With the AFL Finals fast approaching, the office tips are bound to get a little heated! However, you may want to think twice before taking too big a punt on whether a worker in Australia is an employee or an independent contractor. In the recent appeal case of Tattsbet Limited v Morrow, the Full Court … Continue Reading
Do you ever think that your line managers are making such a hash of a grievance or disciplinary process that it would be easier to do it yourself? Do you watch in horror as they stumble blindly but unerringly towards what is clearly the wrong decision? Are you tempted to give them a nudge in … Continue Reading
In almost every TUPE transfer, whether a business sale or a service provision change (SPC), you come eventually to the chap receiving permanent health insurance benefits. The transferor has no need for him any longer and the transferee has no wish to bump up its own PHI premiums for someone who is seemingly never going … Continue Reading
Just when you think you have mostly got a grip on the scope of UK discrimination law, along comes a whole new avenue of legal debate. Gerry Abrams Limited -v- EAD Solicitors LLP is the first reported case of a claim for direct discrimination by a limited company. In brief, Mr Abrams was a member … Continue Reading
In Newbound –v- Thames Water the Court of Appeal has recently upheld the ruling of the Employment Tribunal that Mr Newbound had been unfairly dismissed for gross misconduct despite his breaching company health and safety rules. The case highlights the difficulties faced by employers trying to enforce compliance with new health and safety procedures, but … Continue Reading
A number of cases this year have highlighted that even though the Australian Fair Work Act 2009 regime is generally a “no costs” jurisdiction (i.e. a win does not ordinarily result in an award of costs in the successful party’s favour), the unreasonable conduct of claims can come at a high price for applicants. Costs … Continue Reading
In a decision issued on June 1 [pdf], the U.S. Supreme Court held that a job applicant alleging disparate treatment by a hiring employer only must show “that his need for an accommodation was a motivating factor in the employer’s decision,” and not that the employer had actual knowledge of the applicant’s need for a … Continue Reading
On May 18, the Supreme Court handed down a decision [pdf] in the case of Tibble v. Edison International, confirming that ERISA fiduciaries have a continuing duty to monitor and make prudent decisions regarding trust investments. Under ERISA, a fiduciary must discharge his or her responsibility with the care, skill, prudence and diligence that a … Continue Reading
A particularly brutal little tale from the Employment Appeal Tribunal this month about what happens when you are sacked for deceiving your employer, bring an Employment Tribunal claim and then lie to the ET too. Mr G (not his real name, for reasons which will follow – his real name is Mr Roden, also for … Continue Reading
This is Mental Health Awareness Week in the UK, so here are two brief and totally unrelated perspectives on mental health issues in the workplace. First, a cautionary note for employers in relation to Employment Tribunal proceedings brought by sufferers of serious mental health issues. In Higgins – v – Home Office decided last week, … Continue Reading
So that turned out to be a lot of fuss about not very much, didn’t it? USDAW – v – Ethel Austin, better known as the Woolworths case, was a challenge by trade union USDAW to the established reading of Section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. This requires collective … Continue Reading
The problem with the Public Interest Disclosure Act was that until amended in 2013, the only place within it where the words “public interest” appeared was in the title. That meant that so long as you could find something you reasonably believed to be the breach of a legal obligation and then complained about it, … Continue Reading
The woman who was called “Crazy Miss Cokehead” by her manager has been awarded nearly £3.2m by an Employment Tribunal for sexual harassment, reportedly including £44,000 for injury to feelings and a further £15,000 in aggravated damages. We originally posted a blog on this story in November 2013 https://www.employmentlawworldview.com/crazy-miss-cokehead-when-banter-goes-too-far/. Following the liability hearing, the Tribunal … Continue Reading
Earlier this spring the Polish Supreme Court decided that a company taking over a business is not bound by the non-competition covenant entered into by the previous employer. Normally you would expect the incoming employer to want the covenant to remain in force. However, to enforce a post-termination non-competition clause in Poland requires the employer … Continue Reading
The long-awaited decision of the Leicester Employment Tribunal in Lock -v- British Gas was issued yesterday. It confirmed, as everyone knew, that holiday pay would have to include an element in respect of commissions, but it also provides for the first time a steer (using the word advisedly, for it is actually no more than … Continue Reading
The explosion in the development of smartphone applications has allowed for all sorts of new businesses to pop up—personal shoppers (Instacart), restaurant delivery (GrubHub) and private chauffeurs (Uber and Lyft). We, as consumers, now have instant access to goods and services we didn’t even know we needed. This new boom has even earned its own … Continue Reading
Taking a stand against jilted ex-lovers, Western Australia has joined the UK and USA to fight the war on ‘revenge porn’. Revenge porn occurs when the (either actually or imminently) ex-partner posts nude or intimate pictures or videos online without consent. In the absence of appropriate laws, perpetrators have often escaped liability. In response, countries … Continue Reading
Some reassuring guidance for employers on the conduct of disciplinary investigations from the Court of Appeal last week – not new law but a clear and helpful analysis of just how far you have to go to investigate an employee’s defence. Mr Shrestha was employed by Genesis Housing Association as a support worker, a role … Continue Reading
Right, that should be enough to scupper UKIP’s chances of bringing the UK out of Europe, so now onto the actual facts. The German Labour Court in Erfurt last week ordered the reinstatement of a garage mechanic dismissed for fondling the cleaner’s breasts. Cut and dried dismissal material, one might think, especially accompanied by his … Continue Reading
On January 20, the United States Supreme Court denied a motion for certiorari filed by CLS Transportation which was appealing the California Supreme Court’s decision in Iskanian v. CLS Transportation, about which we blogged in June. While Iskanian generally vindicated employers’ right to enforce class action bans in arbitration agreements, the California Supreme Court distinguished … Continue Reading
On November 12, 2014, the Ninth Circuit addressed an issue of first impression regarding the pleading specificity required to bring an action for unpaid minimum wages and overtime wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) in Landers v. Quality Communications, Inc. [pdf] This opinion is important because many employers served with FLSA collective actions … Continue Reading
Australian employers have been given a clear warning that damages for sexual harassment are likely to be much higher in future. In October 2013 we wrote about a Ms Richardson who won her sexual harassment claim against her employer and was awarded $18,000 in general damages, being damages for non-economic loss such as pain and … Continue Reading
As we’ve reported here and here, recent decisions from the US Supreme Court, federal appellate courts, and more recently, even the California Supreme Court (see here) have clarified that class and collective action waivers in arbitration agreements, including those that waive employees’ right to bring a claim under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) … Continue Reading
So here is Friday’s teaser – let us suppose that an Employment Tribunal has just decided that you have been sexually harassed by your former boss, that he was fixated by your breasts, habitually stared at them and frequently addressed them while in conversation with you. He has also touched you, uninvited and unreciprocated, on … Continue Reading
