Employment Law Archives | Page 6 of 6 | Employment Law Services (ELS) LTD

Gender Inequality in workplace dress codes

Posted on 4 August 20178 June 2023 by @deliver_els

Dress requirements in the workplace that consist of high heels and target young women in “insecure jobs” who already feel vulnerable in the workplace have been suggested as “damaging their health and wellbeing in both the long and short term”, a report concluded by Parliament earlier this year.

In reality, who knew that wearing high stilettos would be a job requirement of a receptionist at a leading City organisation?

A joint report published in January 2017 by the Women and Equalities and Pension Committees – ‘High heels and workplace dress codes’ – notes evidence that employees across the UK are being asked to wear stilettos, dye their hair and apply more make- up from their employers.

Footwear for women has slowly become something of an equality battlefield. There are many employers who enforce dress and appearance requirements on their employees. Generally, the purpose of this is to reflect the business image and reputation. Having dress codes can be justified under legislation, however, employers must be careful in their approach in the event that their working conditions may result in discrimination. In addition, it is important that employers are aware discrimination is not just on the grounds of sex, it can also come in the form of any of the other protected characteristics of the Equality Act 2010, which include – religion, disability and gender reassignment.

In 2016, it was reported that Nicola Thorpe, a 27-year-old female, who was employed by a top City firm in London was asked to go home after refusing to wear high heels to work. This story has been subject to criticism – is this principle legal, fair or healthy?

She reported to the BBC that she was “laughed at” when she told her employers that she did not wish to wear high heels on her first day as a corporate receptionist.

In September 2016, a survey published by Slater and Gordon discovered that 7% of women claimed their employers insisted they wore heeled shoes in the office and when with a client as it made them “more appealing”, 8% were asked to wear more make-up so that they “looked prettier”, Nearly 1/3 of those who participated in the survey admitted they had been asked to change their appearance as it would be “better for business”, 13% declared they made the choice to show more flesh in the office following advice from senior employees to ‘jazz up’ their appearance.

Following Nicola Thorpe’s experience, she set up a petition demanding from the Government that “women should have the option to wear flat formal shoes at work.” The petition stated that current legislation is “outdated and sexist.” Her petition saw 152,420 signatures and as a result of this, was debated in Parliament earlier this year.

In response to the petition, the Government stated that they were “taking action to remove the barriers to equality for women at work, which is why we are tackling gender pay gap, increasing the number of women on boards, increasing support for childcare costs and ensuring employers are aware of their obligations to pregnant women.”

“Employers are entitled to set dress codes for their workforce but the law is clear that these dress codes must be reasonable. That includes any differences between the nature of rules for male and female employees, otherwise the company may be breaking the law. Employers should not be discriminating against women in what they require them to wear.”

Going forward, employers should carefully consider their current dress code and is this necessary? Where a dress code is a requirement, you should ensure all employees religion and disability beliefs are taken into account and the code is not sanctioned to suit one sex and not the other.

Should an employee request that you are more flexible with dress codes in the workplace, you should consider both viewpoints – yours and theirs – before refusing them this request. If the business objection can be met whilst allowing this exception, you may find yourself liable for discrimination should you refuse it.

How can we help?

Employment Law Services (ELS) LTD will ensure you are well informed of updates as they come in. In the meantime, employers concerned about any of the issues raised in this article, can take advantage of our Employment Law Services (ELS) free consultation service – call us today to arrange your free consultation – 0800 612 4772.

“I lost a darts tournament last night and I am too traumatised to come in to work today”

Posted on 17 July 20179 June 2023 by @deliver_els

“I lost a darts tournament last night and I am too traumatised to come in to work today” – One of the most bizarre excuses for calling in sick to work found by survey published by CV-Library.

A recent survey published by jobs website CV-Library has identified that over the last year, around 80% of workers in the UK have called in sick, with women more likely to feel guilty than men when “pulling a sickie”.

In addition, the survey established that over half of workers who participated felt guilty for phoning in sick, because of the stress they then left on co-workers who had to pick up their work.

Some of the most ludicrous excuses range from; “There are cows in my garden so I cannot get to work”, “I lost a darts tournament last night and I am too traumatised to come in to work today”, “I have blisters from wearing new shoes on Saturday night.”

Other excuses included, “I left my work uniform on the bus”, “My hamster is sick and has to go to the vet”, “My boyfriend changed his relationship status on Facebook to single”, “I’m having a BBQ at the weekend and need time to prepare for it.”

The CV-Library identified that the main reason employees called in sick was due to tiredness and lack of sleep. 65% of 55-64 year olds who participated in the survey admitted that they occasionally did not go in to work due to lack of energy.

15% of participants said that they did not go into work because they could not be bothered and 13% had “other plans”.

It was further identified, that generally managers were reasonably tolerant and 86% stated that their line manager was understanding when they had to take a sick day.

Lee Biggins, who is the founding director of CV-Library was reported to state: “Honesty was very important in the workplace as trust from an employer is always vital.”

“While it’s all too easy to come up with an excuse for not turning up to work, it’s important to think about the bigger picture and wider implications of your absence.”

“In today’s working world, it is clear professionals are still taking unnecessary sick days, giving a whole host of excuses for not turning up to work. But while it might seem like a good idea at the time, many workers are feeling the guilt, recognising that their decisions have a wider impact on their team and work load.”

How employers can minimise absence and lateness

As well as conducting a return to work interview, employers can also address workplace issues in order to minimise absence. ACAS recommend that employers and line managers assess the quality of management, working relationships, job design, employment relations, communication of information and flexible working arrangements.

Further, employers should make their employees aware that all unauthorised absences will be noted and investigated. By doing this, employees will be less inclined to take random sick days without cause.

Employment Law Support for Employers

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.

What do employers need to know about the Taylor Review?

Posted on 14 July 201712 June 2023 by @deliver_els

What do employers need to know about the Taylor Review?

“The Taylor Review: What employers need to know” was published first by Personnel Today.

What is the Taylor Review?

Matthew Taylor, who is the former advisor to Tony Blair, has conducted a review with the aim of setting out recommendations in hope of improving the employment market in the UK.

The highly anticipated review “Good Work: The Taylor Review of Modern Working Practices” was launched in 2016 and published on the 11^th July 2017. The fundamental purpose of this publication is to achieve a deeper understanding of how labour market practices function across various industries and sectors, determine what impact technology and the expansion of ‘gig economy’ workers are having on working practices and assess the impact that these developments have within the current framework of employment legislation in the UK.

On launching the review, Taylor said: “Our national performance on the quantity of work is strong. But quantity alone is not enough for a thriving economy and fair society. We believe now is the time to complement that commitment to creating jobs with the goal of creating better jobs.”

“Despite the impact of the national living wage and tax credits, there will always be people who are in work but finding it hard to make ends meet. Our social contract with those people should include dignity at work and the realistic scope to progress in the labour market.”

Despite this, the review has been slammed by trade unions and employment law specialists. France O’Grady, General Secretary for the Trade Union Congress said: “I worry that many gig economy employers will be breathing a sigh of relief this morning.

“From what we’ve seen, this review is not the game-changer needed to end insecurity and exploitation at work.

“We’d welcome any nuggets of good news, but it doesn’t look like the report will shift the balance of power in the modern workplace.”

The review pushes for a “significant shift in the quality of work in the UK economy” and makes several suggestions on how employment law can support this.

Key Principles of the Good Work Review

(1) The UK ought to aim for “good work for all” this means an equal balance of rights and responsibilities between the employer and individual. With protections in place for all individuals;

(2) Two-way flexibility which is to give workers further protections whilst safeguarding fairness for those working in platforms;

(3) Legislation should be implemented to make it easier for employers when making the right choices, whilst ensuring individuals have help and guidance when it comes to exercising their rights;

(4) The most efficient way to obtain a better work force is through responsible corporate governance, good management and strong employee relations;

(5) Every individual should be given attainable methods in order to help develop and strengthen their work prospects;

(6) Employers should promote a proactive approach to workplace health;

(7) All individuals should not be trapped at the minimum living wage resulting in financial insecurity.

Tim Roache, GMB general secretary, states: “The recommendations show some laudable aims on the surface – and of course any progress in basic employment rights is welcome – but as a whole it’s a disappointing missed opportunity.

“Everyone can pay lip service to wanting good quality, well-paid work but employers could offer that right here and now – they simply choose not to. They won’t decide to do so just because they’re asked nicely.”

What impact is the Taylor Review likely to have on employment?

