Posted: June 25th, 2022

PH311 Employee Law And Relations

Question:

Case

Save Time On Research and Writing
Hire a Pro to Write You a 100% Plagiarism-Free Paper.
Get My Paper

Des and Sarah Cole owned a wine shop. They received letters from lawyers representing their employees, warning them to file legal action.

Employees claimed unfair dismissal, discrimination based on gender, and a breach of the work timing guideline.

The lack of a good model for human resources management causes conflict between employees and employers.

By increasing communication between employee and employer, a good human resource management can avoid conflicts.

Save Time On Research and Writing
Hire a Pro to Write You a 100% Plagiarism-Free Paper.
Get My Paper

Des and Sarah have no proper management of their human resources.

There weren’t any guidelines for specific employee activities.

There is no structure in place to manage their human resources.

Des and Sarah can avoid future conflicts by establishing a system for managing their human resources.

Des and Sarah should pay their employees for any acts that may cause them problems.

Task 1

Des and Sarah, who don’t have a good understanding of employment law and are surprised to be receiving these letters, should explain what each claim means and where it is based.

Task 2

Evaluate the relative strengths of each case. Des and Sarah should outline possible defenses.

Task 3

Take stock of the facts of this case study and reflect on the possible conflict situations that Des and Sarah could have avoided.

Use examples of good practice from ACAS and CIPD as well as any relevant frameworks and human resource management models in your answer to Des and Sarah to help you make suggestions for how they might avoid it in the future.

Answer:

Introduction

The United Kingdom’s employment law is civil.

The role of the criminal law is important in employees’ health and safety.

Acts of Parliament, guidelines issued from the government, laws of Europe and code of practice are all sources of employment law.

Employment law covers a variety of rights for employees, including unfair discrimination, unfair dismissal and heath, as well as retirement.

The terms and rights of employees are defined in the contract of employment.

Contract of employment is an agreement between employer and employee. It defines the terms, rights, duties and responsibilities of employment.

The contract must be complied with by both parties.

The aggrieved party may file a lawsuit for compensation if any party violates the terms of the agreement.

Task 1

Des and Sarah Cole employees made four claims.

These claims were related to discrimination based on gender, dismissal without justifiable cause, and breaching work timing.

Diane, who runs the shop’s daily operations, filed the first claim.

After falling from the shop’s stairs, she sustained a neck injury and was unable to return to work for over four months.

Des and Sarah met Diane to determine if she could continue working in the shop.

Their insurance company discussed the matter and offered Diane a one-year salary in exchange for a final settlement. (Bell 2009).

Des and Sarah were threatened by Diane if they didn’t pay a PS50,000 compensation.

Employers cannot fire or discriminate against employees on the basis of disability. The Equality Act, 2010, (Deakin 2012) protects the employees.

Employers must make reasonable adjustments for disabled employees within their organisation.

Diane’s neck injury didn’t heal for four months and she was unable join the job in the near future.

After discussing this with Diane, Des and Sarah decided to fire her after consulting their insurance company.

They agreed to pay her PS25,000 for one year of her salary.

Diane’s claim is untrue (FBA 2011).

The second claim was brought by Graham’s lawyer on the ground of dismissal without proper reason (Colling 2004,).

Des dismissed Graham on the grounds of fraud, because he had imported wine and sold them to make unfair profits.

Jack was part this fraud, but Des did not dismiss him. Instead, he was reinstated with a written caution.

Employers must give a reason for the employee’s dismissal under the 1996 Employment Rights Act.

Graham’s claim was unreasonable because he had admitted to his crimes. He cannot also challenge the employer’s dismissal decision (Lewis 2007,).

Kelly’s lawyer threatened to sue her for constructive removal, discrimination on the basis of gender, and violation of the principles in the Public Interest Disclosure Act unless Kelly received compensation of PS20,000.

A constructive dismissal occurs when the employer breaches the terms of an employment contract and causes the employee to resign as a result (The Employment Rights Act 1996 (Smith 2001).

The Equality Act (2010) protects employees against gender discrimination at work.

The 1998 Public Interest Disclosure Act protects whistleblowers against unfair treatment by their employer.

Kelly gave Des information about Graham’s and Jack’s fraud in business. Kelly’s car was also damaged and she was experiencing significant stress at work.

Kelly is entitled to compensation from her employer for the loss she suffered due to whistleblowing (Martin 2003).

Kelly’s claim of gender discrimination is invalid in this instance.

Ralph’s lawyer threatened to sue him for dismissal without cause and violation of the Working Time Regulations. He also claimed a sum in excess of PS15,000.

Ralph signed the agreement and agreed to the terms of the opt-out clause. This means that he can work no more than 48 hours per week.

The Working Time Regulations allow employees to cancel their opt-out agreement at any time. Employers cannot fire them for this reason.

Des can offer Ralph compensation for unjustified dismissal (Hepple 2005).

Task 2

Diane’s advocate threatened to file suit against Des and Sarah Cole on the grounds of discrimination on disability, and unreasonable dismissal.

Diane was unable for four months to return to work due to her neck injury from falling down the shop’s stairs.

Des and Sarah visited Diane to determine if she can return to work in the near future.

After consulting with their Insurance Company (Woodhams, 2003), they decided to pay her one-year salary of PS25,000 as a final settlement.

Diane claimed that she was unfairly fired because of her disability. She demanded that her settlement be increased to PS50,000.

Employers cannot discriminate against employees based on race, gender, or disability. The Equality Act of 2010 protects them.

Employers cannot discriminate against employees, even if they have good intentions.

Diane’s discrimination claim is not strong enough.

Diane was unable perform her duties after her neck injury. She was also unable to return to work within four months.

Sarah and Des can argue that an employer is entitled to dismiss employees for inability to perform their duties under the Equality Act 2010.

Graham’s lawyer claimed that the reasons given by his employer for his firing were unreasonable.

Graham and Jack were found guilty of illegally importing and selling wine bottles.

They made less than PS100 per person.

Both men confessed to the crime. Graham was dismissed and Jack received a written warning.

Graham claimed that Jack made a small profit and Jack was not fired for the same reason. Therefore, the reason for Jack’s dismissal is unreasonable (Marinescu 2011,).

Employers must give enough reason to fire an employee, according to the 1996 Employment Rights Act.

Graham can be dismissed by Des on grounds of gross misconduct because Graham has admitted to fraud. Graham’s claims are therefore not sufficient.

Graham cannot use Jack’s inability to be dismissed as grounds for Graham’s dismissal.

Kelly claims that Kelly was discriminated against on the basis her gender, constructive dismissal and violations of the principles of Public Interest Disclosure Act.

Kelly was a whistleblower and gave Des information about the fraud of Jack and Graham. Her car was then destroyed by Graham or his friends. They also wrote’snitching bitsch’ on her car’s bonnet.

Sarah offered to pay her expenses, but Sarah advised her that she go to the police.

She decided to resign due to the stress she experienced at work and the insensitive responses from her employer (England 2010,

According to the 1996 Employment Rights Act, constructive dismissal is defined as an act by the employer that violates the terms of the employment contract, leading the employee’s resignation.

The Equality Act 2010, protects employees against discrimination based on gender, race, or disability.

Whistleblowers can seek protection from discrimination or threats under the Public Interest Disclosure Act.

Kelly has the right to claim compensation from her employer because Sarah forced her to resign. Sarah also violated principles of the Public Interest Disclosure Act, by failing to protect the whistle-blower against discriminating behaviour.

Her employer is entitled to reimburse her.

Kelly’s resignation was not due to constructive dismissal, so the claim of discrimination based on gender is invalid.

Ralph sought a payment of PS15,000 from his employer as compensation for being dismissed without cause and violating the principle of Working Time Regulations.

Ralph signed an opt out agreement that he would not work more than 48 hours per week. However, he can cancel the agreement at any time under Working Time Regulations.

If an employee cancels his opt-out agreement, the employer cannot fire him (Selwyn 2014).

Ralph was fired by Des because he refused work for three consecutive weeks without a vacation.

This is an unjustifiable reason to fire an employee. It also violates the Working Time Regulations.

Des should pay Ralph compensation and reinstate Ralph to his job.

