Europe’s largest annual online recruitment conference returns to central London on 26th January 2012. We have an exclusive discount for readers of this blog.

The 10th anniversary conference – “Online Recruitment 2012: The Year Ahead” will focus on online recruitment strategy, candidate attraction, mobile, online law and global social media, You’ll hear from other industry leading speakers as well as network with 500 professionals at the industry’s largest event.

1. Google are presenting on Google+ and mobile within recruitment.

2. ITV are talking about how they have successfully implemented a new careers website and social media strategy.

3. The FIRM are talking about 3,000 FIRM employer recruitment strategies.

4. Boots are back talking about the market a year on and how they successfully used Facebook for social hiring.

5. There’s a social media recruitment legal and compliance masterclass which should be really interesting.

6. Monster are talking about how BeKnown could change the recruitment world forever via Facebook.

7. LinkedIn are discussing their vision of the future of online recruitment in 2012.

8. Plus Enhance Media – the conference organisers – giving insight from the world’s largest piece of online recruitment research.

We’ll be there (obviously) and readers of Jobsworth can get a 10% discount on tickets! To find out more about the conference click here and when booking use the promotion code SCUTT10 to secure your discount.

See you on the 26^th Jan!

No related posts.

Advert: Online Recruitment Conference 2012: The Year Ahead originally appeared on Jobsworth by Michael Scutt on 04/01/2012.

No related posts.

CoreLegal Seminar on OFR originally appeared on Jobsworth by Michael Scutt on 18/11/2011.

Today I want to  give a plug to the  Queen Mary Legal Advice Centre, based on the Mile End Road in London.  It’s part of the School of Law at Queen Mary, which itself is part of the University of London.

It is an advice service, and they won’t handle your claim for you.  They act as a “signpost”  and if you need more than just initial advice on your situation they will refer you to another organisation that can help (and will provide free legal advice) to you. It’s open to all members of the public, but you will need an appointment.

It covers a wide range of areas of law –  including employment – and has a specialism in “Pink Law”  i.e advising the LGBT community.

For a list of all the areas they advise on and how they work, click this link.

Getting free legal advice is often very difficult for people so this service is to be thoroughly recommended.

Related posts:

1. Free Employment Law Resource
2. Feel free to comment
3. 5 steps to getting the employment law advice you need

Free Legal Advice from LAC originally appeared on Jobsworth by Michael Scutt on 25/10/2011.

Sponsored Guest Post

Few business owners take risks these days when it comes to public liability insurance and employers’ liability insurance. The ‘compensation culture’ that has developed in the UK over the last 10 years has made everyone more vigilant against the risk of having claims made against them for negligence. But there are still those who have been caught out.

Just this year in Ireland, no less than 14 member clubs of the Donegal Gaelic Athletic Association failed to renew their property and public liability insurance.

The Donegal Democrat reported that Naomh Ultan’s Terrence McGinley raised the matter at a county committee meeting.

He said: “It is highly irresponsible of these clubs not to have their property and public liability insurance. I don’t know who the clubs are, and for that matter my own club could be one of them, but it is not good enough and it is not on.

“What happens if a supporter or someone from another club or a member of the general public turns up at one of these grounds and gets injured and makes a claim – who is liable?”

The question rang out rhetorically at the time but the answer is clear – the clubs themselves are liable for injury to anyone on premises not covered by public liability insurance.

While it is not compulsory to have public liability insurance for most businesses, customers and clients will often demand to see evidence of adequate cover before agreeing to work with a given company. Horse riding businesses are obliged to take out public liability insurance, as the risk of injury when working with large, powerful animals is considered too great.

Employers’ liability insurance (EL) is a very different matter, and all employers must be insured for at least £5million by UK law. The only exceptions to this rule are businesses that are not limited companies, where the business owner and close family members are the only employees.

The law on EL is enforced by the Health and Safety Executive and fines for failure to purchase EL can reach £2,500. There are also fines of up to £1,000 for employers who do not produce their compulsory EL insurance certificate when asked to do so by HSE inspectors.

Related posts:

1. What will happen to bonuses?

What’s that worst that could happen if your insurance lapses? originally appeared on Jobsworth by Michael Scutt on 07/10/2011.

Choices, choices

Many employees often suspect they have been unfairly placed in the “departure lounge” when their company decides to restructure. Sometimes it is obvious there has been unfairness, or discrimination, in the process.  On other occasions it’s much harder to prove even if suspected and the recent case of Dabson v David Cover & Sons Ltd doesn’t help employees much.  On the other hand, employers will be relieved.

The main requirement for an employer seeking to make redundancies is to conduct a fair selection process.  The old mantra of “Last In First Out” can be problematic these days, so some other method needs to be found.  When a business decides to stop trading in a certain product then it may be fairly easy to say that all employees associated with that product should be made redundant, unless they can be redeployed elsewhere in the business.  Or if a unique role is being removed then the selection of the person carrying out that role is fairly clear cut.  However, what happens when you have ten people in a team and the employer decides it needs to reduce the size to five persons. How does an employer choose which employees to select?

The answer is to have a selection process using objective criteria. It’s not foolproof and how an employer scores the employee can be criticised.  For instance in De Belin v Eversheds the EAT held that it was wrong for an employer to artificially favour a woman on maternity leave in a selection when that had the effect of selecting a male colleague for redundancy.   There is still room for an employee to claim that they were unfairly scored against it.  Employees often claim that the manager scoring them either didn’t know them well enough to make a judgment or bore some grudge or were in some way biased against them. In the case of Mr Dabson, he argued that the manager who scored him did so unfairly and acted improperly in scoring him as he did. There had been a history of friction between the Claimant and the line manager.  On the facts as reported in the caser the final decision does look harsh on the employee.

However, the EAT held that the employer had acted reasonably and repeated previous law to the effect that it is only in a case where there is obvious mistake or an absence of good faith that the scores should be scrutinised.  Those will probably be exceptional circumstances and it makes it very difficult for an employee to challenge in these circumstances.  If employees want to run this type of argument they will need to gather their evidence together   as soon as they can.  Employers can’t relax completely though.  Challenges will still arise but provided an employer can justify their decision and show they have followed a fair and reasonable decision making process they should avoid an adverse finding at Tribunal, which isn’t to say that grievances won’t continue to be issued or letter of claim sent.

This decision suggests that employees don’t have things all their own way, despite what is often said.

Related posts:

1. How Should Employers Select Employees for Redundancy?
2. Redundancy – know your rights!
3. Consultation on Redundancy

Redundancy Selection: Now Harder for Employees to Challenge? originally appeared on Jobsworth by Michael Scutt on 22/06/2011.

I’ve gone away for a few days to the Lake District, so no posting or tweeting until next week,

See you all soon.

Related posts:

1. Jobsworth is Back!
2. Jobsworth is having an identity crisis!

Jobsworth is Away … originally appeared on Jobsworth by Michael Scutt on 18/04/2011.

A few days ago I was telephoned by a prospective new client: she has been working for her employers for just over eleven months and was expecting her boss to terminate her employment at any moment. She told me she had worked well, been very flexible when required, worked unsociable hours and taken a cut in her hours when the business fell on hard times.   In return her boss criticised her (unfairly I am told) for not having the right attitude and spending too much time on her social life.  Leaving aside the issue of who was telling the truth, what is her legal position if her employment is terminated before she has gained 12 months continuous employment experience? What rights has she got?

The regrettable answer is not many.

As the law currently stands (and has since 1999), an employee must (in most cases) have 12 months continuous employment to be able to bring a claim for unfair dismissal.  This can be shortened slightly by the length of the statutory notice period (one week), assuming the employer is unable to pay the notice period “in lieu” of working the notice, meaning that the employer has to dismiss before the 51^st week of employment. If it is possible to allege that the dismissal is “automatically unfair” (because of a discriminatory reason or certain other prescribed situations) then there is no period of qualification required.

However, if she is dismissed before then, her only entitlement will be to her notice period; either to work it if it is an “ordinary” dismissal or, for her notice pay if she is summarily dismissed and told to leave the premises there and then. In the latter case she would have a claim for breach of contract, aka “wrongful dismissal” (note: not to be confused with unfair dismissal which is something else entirely) the compensation for which would only be for her notice monies.

That is a claim she could bring at an Employment Tribunal, which has jurisdiction to hear breach of contract claims up to £25,000.

How much notice is she entitled to receive?  That will depend on what her contract of employment says.  Assuming there is no contract and the employer has not stated what the notice period is, then she will only be entitled to statutory notice, under the Employment Rights Act.  That means for an employee with over one month’s service but less than one year she is entitled to one week’s notice.  That increases to one month covering one to four years’ service (therefore two years equals four weeks, as does four weeks service) and then increases by one week per year of service up to 12 weeks.

In other words, at 11 months service she would be statutorily entitled to one week’s money in the absence of anything to the contrary. She would not be able to bring a claim at an ET to say that her employer had acted unfairly in dismissing her.

