sick leave etc.

You should also include a clause allowing the Company to recoup any losses resulting from damage caused to equipment, or a failure to return it once employment is terminated.

Seek specialist advice

ICT is a massive industry, and its impact upon the workplace cannot be underestimated. It’s likely that ICT is your businesses biggest asset, so make sure you protect it. Empire HR can advise and guide you on all aspects of ICT and people management. Call 01224 701 383 for further information.

January 2010 Bulletin

The Empire HR January Bulletin is now available to download, please click here