Employment Law E-Bulletin

May 2007

QUICK LINK

This month's cases in detail

********************

BANK HOLIDAYS AND PART-TIME WORKERS

The Part-Time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000 make it unlawful to treat part-time workers less favourably than full-time workers solely on the basis that they work part-time unless such treatment can be objectively justified.

Although, this legislation has not caused too many problems for employers, an area of contention has existed in relation to holiday entitlement. The recent case of McMenemy v Capita Business Services Limited has shed new light on the Regulations impact upon this area.

Read full article

CASES

Salary is not a reasonable adjustment

You may remember that, back in October 2006, we highlighted the Employment Appeal Tribunal’s decision in O’Hanlon v Commissioners for HM Revenue and Customs.  The Court of Appeal has now given its view on whether employers are obliged to give a disabled employee on disability-related sick leave full pay as part of the duty to make reasonable adjustments. 

European Decision on Monitoring Emails

The recent decision in the case of Copland v UK should sound a warning bell for all employers who monitor the email and internet use of their staff.

Symbols of Faith

Many of you will recall the mass of newspaper coverage which surrounded the initial hearing of the high profile case of Azmi v Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council. The Employment Appeal Tribunal has now had an opportunity to review the decision and has ruled in favour of the employer.

This month's cases in detail

LEGISLATION UPDATE

Equality Act 2006

When the Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003 came into force in December 2003, discrimination on the grounds of religion, religious belief or similar philosophical belief became unlawful.

On 30 April 2007, the Equality Act 2006 introduced a subtle change to this legislation. It introduced a change in the wording of the prohibition which now states that it is unlawful to discriminate on the grounds of “religion, or religious belief or philosophical belief. This slight change removes the word “similar” making it clear that it is also unlawful to discriminate against someone on the grounds of lack of religion or belief.

It could also pave the way for political beliefs to fall within the scope of the Regulations as the belief that the individual relies on is no longer required to be similar in nature to religious faith.

End of the Statutory Dispute Resolution Procedures?

Unfortunately these procedures are still in force but we just wanted to highlight the findings of the government’s report into the procedures. The report concludes that abolishing the procedures may be the way forward.

Michael Gibbons’ report showed that the intentions behind the procedures were good but that, in practice, they had unintended consequences which had, in his view, outweighed the benefits.

Among one of several recommendations to come out of the report was for the statutory disciplinary and dismissal procedures, together with the grievance procedures, to be repealed. This proposal is now subject to consultation and we will let you know the results as soon as possible. It is unlikely to be a quick process as it would mean repealing an Act of Parliament, which would need to go through two Houses of Parliament, rather than the Secretary of State simply producing a new set of Regulations. So, for the moment, the procedures still apply and must be followed at all times but fingers crossed….

Read Michael Gibbons’ full report.

For further information on any the issues featured here or any other employment law issue, call Burnetts on 01228 552222.

May 2007