The race is also called ‘Grime and Punishment’ – with good reason as there are lots of climbs as well as some quite difficult terrain (beaches and bogs!). Some of the climbs look very steep.

About Oxfam

Oxfam is a global movement of people working towards a world without poverty.

Oxfam works in 92 countries including the UK as part of the Oxfam International confederation, to tackle the root causes of poverty, from life’s basics – food, water, health and education – to complex questions around aid, climate change and human rights.

Jane’s target is to raise £300.00. If you would like to sponsor Jane for the above you can do so by clicking on the following Just Giving website link http://www.justgiving.com/jane-elgar.

Good Luck Jane!

This year the event was in aid of the following charities:

• CHARMS
• HEARING HELP
• J’S HOSPICE
• LEAGUE OF FRIENDS OF HARGRAVE HOUSE
• THE CHELMSFORD MILDMAY CHARITY TRUST

Jane finished in 1hr 17 mins 23 sec’s. She came 225th out of 670 and was the 37th woman out of 235.

Again, well done Jane!!

Jane is entering the Great North Run in September 2012. We will be giving details on how to sponsor her in due course.

Keep a look out for Jane’s next Sponsored Charity Run … details to follow.

The moment an applicant unconditionally accepts your offer of a job, a contract of employment comes into existence. This is the case whether or not it is in writing. The terms of the contract do not need to be written.

An oral contract is equally as binding as a written one. The difficulty is proving its terms if there is a dispute.

Even if you do not issue a full written contract, you are under a legal duty to provide employees with a written statement of the main terms of employment particulars within 2 months of the start of their employment with you.

A written statement is not itself a contract but it can provide evidence of the terms of conditions of employment between you and the employee if there is a dispute later on.

It’s particularly important to have a written contract if you want to include special provisions relating to an individual post/e.g. the handling of money, wearing of a uniform, post-employment restriction on competition to prevent any confusion or disagreement in future.

Where an employee has not received a written statement of employment particulars he or she maybe able to claim compensation.

Can an employer sue an employee for breach of contract?

If an employee has already presented to a tribunal claim and this is still active an employer can make a counter-claim to an employment tribunal if the employer suffers loss through the employee’s failure to observe the terms of their contract of employment. An employer may make a counter-claim at any time up to 6 weeks after the employer receives a copy of the employee’s original application to the employment tribunal. This 6 week period for counter-claims cannot be extended.

Pensions Reform

As part of its strategy to encourage people to save for their retirement from October 2012 – starting with employers with more than 50 employees – businesses will be required to automatically enrol their workers into workplace pensions. The requirement is going to be phased in for smaller employers.

Government proposals for changes in Employment Law

One of the most significant changes to employment law comes into force from 6th April 2012 and that is the increase to the qualifying period for unfair dismissal claims to 2 years for employees whose employment begins on or after 6th April 2012. Note that the qualifying period does not apply to discrimination claims.

There is also an ongoing ‘fundamental review’ of the employment tribunal rules of procedure. This may lead to individuals being required to pay a fee for bringing a claim, the increasing use and increase in the levels of costs awards. The government is also currently consulting on its proposals to simplify dismissal procedures and is seeking views from employers as to whether they are too onerous or complex. Views are also sought on compensated no-fault dismissals for micro businesses with fewer than 10 employees.

Dr Jane Elgar (Specialist in Employment Law) is a Partner at Liddell + Company Solicitors.
Jane is based at our Billericay Office on 01277 636426.

All of the money goes straight to Will Aid and is shared by the participating charities: ActionAid, Age UK, British Red Cross, Christian Aid, NSPCC, Save the Children, Sightsavers, SCIAF and Trocaire. Liddell and Company is proud to support Will Aid and we would like to publicly thank all those Will-makers who donated so generously.

Proud sponsors of Under 18 Intersports football team that play in the Chelmsford League.

LEGISLATION

Download PDF version here

New National Minimum Wage Rates

 New National minimum wage rates come into force on 1 October 2011.

 The apprenticeship rate applies to those who are under 19 or those aged 19 and over who are in their first year of apprenticeship.

Agency Workers Regulations 2010

 The AWR take effect on the 1 October 2011 giving agency workers the right, after a 12-week qualifying period, to equal treatment with permanent employees in most aspects of pay and conditions. There is an exception to the equal pay provisions where the agency worker has acontract of employment with the agency and certain conditions are met, including that the agency worker will receive a minimum of 4 weeks’ pay when no assignment is available before the contract is terminated.

