Whistleblowing has barely been out of the headlines in recent months: criticisms in the Francis Report zeroed in on the importance of whistleblowers, and this was swiftly followed by changes to 'gagging clauses' in NHS Compromise Agreements. This month, we saw new legislation come into force which made significant changes to the way in which whistleblowing operates. With all the changes that have taken place, Julian Hoskins takes the opportunity to review whistleblowing past and present, and provide some practical suggestions on whistleblowing going forward.
Alastair Currie looks at the latest developments that will be keeping HR practitioners and in-house Counsel busy over the Summer: the first tranche of this year’s law reform programme takes effect this month; UNISON has challenged the fee regime due to come into effect next month; the new Employment Tribunal rules have been published; Acas has published its guidance on pre-termination discussions and, finally, the new DBS online checking scheme is in place; and we provide an update on TUPE and how it applies to 'client team' transfers.
Are employers entitled to ‘spy’ on their employees as part of a disciplinary investigation, even if the employer already has the information it needs in order to fairly dismiss the employee? The Employment Appeal Tribunal has looked at how a local Council has dealt with this question and has said that in certain circumstances, the answer is yes: employers may undertake covert surveillance of employees if misconduct is suspected, notwithstanding that the surveillance is part of an over-zealous investigation. Anne Palmer comes in from the cold and explains more.
In what looks very likely to be a significant change to the rules on collective redundancy consultation, it has been reported that a decision of the Employment Appeal Tribunal overhauls the current approach to deciding whether 20 or more employees at an 'establishment' are risk of redundancy.
James Gutteridge reports on an EAT decision which looked at whether the Acas Code applies to dismissals for ‘some other substantial reason’, where the working relationship had broken down between the parties.
introduces our new Francis Report knowledge sharing website, and reports on this month’s employment law developments: it seems that it is possible to bring a post-termination victimisation claim after all, and we provide new dates for your diary in June in respect of the next tranche of employment law reform.
Following a recent run of seemingly odd outcomes in TUPE cases, we are pleased to report that this month the Employment Appeal Tribunal has handed down a refreshingly clear and useful decision on how the consultation requirements under TUPE operate. Specifically, the EAT looked at whether an employer is required to undertake consultation if a proposed transfer does not go ahead; and also whether employees in a part of an organisation which does not transfer are ‘affected’ by the transfer and are, therefore, entitled to be included in the consultation. Sarah Lamont unpicks the detail.