October employment law newsletter out now!

Welcome to October's employment law newsletter

In our October newsletter, we report the publication by the government of the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill, likely, if passed, to effect important change to UK employment law. We consider ACAS' update of their advice on employee suspensions; the TUC's challenge of government anti-strike legislation and more positive news around the 4-day week trial. We also congratulate our employment team for another set of impressive results in the Legal 500's latest edition. 

Analysis is provided by our barristers as follows:

Grace Nicholls considers MTN-1 Limited v Mr David Ross O’Daly [2022] EAT 130,  a case concerned with time extensions and the mental health of the respondent.

Joseph England analyses Lucas v Cosmeceuticals Ltd [2022] EAT 141, a case about the discrimination burden of proof and reasonable adjustments.

Sarah Bowen reviews Miss R Gafari Tijani v The House of Commons Commission [2022] EAT 104, in which a dismissal for 50 instances of lateness was fair despite disclosure issues.

Andrew MacPhail warns against unnecessary criticism when blowing the whistle in his analysis of L Kong v Gulf International Bank (UK) Limited, Protect (Intervener) [2022] EWCA Civ 941.

Finally, Grace Holden contemplates the case of Clark & Others v (1) Sainsburys Supermarkets Ltd (2) Lloyds Pharmacy Ltd [2022] EAT 143 and the conclusion that only one EC number is required in a claim form for multiple
claimants.

Another outstanding Legal 500 result for 3PB’s employment law barristers

Congratulations to our team for achieving 21 individual rankings across the South Eastern, Western, London and Midlands Circuits.

We thank our clients and referees for taking the time to feedback to the Legal 500's researchers.

The Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill and UK Employment Law

The Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill published by the government on 22/9/22 will aim to "ensure that only [EU] regulation that is fit for purpose and suited for the UK will remain on the statute book”. All REUL are due to be revoked on 31/12/23 or at a later date prior to 23/6/2026, potentially impacting large areas of employment law, including:

• TUPE
• Some health and safety regulations
• Information and consultation rights

• Working time and paid holiday guarantees
• Rights of part-time, agency, posted workers, and fixed-term employees.

ACAS updates its advice on how to handle staff suspensions

ACAS has updated its advice on suspensions during investigations at work. The new advice covers: the decision whether to suspend someone; the process to do so; supporting the employee's mental health during suspension as well as pay and holiday.

TUC set to challenge government anti-strike legislation

The TUC is coordinating eleven trade unions, representing millions of workers across a wide variety of sectors, in an attempt to protect the right to strike, against the government’s new regulations allowing agency workers to fill in for striking workers and break strikes.

4-day week trial: more positive news 

Many of the companies taking part in the 4-day week trial run by 4 Week Global have indicated that they would keep the 4-day week policy after the trial ends, the BBC reports, with 95% of 41 respondents saying that productivity had stayed the same or improved during the shorter week.

EC numbers for Multiple Claimants: only one is required

Grace Holden analyses Clark & Others v (1) Sainsburys Supermarkets Ltd (2) Lloyds Pharmacy Ltd [2022] EAT 143, a case which clarifies that where there has been compliance with early conciliation by all claimants to a multiple claim multiple EC numbers are not required on the claim form in order to satisfy Rule 10 ET Rules.

Beware including unnecessary criticism when blowing the whistle

Andrew MacPhail analyses L Kong v Gulf International Bank (UK) Limited, Protect (Intervener) [2022] EWCA Civ 941, a case which serves as a reminder to whistle-blowers that their chances of protection will be increased if they consider carefully whether the full scope of what they propose to state by way of a Protected Disclosure is appropriate and/or necessary.

Dismissal for 50 instances of lateness fair despite disclosure issues

Sarah Bowen reviews the case of Miss R Gafari Tijani v The House of Commons Commission [2022] EAT 104, a useful analysis of fairness in relation to timekeeping dismissals and a judgment that reminds and reinforces that it is not the function of the Employment Tribunal to step into the factual and evidential arena.

The discrimination burden of proof and reasonable adjustments

Joseph England analyses Lucas v Cosmeceuticals Ltd [2022] EAT 141, a case concerned with the discrimination burden of proof and reasonable adjustments, in which Joseph was successful for the respondent in the EAT.

EAT allows appeal to extend time due to Respondent CEO’s mental health

Grace Nicholls reviews MTN-1 Limited v Mr David Ross O’Daly [2022] EAT 130 which gives helpful and clear guidance on the sort of considerations to be taken into account when arguing for an extension of time either at a reconsideration or appeal hearing.

Meet the team

3PB’s employment law group offers expert advisory and advocacy services to private and public sector employers across all areas of employment law including unfair dismissal, discrimination, equal pay, industrial disputes, executive contracts, wrongful dismissals, restrictive covenants, whistleblowing, TUPE, injunctions, pensions disputes and disciplinary proceedings.