Equality Act 2010

 The main provisions of the Equality Act came into force almost a year ago on 1 October 2010. So far, few cases have come to court but employers should be especially aware of the new elements of the law:

• Discrimination by association: This will give new protection to carers
• Protection from third party harassment: Protecting employees from harassmentby, for example, customers, clients, supplies, and members of the public, falls to the employer.
• Health questionnaires: Restrictions on the use of pre-employment health questionnaires and enquiries by employers, except in specified circumstances.
• Pay transparency: Making pay secrecy clauses unenforceable
• New powers : New powers for employment tribunals to make recommendations in relation to the workforce as a whole in discrimination cases.

Regulations are also now in place to promote the specific public sector equality duties in theEquality Act 2010.

 RECENT CASES OF INTEREST

Supreme Court

Car valeters have employee status

In Autoclenz Ltd v Belcher the Supreme Court held that individuals expressly described as self-employed contractors in the written contracts were in reality employees. The individuals paid their own tax, and had to purchase their own insurance, uniforms and materials. The contract stated that they were under no obligation to attend work and could provide a substitute. However the Supreme Court decision shows that what happens in practice willtrump what it is written in the contract. The fact that the employer had written a substitution clause into the contract did not reflect the reality as the valeters were expected to carry out their duties personally.

Court of Appeal

  Award of career-long loss should be the exception.

 InWardle v Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank the Court of Appeal held that an Employment Tribunal was wrong in making an award for career-long loss stemming from a discriminatory dismissal. Compensation should only have been awarded up the point where it was more likely than not (i.e. a greater than 50% chance) that the claimant would have an equivalent job. Whilst the tribunal had awarded losses including elements of loss for the period up to 2024, the Court of Appeal held that June 2011 was the appropriate cut off point. The Court of Appeal emphasised that only in exceptional cases would the Tribunal be entitled to take the view on the evidence before it that there is no real prospect of an employee obtaining an equivalent job for the rest of his or her working life.

 Dismissal in ‘Baby P’ case: compensation estimated at up to £1m

 In R (On the application of Shoesmith) v Ofsted and others the Court of Appeal in May 2011 allowed a judicial review challenge by Sharon Shoesmith, the former Director of Children’s Services for the London Borough of Haringey over the fairness of the process by which she was removed from office and summarily dismissed in the aftermath of the death of ‘Baby P’. A key issue was that Shoesmith had not been allowed to respond to allegations made against her before being removed from office.

 High Court

  Liability for negligent misstatement extends beyond references

 In McKie v Swindon College, the High Court held an employer liable in negligence to a former employee, some six years after their employment ended, for comments when passing on information to a subsequent employer, which led to his dismissal. Employers should think very carefully and check the facts before making any comments that could lead to a former employee being dismissed from a new job. This applies – especially, as in this case, where the allegations made by the former employer are particularly serious – irrespective of the elapse of time.

Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT)

 Breakdown in working relations led to fair dismissal

 In Ezsias v North Glamorgan NHS Trust the EAT has held that an employee could be dismissed for ‘some other substantial reason’ following a breakdown in working relationships between him and his colleagues. The employer had fairly relied on the fact of the breakdown as the reason for dismissal rather than the employee’s responsibility for it, and so the employer was not obliged to follow the contractual disciplinary procedure that governed conduct dismissals.

Employment Tribunals

 Dismissal for sending offensive from home was fair

 In Gosden v Lifeline Project Ltd Sheffield Employment Tribunal held that an employer fairly dismissed an employee who sent an offensive e-mail outside working hours and from his home computer to the home computer of a friend who worked for the employer’s client. The e-mail eventually entered the client’s computer system and caused the employer’s reputation with that client to be damaged. The Tribunal held that the employer had not infringed the employee’s right to privacy. The e-mail was clearly intended for onward transmission and therefore could not be treated as a confidential communication.

 NEWS

 Supreme Court refuses application for ‘Baby P’ appeal

 The Supreme Court has refused the application of Haringey Council to be allowed to appeal the Court of Appeal’s ruling. Haringey Council said that it was bitterly disappointed by the decision adding: “we believe we have acted properly throughout the process and stand by everything we have done”. The ‘Baby P’ decision highlights the importance of following procedure before making a decision to dismiss.

 Paid holiday for sick workers

Following a recent Employment Appeal Tribunal decision, employers still need to be very careful about how they deal with outstanding holiday in the case of employees on long-term sick leave. A recent EAT decision has rejected an argument from an employer that it did not need to make payment in respect of untaken annual leave in a previous holiday year because no formal request had been made for it. Expect more cases to follow!

Should you require advice or assistance on employment matters please contact Jane Elgar on 01277 636426 or email JElgar@liddellsolicitors.co.uk. Jane can help you with employment-related issues. Jane is experienced in employment matters, both as an employment lawyer and previously an HR Manager.