Sponsored Post
According to a piece from The Mirror last Wednesday it is. This is because the government is planning “savage spending cuts” at the Health & Safety Executive (HSE) which will reduce the number of
workplace inspections carried out, thus increasing the risk of personal injuries occurring. The article cites a very sad incident to one worker mortally injured on his last day at work.
Image via CrunchBase
I’ve written on many occasions before about how employers need to have a usage policy for social media to guide employees on what is and is not acceptable use of Facebook, Twitter, blogs etc. As the recent (unreported) case of Stephens v Halfords PLC has shown, merely having a policy is not a magic panacea in itself. Employers must act reasonably in enforcing that policy.
Halfords apparently has a social media usage policy which prohibits employees making any comments on social media platforms that were not in the best interests of the company or that encouraged dissent. That seems rather oppressive, if correctly stated but that’s another issue.
Tomorrow I am chairing the SBK Legal and Strategic Guide to Workforce Restructuring. It’s an all day conference with some very interesting speakers and covering a wide range of topics. Click here for details.
There will be presentations on how to vary contracts of employment, how to adjust pensions, a review of the government’s planned employment law review, how to maintain a positive working relationship with Unions, as well as a session on “Realising redundancy savings: abiding by the rules to avoid a later backlash”. The law on redundancy and procedure is particularly interesting to me and I will be especially looking forward to that session..
Sponsored Post
At a time of economic stress, turndown, worry and cuts, the job market seems as much of a stressful place as anywhere.
Many over the last few months might have experienced the brunt of the economy’s tumble, which will have seeped into the employment market and taken its tolls on jobs, with redundancies being a frequent way of cutting company costs.
I’ve never been away, really. It’s just that for the last three months I have been involved in the end games of two large and long-running pieces of (non-employment law) litigation that have now finally settled. One, a very serious Personal Injury claim concluded following mediation and the other, a dispute in the Chancery Division between two businessmen, halfway through its trial last week. In both cases I’m pleased to say my clients got very satisfactory outcomes.
Would you want this pecking your head?
Here in the UK we’re generally a fairly benign lot; not given to overthrowing our rulers , obeying the laws and only getting really upset when there’s a tragedy in a soap opera (think planes falling out the sky in Emmerdale, trains in Coronation Street and, most outrageously, Nigel Pargetter falling off the roof of his stately pile in The Archers). Our wildlife is also fairly mild mannered: Africa has the Black Mamba snake, the US grizzly bears and Australia any number of venomous snakes, frogs and spiders that will send you to your maker quicker than you can say “G’day mate”.
Sponsored Post
Have you had an accident or injury at work? If so, what are the basic legal issues you need to know?
There’s a big overlap between the laws of employment and personal injury. For instance, an employee may be able to bring a claim in an Employment Tribunal under the Equality Act in respect of disability discrimination where the employer has failed to make reasonable adjustments or the employee has been subjected to a detriment because of their disability.
If you make a lewd comment or joke at work, might you be in trouble? Following the case of Laura Bowater this week the answer is yes, you may be.
It doesn’t take the law any further forward than it was before but it does highlight how workplace situations can get out of hand.
Ms Bowater was a nurse at the end of her shift at the Central Middlesex Hospital. She was called upon by a colleague to assist in restraining a naked male patient who was having an epileptic fit. At some point in the process she ended up astride him, near his genitals and said “‘It’s been a few months since I have been in this position with a man underneath me”.
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 government last week announced that it intends to shake up employment law practice and procedure with a consultation trying to rebalance the rights of employer and employee. It’s the latest episode in the long-running saga “does the law favour employees too much?”
I suspect that there is much political posturing in the consultation and I would be surprised if some aspects survive the consultation process. The headlines have been well trailed already: here is my take on the main points that caught my eye.
Issue Fees – how much is too much?