A Collection is a selection of features, articles, comments and opinions on any given theme or topic. It allows you to stay up‑to‑date with what interests you most.
Login here to access your saved articles and followed authors.
We have sent you an email so you can reset your password.
Sorry, we had a problem.
Tags related to this article
Published 4 abril 2017
Outside the world of employment law the main news, of course, is the snap election on 8 June. Parliament will be dissolved tomorrow (3 May), meaning that no further legislation will be passed until after the election. In the short term, the timing of the election will have limited impact on changes to employment laws and practices.
Gender pay reporting will not be affected by the election. While organisations in scope still have about eleven months to upload their data, the Government's website for this has now gone live.
The Government Equalities Office have also finalised their guidance on this topic which applies across all sectors. They have also produced a mini-guide specifically for the public sector which can be found here.
It is likely that publication of Matthew Taylor's independent review into employment and working practices (billed as "the biggest thing in employment law this year") will be delayed beyond mid-June.
There is more news on employment status cases. The London Central Employment Tribunal has decided, in the second of four employment status claims relating to courier companies, that an Excel cycle courier was a worker. Uber's appeal against the decision that its drivers are workers is due to be heard in September.
In two conjoined cases, (Essop and Naeem) the Supreme Court considered whether a claimant in an indirect discrimination claim has to prove the reason why a PCP puts (or would put) an affected group at a particular disadvantage, and whether the reason has to relate to the protected characteristic.
The Court of Appeal has held that an employee's poor attitude to organisational change had amounted to gross misconduct, and that flaws in the employer's original decision were nothing exceptional, so did not point to race discrimination.
The EAT has held that employee liability information provided pursuant to TUPE does not need to specify whether employees' entitlements are contractual or not.
London - Walbrook
+44 (0)20 7894 6583
+44 (0)20 7894 6564
Udara Ranasinghe, Hilary Larter, Lynda Norbury
Ceri Fuller, Zoë Wigan
John Dunlop, Udara Ranasinghe, Nick Chronias
Guy Bredenkamp, Nick Chronias
Udara Ranasinghe, Nick Chronias
Guy Bredenkamp, Nick Chronias, Udara Ranasinghe
Nick Chronias, Guy Bredenkamp
Nick Chronias, Udara Ranasinghe