Employment Practice

This situation is becoming so serious that employers must consider implementing a policy/procedure, outlawing abusive practices. Draft Electronic Transmissions Policy 1. E-mail should be used primarily to distribute/update information, confirm arrangements, confirm meetings etc. [It may not be used to distribute personal information.] 2. As an exception, the system can be used to leave messages where the recipient is unavailable and the message awaits their return. 3. E-mail should not be used to substitute for face-to-face or telephone conversations since messages they convey lose much that is conveyed by body language. The medium is comparatively ineffective in this area. Research indicates that people reach the best decisions when they occupy adjacent physical space - using e-mail blanks off this advantage. 4. Unless video and audio links are available, electronic communications should not be used for meetings or managerial control. (See 3 above.) 5. Items for dissemination via e-ma...

The rapid development of e-mail and access to the Internet has led to problems regarding the sourcing and use of inappropriate material in the workplace. E-mail allows the instant transmission of a message by a non-typist without the previous time gap for creation which allowed for second thoughts. This can lead to an 'over casual' approach to the generation and framing of such messages. To many users an e-mail message equates to casual conversation but it is written and permanent, unlike spoken words. The Problems 1. Sections 349 and 351 of the Companies Act 1985 require companies to state certain data (i.e. full name, registered country, number and office) on their notepaper etc. and failure to do so is punishable by fine. If a message is sent by e-mail it is considered to equate to a message sent on a letterhead (i.e. to be a business letter) and as such this required data must appear. Computer programs could be altered so that this standard information always appears. 2. Th...

Recruiting, familiarising, and training an employee in the principles and practices of a particular employer is costly. The dismissal of an employee means that such costs are written off - and may well be incurred again as far as any replacement employee is concerned. However, of far greater concern is that the dismissal might generate an Employment Tribunal case for unfair dismissal and potential liability of £55,000 (February 2004) plus the costs of the case. Commentary It should be possible, to convert the unacceptable behaviour of many employees into that which is acceptable. However, where it is not, then any decision to dismiss needs to be considered very carefully, not least since any decision found to be unfair could be very costly to the employer and will also be subject to scrutiny by remaining employees. A decision to dismiss should therefore only be taken: a. as a last resort; b. after calm consideration, and reconsideration, of the events which led to the decision; c. afte...

The following procedure (which is based on advice set out during the Clark v CAA tribunal case by the Employment Appeals Tribunal - see APPEAL) should be used as a base to ensure that the process by which a hearing is conducted is fair - and seen to be fair. 1. Explain purpose of meeting. 2. Appoint person to take notes. 3. Identify those present. 4. Ensure employee has representation (if required). 5. Inform employee of allegations - although ideally these should have been advised previously. Springing allegations on an employee and expecting them to respond without notice is hardly likely to be viewed as fair. 6. Indicate and review evidence underlying allegations. 7. Allow employee and/or their representative to ask questions or to make statements. 8. Ask employee if witnesses are to be called. 9. Allow both sides to make and explain their cases. 10. Listen to arguments from both sides. 11. Consider any pleas in mitigation. 12. Consider severity of complaint and compare with length ...

1. In the event that any employee feels that (s)he has suffered discrimination in any way, the company's Grievance Procedure should be utilised. 2. If the complaint is against the employee's own immediate or other superior, confidential application should be made to [name/ position], who may authorise immediate reference to the next tier of management if this seems appropriate in the circumstances. 3. In instances of sexual harassment, as far as possible, the anonymity of the complainant should be protected. 4. Any employee who discriminates, bullies or harasses another, may be liable for payment of damages to that person, in addition to any damages payable by [the company] should it have failed to ensure the practice ceased forthwith. Note Under the Criminal Justice Act 1994, a criminal offence of harassment was created. This could mean employees who harass or bully could be fined (maximum £5,000) and/or imprisoned (for up to 6 months). These sanctions were considerably inc...

Gender Reassignment The Sex Discrimination (Gender Reassignment) Regulations 1999 came into force in England, Scotland and Wales to prohibit discrimination against persons who change their gender. In this context, discrimination occurs when a person is treated less favourably than another on grounds that he or she is to undergo, is undergoing or has undergone, gender reassignment. Compensation for claims under the regulations which amend the Sex Discrimination Act are, like claims under the Act, not subject to any maximum limits. Under the Sex Discrimination Act employers were, and are able to, discriminate where there is a genuine occupational qualification which predetermines that only a person of a particular sex should carry out the job. A similar exception applies to the new regulations. Thus a person subject to gender reassignment could be denied working: - with vulnerable persons with personal services promoting their welfare where the gender reassignment would (in the reasonabl...

It is unlawful to discriminate on grounds of Religion or Belief. Employers (and those they employ or direct) must not: - treat workers differently on grounds of their religious belief unless there is a GOR for this (for example, a denominational school could insist only those following a particular religion would be employed as teachers or administrative staff. However, it might be unlikely that this could be legally applied when recruiting maintenance staff). - discriminate or subject workers to harassment (in which regard employers are responsible for the acts of their employees) because they (or someone connected with them - e.g. a son or daughter) follow or subscribe to a particular religion. - discriminate against a person or harass them after their employment has ended on such grounds (e.g. not providing a reference because a person is, for example, a Jew). - apply unnecessary rules regarding dress codes which could discriminate against followers of a certain religion. There is c...