The review is clear in its approach, focusing heavily on the ‘Gig Economy’ and its recommendations on how the law ought to be changed to accommodate this. Additionally, it is evident that by changing the law on employment status and implementing protections for casual workers and those employed on zero hour contracts, if enforced, would have a significant impact on the employment market in the UK.

However, it is important to note that this review is simply recommendations and is yet to be a policy document adopted by the Government.

Theresa May was reported to state that she will commit to taking “this agenda forward in the months ahead” and has been seen to invite all parties to “engage with difficult issues” highlighted in the review.

At present, the Government has yet to act on these recommendations therefore organisations do not need to take any immediate action. However, it may be useful to start considering potential developments and plan appropriately.

How Employment Law Services (ELS) Can Help Employers

Employers concerned about any of the issues raised in this article can take advantage of Employment Law Services (ELS) free consultation service – call us today to arrange your free consultation – 0800 612 4772.

Scottish Labour Party has called for a maximum of 48 hours in a working week!

Posted on 12 July 201712 June 2023 by @deliver_els

Scottish Labour Party have called for a maximum of 48 hours in a working week – Is this good or bad?

As part of Scottish Labours new Industrial Strategy, Kezia Dugdale has sought support for a complete ban on employees engaging in more than 48 hours in one working week.

The Scottish Conservative Party have responded to this arguing that no one has the right to “dictate” how many hours individuals should work.

Within the proposals, the Scottish Labour Party argue that powers over employment and health and safety legislation following Brexit could be used to overturn the UK’s opt out of the Working Time Directive which is EU derived and limits the working week to 48 hours.

They have suggested that these proposals will boost productivity in the workplace and that NHS workers will gain the most benefits from it.

In reference to the 250,000 Scottish workers who currently work more than 48 hours a week, the proposals state: “Too many people experience long working hours, job monotony, management by stress and over work.”

Kezia Dugdale who is the leader of the Scottish Labour Party adds further that the Government ought to “consider ending current opt-outs which fail to deliver on our ambition for an inclusive economy.”

The proposals made by Scottish Labour have been slammed and criticized that in the event that working hours are slashed, those who are on low paid wages and who work under a self-employed status will be hit the hardest.

Dean Lockhart, who is the Shadow Secretary for the Scottish Conservatives states “no-one should be forced to work those kinds of hours if they don’t want to or simply can’t.”

“However, many people – particularly those running their own business – do want to, and will be appalled at the idea of Labour trying to tell them what to do.”

“In addition, others may need the cash working those hours bring, for a variety of reasons. Labour simply do not have the right to dictate to those people what hours they should and shouldn’t be working. These restrictions have been tried elsewhere and they’ve should to damage the economy.”

The Working Time Directive

As it stands, the Working Time Directive/ Working Time Regulations ensures that employees cannot be made to work more than 48 hours a week on average.

In addition, the Working Time Directive regulates patterns of work and holidays as well as rest periods on a daily/weekly basis.

Further, the Working Time Directive ensures the health and working hours of shift workers is covered within the regulations.

For general workers, the Working Time Directive administers the right to:

– A limit of 48 hours a week on average

– Paid holidays of 5.6 weeks annually

– In any 24-hour period, a worker must be given a rest break of at least 11 hours

– 20-minute break if the employee is working more than six hours in one day

Exceptions to the rule

There are some exceptions to this rule. The law states that you may have to work more than 48 hours on average a week if you work in a job:

– Where 24-hour staffing is required

– In the armed forces, emergency services or police

– In security or surveillance

– As a domestic servant in a private household

– Where working time is not measured and you are in control, E.G. Managing Directors with control over decisions. (Sourced from Direct Gov)

Opt-Out

Individuals do have the opportunity to work more than 48 hours a week, this is otherwise known as ‘opting out’.

An employer may request from an employee that they choose to opt out, however, they cannot terminate their employment or treat them unfairly should the employee refuse.

If the employee does not belong to one of the groups of workers who are prohibited from opting out, they may make the decision to exclude themselves from the Working Time Regulations. For example, they are required to work on a major project that depends on them working overtime to meet the deadline, they can choose to opt-out for this period of time.

Who can’t opt-out?

– Anyone under 18 years old

– Anyone who is responsible for operating ships or boats, airlines and heavy load vehicles

How Employment Law Services (ELS) Can Help Employers

Employers concerned about their legal obligations and general compliance with UK employment law can take advantage of Employment Law Services (ELS) free consultation – contact us today to arrange your free consultation.

