header-logo header-logo

30 November 2012 / Sarah Johnson
Issue: 7540 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Square deal or raw deal?

Sarah Johnson concludes that the devil will be in the detail of employee owner contracts

Plans for the creation of a completely new kind of employment arrangement, the employee owner contract, were announced recently by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne.

Consultation on the proposals ended on 8 November 2012. The government aims to provide a response within three months of that date. Rather ominously, the consultation says that the government wishes “to ensure there are no unintended consequences” of the new rules. The plan is to allow companies to use the new contracts from April 2013.

Under employee owner contracts, employees will surrender some of their employment rights in exchange for shares in the business they work for, worth between £2,000 and £50,000.
Employee owner contracts will be available alongside standard employment, worker (including agency worker) or self-employed contracts. The Employment Rights Act 1996 will be amended to create this new kind of employment status.

The government suggests that the new status ensures companies can reduce the risks of employment

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll