Employment Law Update Archives | Page 3 of 4 | Employment Law Services (ELS) LTD

April 2018: Important employment law updates

Posted on 5 April 20187 June 2023 by @deliver_els

April is always one of the busiest months of the year in the world of employment law. Here is a summary of the key updates employers should be aware of:

(1) National Living Wage & National Minimum Wage

The NLW is to increase from £7.50 to £7.83 per hour while the NMW will increase as followed: –

21 to 24-year-old rate from £7.05 to £7.38 per hour;
18 to 20-year-old rate from £5.60 to £5.90 per hour;
16 to 17-year-old rate from £4.05 to £4.20 per hour;
Apprentice rate from £3.50 to £3.70 per hour;

(2) Statutory Benefits

On the 1^st April, statutory maternity/paternity/adoption/shared parental pay and maternity allowance will increase to £145.18 per week (currently £140.98 per week).

As of the 6^th April, statutory sick pay will increase to £92.05 per week (currently £89.35 per week).

(3) Tribunal Compensation

Compensation limits are minimum awards payable under employment legislation and are set to increase on the 6^th April. Increases go as followed:

Maximum limit on compensatory award for unfair dismissal will increase to £83,682 (currently £80,541);
Maximum limit on a week’s pay for calculating basic award and statutory redundancy payments will increase to £508 (currently £489);
Guarantee pay will increase to £28 per day (currently £27 per day);
The minimum basic award in cases where a dismissal is unfair by virtue of health and safety, employee representative, trade union, or occupational pension trustee reasons will increase to £6,203 (currently £5,970);
Award for unlawful inducement relating to trade union membership or activities, or for unlawful inducement relating to collective bargaining will increase to £4,059 (from £3,907)
Minimum amount of compensation where individual excluded or expelled from union in contravention and not admitted or re-admitted by date of tribunal application will increase to £9,474 (currently £9,118)

(4) Taxation of Termination Payments

As of 6^th April, all payments made in lieu of notice, will be taxed, regardless of whether they are contractual or not.

(5) Gender Pay Gap Reporting

The 4^th April is the deadline in which gender pay gap reports should be published. These results must be made public on the employer’s website and a government site. This means the public, customers, employees and potential recruits will have access to these figures.

Employers should consider taking new or faster actions to reduce or eliminate their gender pay gaps.

How can Employment Law Services (ELS) Help?

If you require employment law advice on any of the issues raised in this article, or any other employment issue give us a call today on 0370 218 5662. You can also find out more about our fixed fee HR packages here and fixed fee employment law packages here, or get in touch.

Bank Holidays: 5 things every employer should know

Posted on 28 March 20187 June 2023 by @deliver_els

Everyone loves a bank holiday, unless you are an employer trying to work out your obligations and your employee’s rights. As we approach the Easter bank holiday, here is what you need to know:

(1) There is no statutory right for employees to have bank holidays off work. An employee’s right to time off will depend on the employee’s contract of employment.

(2) There is no statutory right to extra pay; for example, should an employee work a bank holiday, they will not be entitled to time and a half. Any right to extra pay will depend on the provisions of the employment contract.

(3) Part time workers should not be treated less favourably than full time workers. To follow best practice guidelines, employers should give part time employees a prorated allowance of paid bank holidays, regardless of whether or not they normally work on the days on which bank holidays fall.

(4) If the employment contract states an employee will be required to work bank holidays, they cannot refuse this, even on the grounds of religious reasons. However, it is important to note, refusal to grant Christian employees time off for any of the bank holidays with religious significance could expose you to indirect religious discrimination claims.

(5) If the employment contract states that employees are entitled to “statutory entitlement plus bank holidays”, this no longer means 20 days leave plus 8 bank holidays. In 2009, the statutory minimum leave was increased from 4 weeks to 5.9 weeks, thus, this wording would grant 28 days holiday with 8 bank holidays on top. Employers should check the wording in their employment contracts to determine if this is an issue.

How can Employment Law Services (ELS) help?

Employers are failing to verify candidate’s CV claims

Posted on 26 January 20188 June 2023 by @deliver_els

An investigation conducted by the BBC Radio 4’s File on Four programme disclosed that thousands of people from the UK had purchased fake degree certificates from a “diploma mill” in Pakistan, which promotes courses from a number of universities that do not exist.

Findings showed that around 3,000 fake qualifications – including Phds and master degrees – were purchased by UK based buyers, some of which were employed by the NHS, although there is no suggestion to say they are fundamentally unqualified.

This discovery has opened up a variety of questions about whether recruitment departments and HR have been carrying out efficient checks on accuracy of details provided in candidate’s CVs, this ranges from qualifications and experience to performance in previous roles.

Jane Rowley, Chief Executive of Higher Education Degree Data check (HEDD) said: “It’s a vicious circle of fraud – employers don’t make checks, so people embellish things on their CVs, they get away with it and the more they get away with it, the more they are inclined to embellish.”

She suggests further that the fake degree industry was surviving because employers were failing to undertake due diligence. Employers can use the HEDD website to verify whether a certificate is authentic.

Research conducted by the Risk Advisory Group identified that 38% of CVs studied from 25-32-year olds had been falsified.

Rowley estimated that only a fifth of employers carry out proper checks on applicant’s qualifications. She cautioned that using a fake degree certificate to apply for a job may be viewed as fraud by misrepresentation and could potentially carry a 10-year prison sentence.

It was reported that Axact sold more than 215,000 false qualifications worldwide from roughly 350 fictions universities and high schools to buyers in 2015.

Shoab Ahmed, Chief Executive of Axact was arrested in 2015 and released on bail after 15 months in custody, Umain Humaid was given 21 months in prison in August 2017.

The Department for Education said it was “taking decisive action to crack down on degree fraud that cheats genuine learners.”

How can Employment Law Services (ELS) help?

Poundland boss was ‘unfairly dismissed’ for handing out freebies

Posted on 18 January 201812 June 2023 by @deliver_els

The Employment Tribunal has ruled that a manager of Poundland was unfairly dismissed for handing out free items to customers.

It was heard in Watford Employment Tribunal that Mr Zia was fired after misusing a button on the till that allowed employees to give out free items in the event of a complaint or damaged goods. His employers argued that the employee had used this tool excessively throughout his employment at the branch and was in breach of its policies.

Between the 1^st January and 13^th May 2016, the Employment Tribunal heard that Mr Zia had handed out £312.65 worth of free items. As a result of this, Poundland’s area manager intervened and opened an investigation on Mr Zia.

Poundland argued that this button was not available during the period that Mr Zia had handed out free items, however, Zia and his colleagues responded claiming that they were unaware of this.

The area manager who conducted the investigations failed to do a written report, instead, escalated the matter to a disciplinary hearing. During this hearing, Zia disputed that he had given out free items as ‘gestures of good will.’ However, the investigatory officer concluded that the “only reasonable outcome of this process was to be a summary dismissal.” Mr Zia then lodged an appeal on the grounds that he had been trained to use the free item button.

On accepting Zia’s claim that the dismissal was procedurally unfair and did not meet the band of reasonable responses test, especially because the employee had a clean record, Judge Manley held that Poundland’s investigation failed for a number of reasons.

“Poundland has no one to blame but itself for very poor methods of communication. Poundland needed to be clear about what the misconduct was. The evidence on how or when the free item button was stopped is opaque and inconsistent.” Said Judge Manley.

The Remedy Hearing of this case is due to take place on 16^th March 2018.

What is unfair dismissal?

To put it simply, unfair dismissal occurs when an employer terminates his employees contract of employment without having a fair reason to do so. Unfair dismissal can also be claimed in the event that there was a fair reason for dismissal, but the dismissal was handled using wrong procedure. Employees will be protected under legislation against both of these eventualities.

When is a dismissal fair?

The dismissal will be viewed as fair if the employer can provide evidence that the employee was dismissed for one of the following reasons:

The reason related to the employees conduct
The reason related to the employee’s capability or qualifications for the job
Because of redundancy
Because of a statutory duty or restriction prohibited the employment being continued
Some other substantial reason of a kind which justifies dismissal

When is a dismissal unfair?

A dismissal will be viewed as automatically unfair if the dismissal is connected with an employee exercising the following rights:

Pregnancy; this includes all reasons relating to paternity
Family reasons; including parental leave, paternity leave (birth & adoption) adoption leave or time off for dependants
Representation; including acting as an employee’s representative
Trade Union membership grounds and union recognition
Part time and fixed term employees
Pay and working hours

The case of Poundland highlights the importance of employers following procedure when disciplining an employee. Should an employee put themselves at risk of dismissal, this should be communicated through policies, investigations and disciplinary procedures.

