REUTERS | Yuya Shino

Dodge the tumbleweed blowing down the corridors, enter any Employment Tribunal (ET) waiting room and you will almost certainly see at least one employment lawyer sitting, staring at the dregs in their polystyrene cup looking to see whether the tealeaves will reveal if and when ET litigation will rise again, or whether the end of the ET system is nigh. Continue reading

REUTERS | Mike Blake

One of the last gasps of the Coalition government was a commitment to bring into force section 78 of the Equality Act 2010, requiring employers to publish gender pay gap data. With regulations originally due to be effective from March 2016, a markedly vague consultation paper in July 2015 followed by a long silence did little to dispel the impression that this had been something of a reluctant concession to a long-gone coalition partner. Now that we have the draft regulations, are they the damp squib that some campaigners feared? Continue reading

REUTERS | Peter Andrews

With the oil price tumbling, a slowdown in China, an unstable position in Greece, commodity prices at an all-time low, a poor Christmas for fashion retailers on the high street, an overheated property market and a looming BREXIT referendum, 2016 bears all the hallmarks of a tumultuous year. Continue reading

REUTERS | Corbis

The Upper Tribunal’s recent decision in Moorthy v HMRC [2010] UKUT 13 (TCC) has left many employment practitioners wondering how this affects the advice they give their employer and employee clients going forward, and what practical steps they should take to ensure tax compliance while protecting their clients’ best interests. Vicki Carr, editor in the Practical Law Tax team, answers some of the common employment practitioner questions likely to arise from the judgment. Continue reading

REUTERS | Amit Dave

In my last blog post I looked at the tribunal’s power of strike out and debunked the myth that strike-out is never appropriate in discrimination and whistleblowing claims. There will, however, be cases that the tribunal may not be minded to strike out, but in which it will be willing to make a deposit order or orders as a condition of their being allowed to continue. Continue reading

REUTERS | Jumana El Heloueh

A decision in early January from the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has brought the issue of an employee’s right to privacy within the workplace back into the spotlight.

The decision found that in accessing an employee’s personal communications with his fiancée which resulted in the employee being dismissed the employer had not breached the employee’s right to confidentiality.

The ECHR case of Barbulescu v Romania – 61496/08 [2016] ECHR 61 involved an employee using a work account for personal communications in breach of the employer’s blanket ban on sending personal messages in the workplace. In accessing the work account, the court found that the employer had acted within its remit and it had not acted unreasonably in trying to establish that the employee was completing his professional tasks. Continue reading

REUTERS | Arnd Wiegmann

Respondents are often perturbed, and claimants buoyed, by the tribunal’s seeming reluctance to strike out discrimination and whistleblowing cases, based on the decisions of appellate courts in Anyanwu v South Bank University [2001] ICR 391 HL (discrimination) and Ezsias v North Glamorgan NHS Trust [2007] ICR 1126, CA (whistleblowing). But is this really the case in practice? Continue reading