Until a few years ago it was thought that a claim could be brought against an employer who dismissed in these circumstances, in order to prevent the employee from gaining her employment rights.  The case of Raspin v United New Shops Ltd 1999 held that an employee dismissed without being given proper notice may be able to claim damages for the loss of unfair dismissal rights if they would have gained those rights had proper notice been given.  However, the case of Wise Group v Mitchell EAT 2005 decided this was not correct. Thus employees therefore remain vulnerable to being sacked at the eleventh hour (well month, but you know what I mean).

This is all particularly relevant now because the government has launched a consultation on employment law practice and procedure.  One of the most high profile proposals is for the 12 month period to be extended to 24 months.  I think this is misguided, wrong and likely to be counter-productive, for reasons I set out here in my last post. It will lead to more employees, many of them in vulnerable positions being exploited as this particular lady was and deny them proper legal redress.

Thinking aloud for a moment (and it might seem crazy to suggest it because it is well out of tune with the current prevailing anti-employee climate) perhaps we ought to consider reducing the qualification period for unfair dismissal to zero months? The qualification period has moved around a fair bit since unfair dismissal was created as a cause of action in 1971: then it only required six months’ continuous service until being increased to one year in 1980 (although two year service was then needed for small firms), two years in 1985 and then back to one year in 1999.  In other words, it’s not set in stone but is something of a political football to be kicked around by the whim of the government.

A reduction to zero months would bring it into line with anti-discrimination provisions and, bizarrely, although it would lead to an increase in unfair dismissal claims, might actually lead to a reduction in the number of weak discrimination claims that are brought by employees because they have no other cause of action.  It would be interesting to learn how many discrimination claims are brought by employees within their first twelve months of employment. Does anyone know of any statistics?

Madness?  Let me know what you think.

Related posts:

1. Unfair Dismissal Rights to be Restricted?
2. Unfair Dismissal to be Abolished?
3. Riots, Looting and Unfair Dismissal

Unfair Dismissal Without 12 Months Continuous Employment Experience? originally appeared on Jobsworth by Michael Scutt on 07/02/2011.

If this happens to you, see a solicitor

I’ve been dismissed, made redundant, accused of misconduct at work, been bullied/harassed/discriminated against.  I need help: what do I do?

Your first step should be to get some legal advice from someone who knows what they’re talking about.  There are numerous sources of legal advice around – just look on Google for instance.  You may have access to a legal helpline via an insurance policy, or you could go to your local Citizens Advice Bureau or Law Centre.  Failing all that you could go and see a solicitor.  The best option is to ask friends, family or colleagues for a personal recommendation but make sure that the solicitor they recommend specialises in the type of law you’re concerned with.  A solicitor who specialises in property work may not know that much about employment law (and vice-versa).

I’ve never been to see a solicitor before.  I’m a bit worried about it.

Don’t be! You’re the client and the solicitor is there to help you.   Most solicitors don’t bite.  These days you should expect to get a courteous and friendly welcome and not be treated as an inferior being.

He probably would bite you, most lawyers wouldn't

Will it be expensive?

It needn’t be. You need to check out how much the solicitor charges before you go along.  Many firms will offer free initial interviews, others will offer an introductory rate.  All solicitors are required to give costs estimates to their clients as soon as practicable.  Don’t hesitate to ask when making contact for the first time.

There are many different funding arrangements out there these days, from no win no fee, to third party funding to legal  expense insurance.  Many solicitors will work on a fixed fee basis in appropriate cases.  In others legal aid may be available (although not usually for employment disputes).

What do I need to take with me?

For employment disputes we always need to see the following;

Your contract of employment (and any variations)

The compromise agreement (if you’ve been given one)

Any relevant correspondence/emails/statements etc relating to the dispute

Any relevant company policies e.g  disciplinary/grievances, diversity issues, whistleblowing etc.

Identification – solicitors have to conduct “know your client” enquiries as well as banks and other professionals, so always take your passport/photocard driving licence and a recent utility bill with you to the first meeting

I always find it really helpful if new clients provide a brief synopsis of the problem/dispute, giving important dates, persons involved and central issues so that the first meeting can be spent not just on fact finding but also on giving some preliminary advice.  Do remember that solicitors are human beings too; if you present the facts and issues of your case to him/her clearly and concisely that will enable the lawyer to get on top of it all much quicker.  In the end that will speed the whole process up and be more cost effective for you.

Please click here for more about the firm and some of the areas of law we can help you with.

Someone's got to read this lot

What happens next?