It is important that employers have a consistent method of treating all employees fairly and in the same way. Policies and procedures may provide room for some discretion, but there should be careful consideration made when deciding not to follow a policy, and of the possible outcomes of this decision.

How can Employment Law Services (ELS) help?

Important case law developments – January 2018

Posted on 5 January 20189 June 2023 by @deliver_els

(1) Discrimination based on a perceived disability found as unlawful

In the case of Chief Constable of Norfolk v Coffey, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) upheld the decision made in the Employment Tribunal that a police officer did suffer direct discrimination because of a perceived disability.

This came after Lisa Coffey’s employer refused her a transfer as there were concerns that she would end up on restricted duties, this was due to her hearing loss being slightly below the medical standard for police recruitment.

In this judgement the EAT held that Norfolk Constabulary was wrong to have denied an application for a transfer from Lisa Coffey because of her hearing impairment.

The employer’s decision in this case suggested that he perceived his employee to be suffering from a progressive condition, which could advance and as a result, have a substantial impact on her ability to conduct day-day activities. Under the Equality Act 2010, this amounts to the statutory definition of ‘disability.’

Employers should note from the decision in this case that disability discrimination works in the same way as any other form of discrimination.

The EAT stated that: “There would be a gap in the protection offered by equality law if an employer, wrongly perceiving that an employee’s impairment might well progress to the point where it affected [his or her] work substantially, could dismiss [him or her] in advance to avoid any duty to make allowances or adjustments.”

(2) Employer found vicariously liable for an employee’s disclosure of personal data

The High Court held in the case of Various Claimants v Wm Morrisons Supermarket Plc, that the employer was vicariously liable for a rogue employee who deliberately released personal data of other colleagues.

Where there is an adequate connection between the employment relationship and wrongdoing, employers will be held liable for acts committed by the employee under the doctrine of vicarious liability.

This case decision submits that where an employer has done as much as reasonably possible to prevent the misuse of data, they may still be held responsible for the employee who misuses it, even in the event that the misuse has been predetermined to damage the employer.

Since this ruling, Morrisons have announced that they will be appealing the decision and have been given leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal.

(3) Pre- termination negotiations

In the case of Basra v BJSS Ltd, the Employment Appeal Tribunal established that the Employment Tribunal had been wrong to rule out evidence of pre-termination negotiations governed under s11a of the Employment Rights Act 1996 when concluding the effective date of termination of an unfair dismissal complaint. Where negotiations occur prior to the termination of employment, statutory exclusions will apply and therefore, cannot be invoked until the final termination date has been confirmed.

The decision in this case emphasizes the importance of ensuring the wording in any form of communication with employees is carried out carefully, whether on an open or without prejudice basis.

How can Employment Law Services (ELS) help?

Please note, the information in this article is for guidance purposes only and it is therefore advised that employers seek legal advice before embarking on any enforcement action.

Employment law issues employers are set to face in 2018

Posted on 21 December 20178 June 2023 by @deliver_els

(1) General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR)

By now, everyone should have a basic awareness on what GDPR represents and what this means going forward. The GDPR is a regulation implemented by the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission and is intended to unify and strengthen data protection for all individuals operating within Europe.

These regulations are set to come into force across Europe on the 25^th May 2018. It is advised that employers use the time before this date reviewing their current documentation and practices to determine how they are currently processing data and confirm whether this is in line with GDPR or not.

It is crucial that employers get this right as the consequences of non-compliance can be potentially devastating for a business, with the maximum fine being 20million or 4% of annual turnover. It has been reported that Uber would have been fined 17.5million for its recent data protection breach.

(2) Tribunal claims set to increase

Following the abolishment of tribunal fees in July 2017, there has been strong evidence produced suggesting that the number of single claims issued in the UK has increased significantly. Whilst this change in legislation was an unbelievable victory for Unison and employees throughout the UK, going forward, employers will now need to be extra cautious to avoid any risks of being served with an Employment Tribunal complaint.

(3) Employment Status

The controversary surrounding employment status and companies like Uber and Pimlico Plumbers have continuously dominated the employment law headlines in 2017.

Status will continue as a major issue in 2018. Uber have applied to hear their case heard in the Supreme Court and following the decision made in the Pimlico Plumbers case, that a plumber was in fact a worker under legislation, has been appealed and is scheduled to be heard in the Supreme Court in February.

