Drivers for Uber are ‘workers’ and not self-employed according to a majority judgment from the Court of Appeal.
The dismissal for gross misconduct of a long-serving employee for failing a routine drug test was unfair.
The right to statutory recognition of a union under art. 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) does not apply to delivery drivers who had specifically found not to be workers as they had a genuine right of substitution which had been exercised.
Where an employee had been dismissed on the ground of medical incapacity while his contractual entitlement to long-term disability benefits was ongoing, it was appropriate to imply a term into his employment contract to restrict the employer’s contractual power to dismiss.
A promotion or change in role within the same organisation will not necessarily amount to a ‘radical’, ‘fundamental’ or ‘significant’ change so as to break a ‘stable working relationship’ for the purposes of calculating time limits for an equal pay claim.
On the question of the mistaken failure to offer of a trial period in a redundancy situation, it is important to consider first of all whether this failure rendered the dismissal unfair, and then whether a trial period would have made a difference to the outcome. Neither is it an answer, when the employer has clearly admitted being at fault, to say that because the claimant did not press the point, this somehow affects the reasonableness.
Workers cannot be deprived of paid statutory holiday entitlement on the termination of employment or at the end of a particular reference period/authorised carry-over period unless the employer has ensured ‘specifically and transparently’ that the worker is given the opportunity to take the leave.
Three drivers for a taxi and courier company were ‘workers’ and not independent contractors.
There was no unfairness when an employer withheld certain evidence from a disciplinary hearing that ultimately led to an employee’s dismissal.
The requirement for a part-time worker to be available for work on proportionately more days than a full-time worker was less favourable treatment. In deciding whether such treatment is legally justified, tribunals should consider statistical evidence.
Further details have been published on how the forthcoming right to bereavement leave and pay will work in practice.
Two company directors were personally liable for their part in dismissing an employee on whistleblowing grounds.
An employer was vicariously liable for the actions of one of its employees who, to damage his employer, leaked personal staff data on a file-sharing website.
A volunteer reservist was fairly dismissed for committing to a seven-week training exercise without obtaining his employer’s approval.
An employer was vicariously liable for life-changing injuries inflicted by its managing director on one of its employees at a Christmas party.
A bakery did not discriminate against a gay man on the grounds of his sexual orientation or political belief when it refused to supply a cake with a message on it supporting gay marriage.
A flawed ill-health retirement process will not, by itself, amount to direct disability discrimination or discrimination arising from disability.
Faced with deciding whether a sum is ‘properly payable’ for the purposes of an unauthorised deduction claim, a tribunal does have jurisdiction to interpret contractual terms.
There has been a marked rise in the number of employment tribunal claims being lodged.
The withdrawal by a transferee of a contractual entitlement to a travel allowance was not void under TUPE.
- Page 2 of 5