header-logo header-logo

30 June 2016 / Ian Smith
Issue: 7705 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Employment law brief: 30 June 2016

nlj_7705_specialist_smith

Ian Smith examines cases from a smorgasbord of employment areas

  • Casual workers and their rights (or lack thereof) under the discrimination legislation.
  • Settling a hitherto open point on damages for breach of working time rights.
  • Discrimination statute: discriminatory policies and the perennial question of territorial jurisdiction.
  • Check-off system for the collection of union dues by the employer.

Five cases have been chosen for this month’s brief, from widely different areas. The most first and important concerns casual workers and their rights (or lack thereof) under the discrimination legislation. In it, the Court of Appeal disapproved of a move towards greater protection for such workers that had been proposed in an innovative decision of Judge Clark in the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT). Those advising such clients will want to read it carefully. The good news is that ultimately these are still matters of fact in individual cases, but the bad news is the emphasis against “employee/worker” status if there is lack of mutuality. The second case settles a hitherto

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll