header-logo header-logo

26 September 2014
Categories: Legal News , Employment
printer mail-detail

Payments plan slammed

Employment lawyers criticise exit payments proposals

Employment lawyers have condemned government plans to claw back exit payments from public sector staff as “unclear” and “ill-conceived”.

High-earning staff would have to return exit payments if they got another job in the same part of the public sector within 12 months, under proposed new legislation. According to the government’s consultation on Recovery of Public Sector Exit Payments, which closed this week, 17% of 19,000 NHS staff made redundant were rehired, most within a year, and six out of 37 local government chief executives who left by mutual agreement in 2007 and 2008 had been employed by another council within 12 months.

However, the Employment Lawyers Association (ELA) has warned of increased litigation and lower settlements if the law is passed as currently drafted in the Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Bill, scheduled to be implemented by April 2016.

The ELA says it has “serious concerns over the retrospective variation of contracts of employment and in relation to collectively agreed terms and agreements”. It points out that terms such as “statutory payments”, “casual worker” and “sector” lack clarity and could lead to argument and dispute. It also warns of unintended discriminatory consequences.

Maeve Vickery, chair of the ELA sub-committee which examined the proposals in detail, says: “It pains us to say this but the draft legislation is like a poorly-prepared, hastily completed piece of homework—except that it has serious legal implications.

“We can see what government is trying to do here but it risks being in conflict with statutory and contractual rights, compulsory redundancy rights, voluntary exit agreements and settlement agreements, to name but a few, if it presses ahead as things stand.”

Categories: Legal News , Employment
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Weightmans—Elborne Mitchell & Myton Law

Weightmans—Elborne Mitchell & Myton Law

Firm expands in London and Leeds with dual merger

Boodle Hatfield—Clare Pooley & Michael Duffy

Boodle Hatfield—Clare Pooley & Michael Duffy

Private wealth and real estate firmpromotes two to partner and five to senior associate

Constantine Law—James Baker & Julie Goodway

Constantine Law—James Baker & Julie Goodway

Agile firm expands employment team with two partner hires

NEWS

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
back-to-top-scroll