The Government was expected to respond to the recommendations set out by Matthew Taylor in the Review of Modern Employment Practices by the end of 2017. However, it was reported at the beginning of December that this would be pushed back due to other Government priorities. Therefore, employers will have to sit tight and wait on confirmation of employment status in 2018.

(4) Sleep in shifts

The case of Esparon v Slavikovska established where there are minimum staffing level requirements that require workers to be on site, they should be paid national minimum wage.

This area of law is predicted to continue as an area of concern for care sector employers in 2018. Employers should consider whether staff are paid in lump sums for overnight shifts or whether their shift is likely to amount to “working time.”

The Government publicly warned that many care sector workers should have been paid at least the national minimum wage for the hours they were sleeping on an overnight shift. It has since been submitted that many of them will be able to claim up to 6 years back-pay.

On recognising the uncertainty around this area, the Government introduced the Social Care Compliance Scheme. This allows employers to voluntary sign up and review their sleep-in payments and reimburse any underpayments to avoid any further action.

How can Employment Law Services (ELS) help?

Please note, the information in this article is for guidance purposes only and it is therefore advised that employers seek legal advice before embarking on any enforcement action.

World Mental Health Day 2017 – Mental health in the workplace

Posted on 10 October 201712 June 2023 by @deliver_els

What is mental health?

ACAS define mental health as: “The mental and emotional state in which we feel able to cope with normal stresses of everyday life.”

When an individual feels good about themselves they often work more productively, communicate better with colleagues and make a valuable contribution within the workplace.

It is important to note that mental health can vary from feeling ‘a bit down’ to common illnesses such as anxiety and depression to more severe cases such as bipolar disorder and schizophrenia.

It has been reported that mental health problems cost the average UK employer roughly £30bn annually. This is due to lack of production, recruitment issues and absence.

“Although understanding of mental health issues is growing, misconceptions still remain – especially in the workplace. Once thought of as something that happened to an unfortunate few, one in four people are now affected by mental health issues, and employers need to be able to spot the signs. If not, problems may only come to light later on when more serious interventions are necessary.” Joy Reymond, Head of Vocational Rehabilitation Services, Unum.

Therefore, it is encouraged that employers promote good mental health and provide support for employees who are suffering from mental health issues such as anxiety and depression.

This blog focuses on the practical, but less obvious steps that employers should take in order to make a more positive difference to the lives of their employees who may be suffering from mental health issues in the workplace

Recognise that all employees have mental health

It is important that employers identify that all employees have mental health, in the same way an individual has their physical health. Both can deteriorate from good to bad depending on circumstances that may be going on in and out of the working environment.

Keep in contact with employees who are off with a mental health issue

It is crucial that employers find the right balance when keeping in touch with an employee who is off sick. Further, employers should be aware that the longer an employee is off with a mental health issue, the less likely they are to return to work. This is because they will begin to loose confidence and feel kept in the dark from the business.

In addition, employers should help their employees with access to medical services. By helping the employee take medical action as early as possible will see the employee return to work sooner than later.

Culture

Employers should develop a mental health policy, by doing this employee’s will be reassured that the business cares for their wellbeing. In addition, such policies will create an overall awareness in the workplace and encourage individuals to talk about mental health.

Communication

Employers should use staff newsletters, posters and other internal communications to promote mental health awareness. As well as this, introducing discussions into staff meetings can be used as an opportunity to check in with how employees are feeling.

Ensure all managers are properly trained

By training up managers, employees will be reassured that their management team is educated in mental health matters, meaning they will feel more inclined to come forward and discuss any problems they may be having in and out of the working environment.

Zero tolerance to bullying policies

All employers should ensure there is a zero-tolerance approach taken to bullying in the workplace. It should be communicated in these policies that those found guilty of such conduct will be subject to disciplinary action.

Employment Law Support for Employers

Most of the time absence is genuine. At Employment Law Services (ELS) our employment law team help our clients form effective people management policies, give advice on the cause of absence and provide them with guidance on how to monitor long-term illness, return to work, sick pay and fit notes.

If you require employment law advice on any of the issues raised in this article, or any other employment issue give us a call today on 0370 218 5662.

Please note, this article has not to be taken as legal advice. The author strongly advises the reader to take the correct legal advice before embarking on any enforcement action.

