Dear Employer It seems that you may see little of your employees during April, with all the Bank Holidays that are upon us. If you regard that as good news, there is even more good cheer in the Government’s proposals to cut the red tape for small businesses: see section ‘Some Recent Changes and Cases in Employment Law’. Meanwhile, we hope you have not missed the boat for putting into motion any retirement procedures, because it is now too late for the default retirement age to be effective: see the ‘Employer Trap’ section. We wish you a Happy Easter, and may all your eggs be FabergĂ©. If you have any comments or suggestions on this newsletter, please email
newsletter@breezeandwyles.co.uk Kind regards The Employment Law Team
Some Recent Changes and Cases in Employment Law
1. LESS RED TAPE!
The Business Secretary, Vince Cable, has announced a range of measures to reduce the amount of red tape faced by businesses. These include (but are not necessarily limited to the following:
· Repealing the regulations which were going to extend the right to request flexible working to the parents of 17-year olds. This means that the right to request flexible working will continue to be available only to parents of children aged under 17 and disabled children under 18, and to carers of certain adults.
· There will be a moratorium introduced to exempt businesses with fewer than 10 employees, and genuine “start-ups”, from new domestic regulation for 3 years. Watch this space for more details.
· There is also going to be a public audit of almost 22,000 statutory instruments, which includes regulations. Through a dedicated website, businesses will be asked to tell the Government what they think of certain regulations and how to improve the system. Any overly burdensome or unnecessary regulation will be removed, unless Government departments can prove there is a good reason for them.
2. TEAM POACHING
A recent case where an employee left his employment and poached fellow employees is of interest because, unusually, the High Court took a pro-employee stance. Key points from the case included the fact that the employer argued that the team leader of a small group of insurance brokers was a “fiduciary”, and therefore had particular fiduciary duties, but the Court disagreed (e.g. because he was never a statutory director and was never part of senior management).
The Court also criticised another case which is often relied on by employers who seek to show that an employee has breached the implied duty of fidelity. The Court criticised the proposition that requires an employee to disclose to the employer that fellow employees are being recruited by a competitor as being unsound (the “Kynixa” case).
Also, an assertion by the employer that all the departing employees’ budgeted business would be lost as a result of their wrong doing was unlikely to be correct. Instead, the employer should claim damages based on a “bottom up” approach, by looking at each individual client, identifying the opportunity of retaining its business.
The moral for employers is that they should ensure there are sufficient provisions in the employment contract to widen the duty of disclosure (i.e. giving information to the employer) and the duty of fidelity, and where appropriate to impose fiduciary obligations. [Longmar Global v West & Others (2011)]. What’s in the pipeline
1. BRIBERY ACT 2010
The implementation of this was delayed, and it is now coming into force on 1st July 2011. On 31st March, the Ministry of Justice published guidance on the procedures that commercial organisations should put in place to prevent persons associated with them from bribing. If companies put into place anti-bribery procedures, it will enable them to rely on the statutory defence to the charge of failing to prevent bribery under Section 7 of the Act. (This has been touched on in previous Ezines.)
The guidance sets out six guiding principles, each followed by commentary and examples. The guidance stresses that it is not advocating a “one size fits all” approach. Instead, organisations are encouraged to put in place procedures that are proportionate to the risk of bribery faced by their particular organisation.
The guidance also includes practical case studies on hospitality, facilitation payment and joint ventures, to provide additional clarity in these areas. There is also a “quick start guide”, explaining the key points organisations should know prior to the Act coming into force.
The guidance can be obtained from the justice.gov.uk website.
2 CHANGES TO LEGISLATION
These include (but are not necessarily limited to):
3rd April : Additional paternity leave and pay regulations that came into force in April 2010 apply to parents of children due (or matched for adoption) on or after 3rd April 2011. 3rd April : Statutory maternity, paternity and adoption pay increases from £124.88 to £128.73. 5th April : For the public sector, the General Public Sector Equality Duty in Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 comes into force. 6th April : The default retirement age will be phased out and the statutory retirement procedure abolished (to finally take effect in October). 6th April : The Positive Action in Recruitment and Promotion Provisions in Section 159 of the Equality Act 2010 comes into force. 6th April : Statutory Sick Pay increases from £79.15 to £81.60. 11th April : Maternity Allowance increases from £124.88 to £128.73. The Employer Traps and Other Tips
1. PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT/APPRAISAL SYSTEMS
With the abolition of the default retirement age which takes effect in October, you can choose to impose a fixed retirement age within your business. However, if you do so, you must be able to show that this is a “proportionate” means of achieving a “legitimate” aim. In practice, this will be very difficult for most employers to do. Instead, older employees will have to be managed in the same way as younger staff, meaning there will be an increased emphasis on “performance issues”. It will therefore be essential: (1) to have performance management and appraisal systems in place in order to be able objectively to measure the performance of your staff; (2) to be able to show that no assumptions were made that the employee’s capability would necessarily decrease as their age increased. It would be wise, therefore, to review your management and appraisal systems.
2. RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS
Remember, you can try to protect your business by including in the employment contract certain restrictive covenants which prevent the employee competing for a certain time after termination. However, do not be tempted by the “one size fits all” precedent that you may have come across: be aware that such clauses are, on the face of it, void unless they can be objectively justified as protecting your legitimate business interests. In short, take advice.