Task 3

Des and Sarah could use a suitable model for human resource management to avoid conflict between employee and employer.

The right model of human resource management can help create an environment that is informed and engages employees.

The use of human resource management (or HRM) could improve employee turnover, performance, communication, and strengthen the relationship between the employer and employee (Foot 2008.

A better management of human resources could have prevented the conflict between employee and employer in the case Diane.

Des and Sarah could have used a similar model to meet their HRM needs.

Safety and protection should be ensured for employees. Diane should also be supported after her injury.

According to the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD), employers should make every effort to assist disabled employees when they return to work.

To make it easier for employees, the employer should talk to them about their circumstances.

Hartman v South Essex Mental Health and Community Care NHS Trust [2005] EWCA Civ06 case highlights the importance of employers in providing a safe work environment for employees.

Six suits were filed by employees alleging that they are stressed at work.

Diane’s case is an example of how her employer should provide her with the necessary support at the time she sustains injuries.

Employers should communicate properly with injured employees to adjust their work environment.

After discussing the matter with Insurance Company, Des and Sarah decided to compensate Diane with PS25,000.

Diane could have avoided her employer’s lawsuit by using a better model of human resource management.

An employee’s gross misconduct should be dealt with by the organisation.

Employees who break the code of ethics must be punished and given a proper procedure.

Des made the right decision in Graham’s case and dismissed him from his job. Jack was not subject to the same punishment.

This creates conflict between Graham, Des.

In the case of fraud, there must be a procedure for punishing employees. The punishment should be the same for all employees without discrimination (Heery 2008).

To avoid fraud, the HRM should keep an eye on employees according to CIPD.

The HRM should investigate any employee-related fraud and gather evidence.

Before taking any action against employees, it is important that they have a fair opportunity to be heard.

Employees should be punished for their crimes after they have been confirmed.

Each employee should be punished equally if they are involved in a crime.

Employees should not be treated differently.

Des and Sarah did not have provisions to protect whistle-blower rights.

Kelly disclosed to Des the fraud committed by Graham and Jack. She is entitled to protection under the Public Interest Disclosure Act.

Whistle-blower protection must be included in any model of human resource management.

Kelly’s whistleblowing caused Kelly’s car to be destroyed and she can seek compensation from her employer.

The Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (ACAS) states that employees cannot be fired for whistleblowing if they disclose information in the public interest.

An organization must have policies to protect the rights of whistle-blowers.

For their protection, whistle-blower’s identity should not be disclosed to any other employees.

The whistle-blower should not be discriminated against (Miceli 2009).

Des and Sarah should have followed proper HRM procedures to protect whistle-blower rights.

Kelly should have been compensated for her car and given support to reduce stress at work (De Maria 2006).

Each employee is entitled to work no more than 48 hours per week, as stipulated by the Working Time Regulations. However, employees can opt out of this restriction and increase their time.

Ralph has signed an opt out agreement, which allows him to work more than 48 hours per week.

However, working for too long could be detrimental to an employee’s health.

To avoid health problems, employees should have a structured work schedule (Hawkins 2005).

Ralph worked for two weeks straight, with no time to rest.

To avoid health problems, Des should have allowed Ralph to take a break.

To avoid overworking, a proper HRM structure would have split work equally among different employees.

An employee can cancel an opt-out agreement at any time and the employer cannot fire him for it (Dembe 2005).

Conclusion

Organizations should have a clear model for human resource management to avoid conflict between employee and employer.

A HRM helps to increase communication between companies in order to avoid conflicts.

Employers should take all necessary precautions to ensure their employees’ safety and health.

Conflicts can negatively impact the company’s work and cause problems for the employees.

Des and Sarah’s case helps us understand the importance of human resource management.

A human resource management plan is essential, as evidenced by the numerous legal notices received from employees.

Employers should support their employees and provide various benefits for their health in order to manage their behavior.

The key to positive relationships between employees and employers is a good model for human resource management.

Recommendations

Des and Sarah should create a human resource management model in their company to avoid future conflicts between employees and employers.

This model should be beneficial to both parties and protect their interests.