“Some Self-Employed workers should be covered by the National Minimum Wage” – Resolution Foundation Report

Posted on 7 July 201712 June 2023 by @deliver_els

Resolution Foundation Report

The Resolution Foundation has published a report arguing for a better pay deal for those working in the Gig-Economy.

The report argues that the Government ought to extend minimum wage legislation to cover the self-employed workforce in order to tackle low pay and insecurity in the UK.

As part of their submission to Taylor’s Review of Modern Practices, the Resolution Foundation have suggested “the minimum required”. The proposal suggests that a number of recommendations to end endemic levels of pay among self-employed.

The report identifies that 21% (1 in 5) employees are low paid, in 2016 49% of those who are self-employed fell below the UK’s typical weekly earnings, making less than £310 a week.

The Government have pledged to introduce the National Living Wage in the next few years in hope that it will reduce low pay among employees. It has been suggested that those who work under a self-employed status will miss out in this event because they will not be entitled to it.

However, the Resolution Foundation has cautioned that if low pay rules are not changed organisations might start employing individuals on self-employed contracts as a way of dodging having to pay the legal minimum wage.

The Data Analyser for Resolution Foundations was reported to state: “The number of people who are self-employed has increased decently over the last 10 years, we used to ask if these people were self-employed because they couldn’t find other employment or if it was by choice. Now the conversation has moved on. We need to ask if this rise in self-employment is a good thing and what we can do to help them in their long-term interests.

Jason Moyer – Lee who is the General Secretary of the independent workers in Great Britain argued that unless legislation is enforced by the Government it is useless.

“Most people in the gig economy, in my experience have been bogusly categorised as independent contractors.” The law, as it currently stands, is in favour of these workers, but employers face no consequence what so ever if they ignore it.” He said.

He recommends that the Government ought to fine employers who disobey the law and that tribunal fees should be abolished. Stating further: “It’s nearly impossible for workers to access a tribunal and there is no Government enforcement, it is no surprised that gig-economy businesses are blatantly disregarding the law.”

How Employment Law Services (ELS) Can Help Employers

How can you protect your business against reputational damage?

Posted on 5 July 20178 June 2023 by @deliver_els

How employers can prevent reputational damage

It is important that employers protect their organisations reputation, Personnel Today have listed six ways in which employers can reduce the risk and ensure that damage is kept to a minimum.

(1) Put in place a firm Social Media policy

Employers should ensure they have a robust social media policy that applies clear rules on the use of social media. E.G. Remind employees that they should not assume opinions and remarks made on social media platforms are private. Your workplace policy should set out clear procedures of disciplinary action that may be taken if rules are broken.

The case of Plant v API Microelectronics LTD notes the importance of being cautious when making comments regarding your place of work on social media platforms.

In this instance, the employer implemented a social media policy reminding employees on what they considered as acceptable content on social media. On doing so, the organisation provided all employees with a list of things that they should not be doing, in the event that it may damage the company’s reputation.

Ms Plant, who had served 17 years at the organisation with a spotless disciplinary record made the mistake of posting a comment on Facebook about her employers that stated: “PMSL (piss myself laughing) bloody place, I need to hurry up and sue them PMSL.”

Following this comment, the employee was invited to attend a disciplinary meeting to discuss her actions. The employees defence was that she did not think her Facebook was linked to the company in any form and that the comments made were not aimed at her employers. There was no further explanation given.

Her employers argued that because of their strict social media policy that they had implemented and the nature of the comment, the employee should be dismissed. Ms Plant was given the chance to appeal this decision.

On appeal, the Employment Tribunal found that: “It may be seen as harsh, but the company taking into account Ms Plant’s long service and clear record nevertheless was dismissed for a clear breach of the policy and that would fall within the range of a reasonable response open to an employer.”

(2) Address inappropriate comments made on Social Media

In the event that an employee has posted an inappropriate comment on social media that involves the organisation, you should gather enough evidence and take the correct steps to delete the material quickly. This may involve asking the employee to do so. Depending on the content, disciplinary action may be required.

(3) Have your managers properly trained in the correct recruitment practices

It is crucial that managers manage recruitment processes in a professional manner. Even more so when updating an unsuccessful applicant.

A recent case of “recruitment mishaps” saw an unsuccessful job applicant who tweeted a screenshot of a text that they had received informing them of why she had not been chosen for the role, the text message was sarcastic and at the end of the text the manager had used a cry-laughing emoji.

Another example concerned an email that had been accidently sent to the applicant calling her a “left wing loon tree hugger.”

(4) Ensure your staff are aware of behaviour that will be expected out of the workplace

Inappropriate behaviour outside of work can have a severe impact on an organisations public image. It is the line managers duty to pre-warn employees what will be viewed as acceptable and unacceptable behaviour in the workplace or at a public event.

If your employee has committed a criminal offence out of the workplace, the employer should consider dismissal in the event that continued employment would see damage on the company’s reputation.

(5) Prepare for gender pay gap reporting

Large organisations that do not publish gender pay gap figures by April 2018 run the risk of negative publicity. You can start preparing for gender pay gap reporting now. This can be done by putting figures into context and producing a narrative commentary.

(6) Consider the organisations reputation before pursuing Employment Tribunal claims

In February 2017, Employment Tribunal decisions were made available online and as a result of this, it may put the business at risk of negative media interests. Further, it may put potential job applicants off working for your organisation.

Thus, you should take reputational damage into consideration when deciding to defend an Employment Tribunal case.

How Can You Avoid Getting Caught Out?

If you are unsure about how these changes to employment law might affect your business, or simply want to check your company’s compliance generally, Contact Us and we will undertake full review of your current arrangements and provide you with our findings and recommendations.

Training and Study at work

Posted on 3 July 201712 June 2023 by @deliver_els

“GMB Officer Wins Employment Tribunal on Union Safety Role” – TUC

A GMB officer who as refused safety training has been awarded compensation and the legal battle against his employer. The Employment Tribunal in Central London has ruled in favour of the claimant against London Borough of Camden on the grounds that an employee should be entitled to the right to time off for training under the Trade Union and Labour Relations Act (TULRA) 1992.

The claimant was a health and safety branch officer for the GMB, the TULRA provides that the claimant qualified for the right to time off for training, this was to allow him to carry out his functions.

The employee was then awarded £2,500 in damages and tribunal fees incurred.

Helen Purcell who is the GMB London Organiser stated: GMB are over the moon about the tribunal’s decision. Grant’s dogged determination throughout this whole process is to be commended. It is disappointing that Camden Council sought to block our representative and defended the claim at tribunal.”

“Grant is delighted with the outcome and has maintained throughout that it is the declaration that is important to him. We hope that we can now move forward in a positive way to improve industrial relations and our representatives can go about their business without obstruction.”

Who can ask for time off to complete training

To have the right to ask for time off:

-The individual must be classed as an employee

-They must have worked for you for at least 26 weeks continuously

-The training that they requested must help them to carry out their job role better

-There must be at least 250 people already working for the organisation

Time off will usually be unpaid unless the employer agrees to pay it.

Who can’t ask for time off

-An agency worker

-An individual employed in the armed forces

-An employee of compulsory school age

-A young individual who already has the right to take time off for studying/training

-Anyone aged between 16 and 18 who is expected to take part in education or training

Employers Should:

-Respond to the request within 28 days

-Hold a meeting with the individual to discuss the matters

Direct Gov state that an employer can only turn down the request if:

-The training wouldn’t benefit their business

-They would run up extra costs for the business

-They wouldn’t be able to meet customer demands

-They can’t re-organise the work among other members of staff

-They can’t recruit extra staff

-It would damage quality and business performance

-There wouldn’t be enough work for the employee to do at the times they intend to work

-It conflicts with planned structural changes

How Can Employment Law Services (ELS) Help?

Failure to comply with the law, even unintentionally, can leave your business vulnerable to costly Employment Tribunal claims. Seeking Employment Law Advice from qualified employment law practitioners can help you ensure you safely manage issues in arguably one of the most complex areas for any business to get to grips with. Employers concerned about how these regulations might impact them can take advantage of Employment Law Services (ELS) free consultation service – Contact us today to arrange your free consultation.

Fire Risks in the Workplace

Posted on 28 June 20178 June 2023 by @deliver_els

Fire Risks in the Workplace

Following the fire that tragically destroyed Grenfell Tower in West London on June 14^th, it is important that employers are made aware of their legal obligations when carrying out fire risk assessments and what procedures they should follow in relation to this.