European Human Rights Court limits employers’ right to monitor employee emails

Posted on 6 October 20178 June 2023 by @deliver_els

Last month, Europe’s Human Rights Court established that employers can monitor employees’ emails but only if they notify the employee in advance. This represents the rapid evolving area of legislation at the crossing of technology, privacy and workers’ rights.

The judgement in the case of Barbulescu’s v Romania concluded that the authorities had not sufficiently protected Barbulescu’s right to a private life and correspondence. It was further established that the national courts had failed to identify whether the employee had been given prior notice from his employer that his workplace communications were being observed.

In this case, the employees’ communications involved messages he had sent to his brother and fiancé disclosing private matters, some of which were of an intimate nature.

Following this, the employee had his employment terminated on the grounds that he had breached the company’s internal regulations that prohibited the use of company equipment for personal purposes.

The courts in this case submitted, although it was debatable whether the employee could have had a reasonable expectation of privacy in view of his employer’s restrictive regulations on internet use, and although he had been informed, the employers instruction could not reduce private social life in the workplace to zero.

The decision made in this case does not mean that employers are prevented or restricted when it comes to monitoring emails, but they should be taking into consideration some other important aspects before doing so.

(1) Have a legitimate reason to monitor employees’ emails in the first instance

Legitimate reasons include; The need to detect any criminal activity, to identify if an employee is using workplace systems for the wrong reason, making sure that employees are working to the expected standards and following company procedures, investigating claims of misconduct and finally, if there is a need to identify misuse of confidential information.

Employers must have a fair, proportionate and legitimate reason to investigate employee communications. It is crucial that employers find the correct balance between their needs and their employees right to a private life.

(2) Ensure that there are clear workplace policies in place

In the event that you decide to monitor the use of electronic platforms in the workplace, it is important that all employees are made aware of the nature and the context of the monitoring. Further, it is recommended that employers insert such provisions into the employees’ contract of employment or employee handbooks. Within these the instructions, it should be made clear what the employee can and cannot do and the consequences of any violation within these policies.

(3) Ensure your employees are well informed in advance

Should an employer find that an employee’s communication use needs to be monitored, it is crucial that they employee is made aware that this is going to occur. As well as this, the employee should be notified of how this will be conducted and what aspects of communication are under investigation.

(4) If you do not already, have a monitoring policy in place

If an employer does not already have these in place, or it is not detailed in employee’s phones, emails and internet use, then these should be incorporated and communicated to all employees. Having these signed documents is crucial in the event that an employer should wish to enforce a monitoring policy.

(5) Is there a less intrusive method available?

In the first instance, it may be more productive to ask the employee first if they are using workplace emails for private use, instead of assuming and accessing their email immediately. If the employee owns up and admits they have been using emails for personal use there will be no need to monitor further. Monitoring should only be carried out if the employee denies such a claim.

Employers should note that UK case law states that the monitoring of employee calls, emails and internet use is a breach of privacy. This latest judgement by the European Human Rights Court reiterates the seriousness for UK employers to find the correct balance prior to carrying out any investigations of employees.

Employment Law Support for Employers

Where are employers going wrong when managing annual leave?

Posted on 28 September 201712 June 2023 by @deliver_els

In light of the recent controversy that has surrounded Ryanair in regard to management of annual leave, Personnel Today have published 5 common employer pitfalls. At Employment Law Services (ELS) we have summarised these to help our existing and non-existing clients avoid being caught out.

(1) Not encouraging employees to spread annual leave out over the working year

It can become problematic for employers who allow their staff to build up too much annual leave.

This could arise in the event of excess work to complete or a business finds they are struggling due to the economic climate. Because of this, employees may be hesitant to take annual leave as they believe they are not in a position to do so at certain times of the year without putting their job at risk.

It is suggested that employers encourage their employees to plan and take time off, by doing this it helps to preserve employee health, wellbeing and motivation. Further, this helps prevent the workforce from sitting on excessive amounts of leave to take at the end of the year.

(2) Offering an employee a cash substitute for their holidays

Often an employer may be tempted to offer their employee with a cash alternative in return for them giving up their annual leave entitlement. This has been seen when organisations are having a staffing crisis, have a heavy work load or require a big project to be completed on time.