The model should include all aspects of the employment relationship.

These are the aspects of Des and Sarah’s model:

All grounds and procedures for firing an employee.

Procedure for punishing an employee for gross misconduct

Employers may make reasonable adjustments to disable employees.

This is the procedure to prevent discrimination based upon gender, race religion, or disability.

Protective measures and awards to whistle-blowers.

Employees will be healthier if they have better control over their work hours.

Des and Sarah must follow the above-mentioned procedure in their human resources management model in order to avoid future conflicts.

Des and Sarah need to establish a healthy relationship and communicate with their employees in order for them to solve workplace problems.

Refer to

Barnes, C. and Mercer G., 2005.

Working with disabled people: Disability, work and welfare.

19(3), pp.527-545.

Bell, D., and Heitmueller A., 2009.

The UK Disability Discrimination Act: Helping or hindering employment for the disabled?

Journal of health economics 28(2), pp.465 -480.

The privatization and resolving of disputes in Britain.

Economic and Industrial Democracy 25(4), pp.555-579.

Protection of whistleblowers in Australia and South Africa, New Zealand, South Africa, and the United Kingdom.

International Journal of Public Sector Management 19(7), pp. 643-658.

Deakin, S.F.

Hart publishing.

Banks, S.M. 2005.

New evidence from the United States on the impact of long work hours and overtime on occupational injuries and illness:

Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 62(9), 588-597.

The gender revolution: Uneven, stalled.

OUP Oxford.

Foot, M. and Hook C. (2008).

Pearson Education.

Hartman v South Essex Mental Health and Community Care NHS Trust [2005] EWCA Citv 06.

Hawkins, S.S. Cole, T.J. Law, C., and Millennium Cohort Study Child Health Group (2008)

Results from the UK Millennium Cohort Study: Maternal employment and overweight in early childhood

International journal on obesity (2005) 32(1), p.30.

Heery, E. and Noon M. (2008).

Dictionary of human resource management.

OUP Oxford.

Global trade and labour laws.

Bloomsbury Publishing.

Lewis, D., and Uys T., 2007.

Protection of whistleblowers at work: Comparison of South African and British legislation.

Managerial Law, 49(3) pp.76-92.

Is it possible for judges to be sensitive to economic conditions?

Evidence from UK employment tribunals.

ILR Review 64(4), pp.673-698.

The illusions of whistleblower protection

UTS L.

Miceli M.P., Near J.P., and Dworkin T.M.

One word of wisdom: Managers and policy-makers should encourage employees to report wrongdoing.

Journal of Business Ethics, 1986(3), pp.379-396.

Selwyn, N.M., and Emir. A., 2014.

Selwyn’s law on employment.

Oxford University Press, USA.

Smith, P. and Morton G., 2001.

New Labour’s reform to Britain’s employment laws: The devil isn’t just in the details, but also in the values and policies.

British Journal of Industrial Relations, 39(1) pp.119-138.

Woodhams, C., and Corby S., 2003.

A critique of the British Disability Discrimination Act 1995: How to define disability in theory and practice.

Journal of Social Policy 32(2), pp.159–178.

Lockwood, G. Henderson, C., and Thornicroft G. (2012).

The Equality Act 2010 and mental healthcare.

The British Journal of Psychiatry 200(3), pp. 182-183.

Pilbeam, S., and Corbridge M., 2010.

Human resource management and talent planning: A practical HRM.

Prentice Hall.

Gazier, B. and Schmid, G.

The Dynamics of Full Employment: Social Integration through Transitional Labour Markets.

Edward Elgar Publishing.

Selwyn, N.M., and Emir. A., 2014.

Selwyn’s law on employment.

Oxford University Press, USA.

Expert paper writers are just a few clicks away

Place an order in 3 easy steps. Takes less than 5 mins.

Calculate the price of your order

You will get a personal manager and a discount.
We'll send you the first draft for approval by at
Total price:
$0.00
error: Content is protected !!
Open chat
1
Order through WhatsApp!
affordablepaperwritings.com
Hello!
You Can Now Place your Order through WhatsApp
 

 

Order your essay today and save 30% with the discount code DISCOUNTS2022