The solicitor should be able to advise you on your situation and what your options are.  If more information is needed, or enquiries need to be made, you should be told.  Make sure that you raise any queries that you want dealt with (don’t be afraid to make a list of questions to take with you) and don’t be afraid to telephone or email later if you think of something that you forgot to mention or something wasn’t clear.

If I can assist you at all please do call me on 0207 464 8433 or email me at michaelscutt@dalelangley.co.uk.

No related posts.

5 steps to getting the employment law advice you need originally appeared on Jobsworth by Michael Scutt on 11/05/2010.

Yesterday I spoke at a workshop arranged by Gateway Media on the theme of “Combating Tesco Law: Preparing your Brand Presence”.  I tried to explain what the LSA does in about an hour – it was a bit of a rush but no one fell asleep and I hope I got the main points across.  As promised I have loaded my Powerpoint presentation onto Slideshare and you can view it here;

No related posts.

The Legal Services Act 2007 originally appeared on Jobsworth by Michael Scutt on 03/03/2010.

Wot, no snowman?

I’m not referring to the five inches of snow outside as I write this, and the inevitable disruption caused to roads and railways for the next week,  but instead I am considering what the main statutory changes affecting employment law issues in 2010 will be.

January  

Not much will happen this month while everyone looks in astonishment at their credit card bills, but just a reminder that the Vento guidelines on awards to be made in cases of injury to feelings in discrimination cases look to have been increased late last year in the case of Da’Bell v NSPCC. The Court of Appeal case in Vento v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police in 2002 set three main bands for ETs to consider when making awards for injury to feelings; 

Lower – £500 – 5,000                       – for one-off or isolated incidents 

Mid     - £5,000 – 15,000 – for more serious incidents but not of the most serious nature 

Upper -£15,000 – 25,000               – for the worst examples of discriminatory behaviour, such as where there has been a campaign of bullying and harassment.  Only exceptionally should awards be made in excess of the upper figure. 

Since 2002 these bands have not changed.  It is now anticipated that the new bands will be 

Lower:  £? – 6,000 

Mid – £6,000 – 18,000 

Upper – £18,000 – 30,000 

For a fuller and very helpful discussion see Usefully Employed’s post on the subject.  

February 

This month will see something that hasn’t occurred before.  The maximum compensatory award that can be made by an Employment Tribunal for unfair dismissal will actually decrease. The Employment Rights (Revision of Limits) Order 2009 states that the maximum award will decrease from its current £66,200 to £65,300 for all claims where the event giving rise to the claim  occurred on or after 1^st February 2010.  This is because the maximum amount is linked to the Retail Prices Index (RPI) and that fell by 1.4% in the year from 1^st September 2008. 

The MINIMUM AWARD that can be made to an employee excluded/expelled from a Union and not re-admitted by the time the case reaches an ET falls from £7,300 to £7,200 

The maximum guarantee payment to an employee under s.31(1) ERA 1996 decreases to £21.20 per day. 

Each February also sees various other rates and limits amended – usually upward.  This time though the maximum weekly award, used for Statutory Redundancy Pay purposes and calculating the Basic Award in Unfair Dismissal cases will remain at £380, but only because it was increased to that figure last October.   

April – other notable increases, will be 

Statutory Adoption         } 

Paternity                            }                          all increase from £123.06 to £124.88 per week 

Maternity Pay                   } 

Maternity Allowance      } 

But, Statutory Sick Pay (SSP) will remain unchanged at £79.15 p.w 

This month will also see employees at employers with at least 250 employees acquire the right to request time off for studying or training relevant to the business.  The right is simply to request time off NOT for the employer to fund the training. 

Income Tax will rise to 50% for those earning more than £150,000 p.a 

October 

Legislative developments tend to occur in April and October now.  In October it is expected that the Equality Bill will come into force to hopefully bring some order to the convoluted and confusing plethora of anti-discrimination laws currently on the statute book. It won’t just tackle discrimination in the employment arena, but will be wider ranging. Contractual provisions that prevent employees discussing their pay with workers are expected to be made illegal and the government will acquire the power to force privatre companies to disclose gender-pay details.  More on all this in due course, assuming that it survives a change of government 

Throughout the year there will be new cases being decided that will make the headlines, or appeals considering cases that caused a stir in 2009.  I will cover these as they come up so please subscribe to the RSS feed or to the email updates for “breaking news”. 

If you need advice on any employment law issues please call me on 0207 464 8433 or email me at michaelscutt@dalelangley.co.uk.

No related posts.

What lies ahead in 2010? originally appeared on Jobsworth by Michael Scutt on 06/01/2010.