header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
22 February 2007 / Christine Jenner
Issue: 7261 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Past caring?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Flexible working is a must, not an optional extra, for carers says Christine Jenner

Recent media reports highlight an increasing trend for elderly and disabled people to rely on family and friends to care for them. This is apparently due to the combined effects of an ageing population, NHS cut backs and local authorities restricting access to social services.

What this means is that more people of working age now have caring responsibilities and need to manage their working lives around those responsibilities.

Two expected changes to UK law due this year will assist carers to do this:
 The new right for carers to apply for flexible working which is due to come into force in April will oblige employers to consider how to accommodate the needs of carers in the workplace. 

 In addition, when the European Court of Justice (ECJ) gives its ruling in
Coleman v Attridge Law (a firm) [2007] IRLR 88, [2006] All ER (D) 326 (Dec) later this year, it is widely expected to find that the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Projects and rail practices strengthened by director hire in London

Bird & Bird—Gordon Moir

Bird & Bird—Gordon Moir

London tech and comms team boosted by telecoms and regulatory hires

DWF—Stephen Hickling

DWF—Stephen Hickling

Real estate team in Birmingham welcomes back returning partner

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: 40 years on, has PACE lost its edge?
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
NLJ this week: Stress-testing the City
Operational resilience is no longer optional. Writing in NLJ this week, Emma Radmore and Michael Lewis of Womble Bond Dickinson explain how UK regulators expect firms to identify ‘important business services’ that could cause ‘intolerable levels of harm’ if disrupted
NLJ this week: How sure is ‘sure’ enough?
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
NLJ this week: A deferred prosecution reprieve
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
NLJ this week: Mandelson, Epstein & the court of popular opinion
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll