The Employment Appeal Tribunal has stressed that workers are afforded protection under the Agency Workers Regulations 2010 (SI 2010/93) only if they are supplied by a temporary work agency to work "temporarily" for the end user.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has held for the second time in 2013 that there is no requirement for an employee's request to be accompanied by a particular companion to a discipline or grievance meeting to be reasonable, provided the chosen person meets the definition of a companion in the Employment Relations Act 1999.
This constructive dismissal claim against a fashion retailer was unsuccessful, but it does reveal some of the difficulties that can arise when employers in this sector require their staff to project a particular image.
Colin Makin, Krishna Santra, Linda Quinn and Sandra Martins are senior associates and Melissa Powys-Rodrigues is an associate at Colman Coyle Solicitors. They round up the latest rulings.
The Court of Appeal has held that, where the reason for a TUPE-related dismissal is to continue running a business and to avoid liquidation, this can constitute an economical, technical or organisational (ETO) reason entailing changes in the workforce, meaning that such a dismissal is not automatically unfair.
This employer lost an employment tribunal case because it did not allow an employee who was still on his probationary period be accompanied at a meeting at which he was informed that he was being dismissed.
This employment tribunal decision provides a useful example for employers of what the legislation on the right to be accompanied means when it says that the right applies where a worker "reasonably requests" to be accompanied at a disciplinary hearing, an issue on which there is a surprising paucity of case law.
James Buckle, Gerri Hurst, Joelle Parkinson, Chris McAvoy and Helen Samuel are associate solicitors at Addleshaw Goddard LLP. They round up the latest rulings.
This employment tribunal decision shows that there is nothing to stop a transferee from disciplining a transferred employee who is alleged to have committed misconduct before the transfer.
Assumptions that an individual accused of sexual harassment must be guilty can be costly, as this council found out after a tribunal awarded the claimant £169,000 for sex discrimination and constructive dismissal.