Employment Law Update - February 2010

Requests for Holiday, Disability Discrimination and an Increase to Statutory Payments

REQUESTS FOR HOLIDAY TOWARDS THE END OF THE 'HOLIDAY YEAR'

How and when employees should be allowed to take holidays remains a common area of confusion and dispute.  This is especially true when employees put in last-minute requests for time-off shortly before the end of the holiday year.

Unless otherwise specified in the contract of employment, the general rules on the amount of notice which should be given are:

• An employee must give notice of a request to take holiday.  This notice must be at least twice the period of holiday that they are requesting (i.e. an employee wanting 5 days holiday must give 10 calendar days notice).


• An employer can respond with a counter-notice which can have the effect of refusing the holiday request.


• The rules above can be varied by a contract of employment.

A recent positive case for employers involved an employer which had set out its own rules on holidays in its contracts of employment.  The Tribunal ruled that the employer could refuse to allow an employee to take holiday where the employee had not given the 4-weeks notice for booking holidays.  As the employee's holiday could not be accommodated at short-notice before the end of the holiday year, the employee lost his remaining holiday entitlement for that year.

You should be aware that your rules on holidays must be operated reasonably.  Wehn operated correctly, the rules can result in loss of holidays that have not been taken by the end of the holiday year.

The example above needs to be taken with a note of caution.  Often it is not worth the hassle of refusing an employee's request for holiday point-blank.  However, the above is useful to remember when dealing with obstructive employees and when seeking to reach agreement on when holidays are to be taken.

This case also serves as a reminder to employers to ensure all employees have up to date contracts of employment that have been tailored to your needs.  Rules set out in a contract of employment often prevent employees bringing claims because they know (or more importantly their advisors know) the action will be futile.  If you need any assistance with this please let us know.

DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION -SERVICE PROVIDERS

In a widely-publicised Court decision, the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) has recently been ordered to spend £200,000 on installing a lift at one of its branches to provide access to customers with disabilities.

The law behind this decision is set out in the Disability Discrimination Act 1995.  Part of this Act states that service-providers, which will include many employers, should make reasonable adjustments to allow disabled people (whether they are employees, customers or the public) to use the services they provide.

The claim against RBS was seen as a test case and the majority of service-providers need not fear such a damaging outcome.  However, the law in this areas is complex and the consequences of ignoring it can be severe.

Cases concerning members of the public raising concerns about disabled access to buildings have recently come to our attention in the local area.

We suggest you:

• Implement and maintain a simple suitable written policy an disability discrimination;


• Ensure all employees are aware of this policy and the possible consequences of disability discrimination.  You should make sure that any complaints or issues regarding disability are passed to senior management immediately; and


• Deal with any issues or complaints regarding disability quickly and sensitively.  Often these can be dealt with relatively easily provided they are not ignored.

As is the case with much of the advice we give on employment and other matters, dealing with problems early, before they occur or develop, will save time and money when compared with dealing with a Court or Tribunal claim (the fence at the top of the cliff is better than the ambulance at the bottom).  If you have any concerns about how the law on disability affects you or your business, or you want help with your 'fencing', please contact us.

INCREASE IN STATUTORY PAYMENTS

The Government has recently proposed increases to Statutory Maternity, Parternity and Adoption Pay from April 2010.

The Standard Rate for Statutory Maternity Pay (as well as the rates for Statutory Parternity and Adoption pay) will rise from £123.06 to £124.88 a week.

Statutory Sick Pay will remain the same at £79.15 a week.

If you have any questions or issues relating to this e-mail or any other employment related matters please feel free to contact:

Alistair Latham
Tel: 01482 324591
e-mail: ail@sjplaw.co.uk

Mark Daubney
Tel: 01482 324591
email: mtd@sjplaw.co.uk

Please let us know if you would like us to contact you by an alternative method or by using a different e-mail address. If you would like these updates to be sent to anyone else in your organisation please send us their name and contact details.

To unsubscribe from our employment law updates simply reply with 'unsubscribe' as the subject of your e-mail.

DISCLAIMER:
The information and any commentary on the law contained in this e-mail is provided free of charge for information purposes only. Every reasonable effort is made to make the information and commentary accurate and up to date, but no responsibility for its accuracy and correctness, or for any consequences of relying on it, is assumed by the author.

The information and commentary does not, and is not intended to, amount to legal advice to any person on a specific case or matter. You are strongly advised to obtain specific, personal advice from a solicitor about your case or matter and not to rely on the information or comments contained in this e-mail.

Stamp Jackson & Procter
Solicitors
5 Parliament Street
Hull
HU1 2AZ

Tel: 01482 324591
Fax: 01482 224048

www.sjplaw.co.uk

Back to news listing