This section gives you an idea as to the information supplied to our clients on a monthly basis. Our e-newsletter gives you the latest news on employment law ( the ever-changing employment law) including interesting cases. This information means you are less likely to get caught out with all the costs involved in getting it wrong.
November Newsletter Extract:
Recent Developments
UK Rights of Additional Paternity Leave may be ruled unlawful before we even have them!
Roca v Sesa Start Espana
Alvarez was employed in a Spanish company which had additional maternity leave benefits including “breastfeeding leave”. This particular leave was originally only intended for mothers in Spain but had, over time, been granted to fathers if the mother was an employee. Alvarez applied for leave from his company but his wife was self-employed. His leave was rejected on the basis that his wife wasn’t employed. He challenged this and The European Court of Justice found that Spain’s employment law was in breach of equal treatment in that it didn’t matter what the father’s status was should a mother wish to take the time off so it shouldn’t matter what the mother’s status is should it be the father who requests it. Under the Additional Paternity Leave regulations coming in next year, the father can request up to six months additional leave which would be paid in-line with the statutory payments at the time but, what happens if a company pays additional payments i.e. full pay or partially full pay for maternity leave – this ruling may mean that the father can argue they are entitled to the same benefits as their wife (even if their wife works in a different company)
Comment:
This is an amazing (though let’s face it not surprising) judgement. It’s amazing because we don t even have the additional paternity regulations and they could obsolete! The worst case scenario could be that all men could assert the same rights existing within their wife’s contract even if those rights give the women extra maternity pay/leave etc. Of course the question her would be, who would pay for this; we assume the employer of the women who was so generous in the first place but then what if the father is on very good pay ( and let’s face it men are still generally paid much more than women even with Equal Pay Legislation)? Does he assert his right for his current employer to provide these extra benefits even if they are not in his contract? Also will this case mean a full review of the pending Additional Paternity Leave Regulations and also what about the coalition’s pledge not to “gold plate” European legislation? Obviously no changes yet but watch this space
Don’t Let Office Gossip Ruin Your Christmas and New Year!
Nixon v Ross Coates Solicitors
At the Office Christmas party an HR Manager was gossiping about the paternity of a fellow worker’s pregnancy. The employee (Nixon) made a claim of harassment and when the employer refused to move the employee away from her alleged harasser (possibly falling back the old “it was out of work so doesn’t count” defence, Nixon sued. Nixon won her case and was made an award in compensation and whilst the Tribunal said she contributed to her own “downfall” (?), the ETA overruled this and the award was increased!
Comment: Given the time of year, an apt case. We now have the Equality Act but this case shows that a lot of the requirements of the Equality Act existed before. It demonstrates the importance of instructing staff not to gossip inappropriately but more important than this, to deal with any claim of harassment properly. If the company had moved the individual (as requested) then it is unlikely the claim would have followed and even if it did, it is likely to have been thrown out! We don’t know here whether the company relied on the “it’s out of working hours so it doesn’t count” defence but if they did, they would have been misguided. It is important to communicate expectations to employees before any company organized Christmas “do” or indeed at any other time of year.