Employment - February 2008
This month's edition includes articles on: alcohol-related
dismissals; the employer’s implied duty to consider ill
health retirement benefits...
...the level of protective awards for failure to consult on
collective redundancies; the test for disability in relation
to recurring conditions and retirement dismissals.
Alcohol-related dismissals
Sinclair v Wandsworth County
Council confirmed that an employer’s failure to implement
its alcohol policy when disciplining an employee with an alcohol
problem rendered the dismissal unfair. The case is also of interest
as it explored the issue of whether misconduct arising from the
employee's alcoholism could amount to contributory fault for the
purposes of assessing unfair dismissal compensation. Carley Wilson, a Trainee Solicitor based in
Weightmans’ Liverpool employment team, considers recent case law on
reasonable adjustments.
Unfair dismissal and Ill-health retirement
A capacity dismissal will normally be unfair
if an employer fails to take reasonable steps to ascertain whether
an employee is entitled to the benefit of ill-health retirement
benefits. Ashley Irving, Trainee
Solicitor at Weightmans, London, examines the recent EAT decision
on First Leeds v. Haigh.
Protective awards
Since the introduction of the Employment
Protection Act 1975, there has been an obligation to consult with
representatives ahead of decisions to make employees redundant;
whilst this particular form of obligation has changed following
case law and amendments to the legislation, the framework remains
constant – an employer proposing to make redundancies must provide
information in advance, and consult appropriate representatives.
Kate Rashid, Trainee Solicitor at
Weightmans’ Birmingham office considers protective awards and the
recent case of Evans & Ors v Permacell Finesse Ltd
[2007].
Establishing disability: is likely to recur?
Are you disabled if symptoms have
ceased but are likely to recur? This question has been
answered by the Court of Appeal in the recent case of
Richmond Adult Community College
v McDougall [2008] EWCA CIV 4. Radhika Aggarwa, Associate and Business Centre
Manager of Weightmans’ Manchester employment team, reviews the
recent case of Richmond Adult Community College v McDougall [2008],
on the test for establishing disability.
Compulsory retirement – the saga continues…
Justified or not justified, that is the
question on everyone’s lips when talking about compulsory
retirement. Ashley Irving, Trainee
Solicitor at Weightmans, London, looks at the two recent cases on
the requirement to justify retirements.
This update does not attempt to provide a full analysis of those
matters with which it deals and is provided for general information
purposes only and is not intended to constitute legal advice and
should not be treated as a substitute for legal advice. Weightmans
LLP accepts no responsibility for any loss that may arise from
reliance on the information in this update. The copyright in this
update is owned by Weightmans.