Legal Duties

The Fire (Scotland) Act 2005 and the Fire (Scotland) Regulations 2006 have replaced most workplace fire regulations. Under this legislation, those who are responsible for fire safety in the workplace include:

-The employer;

-The owner;

-The landlord;

-The occupier; and

-Anyone else with control of these premises

What do you have to do?

Employers are legally obliged to carry out fire risk assessments and keep these documents up to date, this is similar to a health and safety assessment.

Depending on the findings of this assessment, an employer will have to ensure that the appropriate measures are then put in place to minimise any risks. You must then take action to control these risks and consider how you will protect people in the event of a fire.

If you are responsible, you should take steps to prevent the impact a fire may have to the work environment. It is your responsibility to prepare and maintain any fire safety measures which will be required in order to safeguard anyone in the workplace – this includes visitors!

Additionally:

-When safeguarding employees, employers must appoint individuals to specific roles that may be required in an emergency plan;

-Employers should consult their employees of who has been nominated to carry out any role in connection with the fire and safety proposals;

-On carrying out fire and safety risk assessments, employers should inform anyone else that shares the building of any significant risks found;

-If you do not employ anyone else, yet, in control of a premise, you are legally obliged to ensure fire legislation is complied with in any area that you have control over;

-Employers should establish a sufficient means of reaching the emergency services and arrange that they can be easily reached;

-In some buildings, there may be a requirement of a licence before the business can operate, your local authority can inform you of this

The Equality Act 2010

When carrying out a fire risk assessment, the first aspect to be identified is, those who are at risk. Employers should assess those who are most vulnerable, E.G. children and those with a disability.

The Equality Act 2010 provides that those with a disability should not be treated less favourably. An employer should ensure there is arrangements in place to safely evacuate disabled employees/visitors from the building. You may be held liable for discrimination should you fail to implement this into your evacuation plan. It is important to note in this instance; the definition of a disability is not just restricted to physical disabilities.

Other measures to safeguard those that have a disability under the Equality Act 2010 include, providing clear, concise instructions and maps with diagrams that set out how disabled employees can get to a place of safety.

Additional information on fire safety

You can find a comprehensive guide to fire and safety by visiting the Scottish Government website through this link https://www.gov.scot/Topics/Justice/policies/police-fire-rescue/fire/FireLaw

Employers concerned about how these new regulations might impact them can take advantage of Employment Law Services (ELS) free consultation service – Contact us today to arrange your free consultation.

New Research Produced by the CIPD establishes the need for a flexible, affordable, and straightforward immigration system

Posted on 26 June 20179 June 2023 by @deliver_els

CIPD: As Brexit negotiations commence, business owners sound the alarm over immigration crisis

Recent research published by the CIPD has highlighted the demand for a direct, flexible and cost-efficient immigration system following Brexit.

The research produced by the CIPD displayed:

-UK employers struggled to fill low or semi-skilled jobs with UK born citizens and therefore had no option but to recruit EU nationals

-25% of employers believed that a requirement for a job offer for an EU migrant would see a negative effect on the business

-11% of business owners claim they have recruited less EU nationals since Brexit

It has been suggested that the end of free movement in the UK will cause havoc to UK businesses and public sectors, unless post Brexit Immigration Policies consider the need in the UK for not just high skilled workers but, low skilled labour workers from the EU as well. The CIPD have been seen to stress this throughout their research.

In addition, the research asks that businesses expand their recruitment and people development strategies to make sure that organisations are attracting and developing UK nationals, further pushing for the Government to make significant changes to the skills policy.

The Future: Tackling Post Brexit Labour Skills and Shortages

The Policy Report investigates the reason behind why UK employers recruit EU nationals. In addition, it reveals issues around the shortage of skills and the scope of UK nationals.

The report also makes an assessment on whether the UK’s decision to leave the EU has had any impact yet on employers in the event of recruitment and retention of EU nationals.

The main purpose of the report is to analyse solutions for the challenges and obstacles that UK employers will face when filling vacancies, in hope of forming a policy that fits all sectors.