It is important that employers remember the key principle of annual leave legislation – employers cannot offer employees payment in lieu of their statutory minimum annual leave entitlement.

(3) Allowing employees to carry over excessive amounts of annual leave

European law restricts employers from carrying over the first 4 weeks of an employee’s statutory annual leave, except in the situation where an employee has not been able to take their holiday entitlement due to sickness. If they are not taken, they are lost.

After the first four weeks of statutory annual leave, employers have more scope to allow employees to carry forward any holidays left at the end of the year.

It is important that employers/managers confirm this through the employee’s contract of employment when clarifying whether this will be allowed or not and what rules have already been set.

(4) Authorising too many employees holiday requests at the one time

This is generally seen during summer time and Christmas time. Managers are often discouraged to turn down an employee’s holiday request if they have already planned the trip.

However, it is important that employers/managers remember they are not legally obliged to accept these requests, unless the contract of employment states otherwise.

At Employment Law Services (ELS), we equip our clients with clear policies on holiday requests and encourage employers/managers to decline requests if the timing would result in the business struggling.

(5) Not paying the employee the correct rates during annual leave

Recently, according to Personnel Today, “the single biggest employment law headache for UK employers has been revolved around the calculation of holiday pay.”

It is important to note, that it is no longer admissible to calculate holiday rates on the basis of an individual’s basic rate only.

Employers now need to consider over time, commission, stand by and travel allowances.

How can Employment Law Services (ELS) help?

Ensure your HR policies are updated to comply fully with current UK employment law. This is critical in protecting your business from employment Tribunal claims because they provide the framework to help employers to treat their staff fairly and consistently within the parameter of current UK employment law.

Formalising arrangements in certain areas of people management and development not only makes good business sense, it also ensure everyone is treated fairly and consistently which will help protect your business by significantly reducing the risks and costs associated with disgruntled staff filing Industrial Tribunal claims.

What to do if your employee resigns and doesnt work notice

Posted on 21 September 201724 July 2024 by @deliver_els

What action can you take when an employee resigns but does not work their required notice period?

In the first instance, employees are generally under a contractual duty to give their employer a minimum notice of resignation. This duty is waived if the employer has fundamentally breached the contract of employment or has agreed to remove the notice period.

Of course, if the employee does not show up to work during their notice period the employer does not have to pay them. However, the business may then be at a loss in the event that the employer then has additional costs to pay should he bring in an agency worker to cover the role.

At Employment Law Services (ELS) we believe prevention is key!

Preventing the situation from occurring in the first place is always better than the cure. It is recommended that employers insert contractual rights which will discourage the employee from not working their notice period whilst providing the employer with an effective remedy if they do.

An example of this is a contractual clause that permits the company to deduct from the employee’s final wage. This is usually an amount equal to what the employee would have earned throughout the period of notice they failed to work. E.G. If they did not work one week then the employer could deduct one week’s pay off their final wage.

Breach of contract

It is crucial that employers insert these provisions into the contract of employment prior to the employee handing in their notice.

Should you fail to do this, then deduct from the employee’s final wage anyway, this action will amount to an unlawful deduction of wages. For which the employee can then raise a claim in the Employment Tribunal, this will then further prevent you from recovering any losses occurred using another legal remedy.

It can become time consuming and costly when attempting to prove damages to the business and will essentially depend on the nature of the organisation and the role of the employee. Because of this, employers often fail to pursue further action.

Thus, it is extremely important that your contracts of employment are kept up to date in order to protect yourself and the business from unnecessary damages.

How can Employment Law Services (ELS) help protect your business?

For Employers that already have contracts of employment in place, we can review all existing documents and update them as required and for Employers that have nothing in place, we can produce effective contracts of employment for all staff members from scratch.

Whatever your requirements are, Employment Law Services (ELS) can help! Either as a ‘one-off’ exercise or as part of one of our HR Service packages, EmployEasily will ensure your statutory obligations are met and that your business prevents problems and remains protected.

At Employment Law Services (ELS), our team understand that the needs of employers differ depending on the nature of the role that they are looking to fill. We also appreciate that some employers may already have some form of contract with employees, but may be concerned that the contract does not accurately reflect the nature of the relationship or is riddled with ambiguities. It is these issues which often cause difficulties to employers in attempting to deal with employees when difficulties can and do arise. We take pride in offering a service that aims to address these concerns of employers.

Employment Law Support for Employers