“Alongside access to the single market, EU immigration policy is arguably the most important public policy issue facing employers and policy-makers resulting from the UK’s decision to leave the European Union.” – CIPD

The Chief Executive of the CIPD, Peter Cheese states: “Access to skilled and un-skilled labour is a huge concern for employers. If the Government does not provide a straightforward, flexible and affordable immigration system for EU nationals post Brexit, as set out in our recommendations, significant numbers of employers are likely to face real skill shortages which may hold back their growth and performance.”

“With the Brexit negotiations starting this week, there is still little clarity on the immigration system that the UK will adopt after Brexit. An overly blinkered approach focused on simply cutting immigration to tens of thousands and focusing only on high skilled employees could leave employers high and dry, especially those who rely more on EU migrants to fill low-skilled jobs. The Government must therefore consult far more widely about their plans and invite employers to play a key role in shaping the future of UK immigration policy to ensure it works for businesses and the economy.”

“Our research also suggests that while Brexit will encourage some employers to work harder to recruit local candidates and people from under-represented groups in the UK, many employers are already working to build links with schools, provide apprenticeships and invest in training and yet are unable to find the skills and people they need.”

Within the report, the qualitive research identified that many employers struggle to attract satisfactory UK Nationals to fill low paid and low skilled job roles. Additionally, it was found that employers who are classed in the lower paid sectors (retail, hospitality, factory workers and care) had a higher chance of recruiting EU migrants as their expectations were lower for wages and employment conditions.

“Our research adds further weight to evidence that employers don’t recruit EU migrants in preference to British workers, but because they attract too few British applicants. Ideally, many employers would like to recruit more young people but working in a meat factory or a care home is not top of the list for school leavers now, and never has been.” – Heather Rolfe, Associate Research Director of the National Institute of Economic and Social Research.

There has been a substantial amount of criticism in regard to efforts made by employers when attempting to attract a larger range of UK candidates. It has been suggested that this particularly occurs in organizations such as, food manufacturers, hospitality and care, which heavily rely on migrant workers.

The report concludes by urging the new Government to implement a future Immigration Policy that is viewed as, straightforward, flexible and affordable.

How Can We Help?

If you are unsure about how these potential changes to employment law might affect your business, or simply want to check your company’s compliance generally, contact us and we will undertake a full review of your current arrangements and provide you with our findings and recommendations. Call us now for your free consultation – 0800 612 4772

Zero Hour Workers Holiday Pay Implications

Posted on 19 June 201712 June 2023 by @deliver_els

Zero Hour Contracts & Holiday Pay

With the summer holidays on the horizon, it is important that employers are fully aware of workers annual leave entitlements and in particular those who are employed on zero – hour contracts.

Research by the Citizens Advice has recently shown that half of workers on zero-hour contacts wrongly believe that they are not entitled to paid annual leave. This has led to the Citizens Advice calling on the new Government to ensure workers are fully aware of their employment rights and holiday entitlements.

The charity reported further that employers are purposely misleading their employees which has been suggested to exploit employee confusion.

Gillian Guy, who is the Chief Executive of Citizens Advice stated: “Citizens Advice is calling for all employment rights enforcement to be brought into one Fair Work Authority that can tackle employers that break the rules. We also want to see a £50 cap on Employment Tribunal fees, so that people who are unfairly treated aren’t priced out of justice.”

The charity announced that over the last financial year, 185,000 employees sought help from them regarding employment issues. 10,000 cases out of this were connected to holiday pay.

One particular employee that received help from the charity had worked in a care home for over five years, roughly 48 hours a week. His employer had misinformed him by telling him that night workers did not have a right to paid time off. On helping this man, the Citizens Advice calculated that he had missed out on £8,900 worth of holiday pay.

It is important that employers who have workers on zero hour contracts, calculate their holiday pay entitlement on the basis of worked hours. If you have zero hour workers who have not worked any hours, their holiday pay entitlement for that period will be zero.

The law on zero-hour workers and status within an organisation is not straightforward for some employers. However, it has been proved as advantageous when a business requires a pool of staff throughout busy periods.

How can Employment Law Services (ELS) LTD Help?

If you are looking for tailored advice on taking on staff on a casual or zero-hours basis, or would like to ensure the employment contracts you currently have in place are suitable and truly reflect the reality of your employment relationships, our expert team of employment law and HR Specialists are ready to help. We offer employers practical and effective solutions for any HR or employment law matter, aimed at giving you peace of mind so you can focus on running your business.