Why would a person who doesn't like heights......   jump out of an aeroplane?

To meet or not to meet?   That is the question.

New Statutory Holiday Rules Finalised   Extra entitlement for workers

Why would a person who doesn't like heights......

On 7 September our Managing Director, Lina Hogg, will be  risking life and limbs for a sponsored skydive for St Elizabeth Hospice, Ipswich. Given that she doesn't not like heights very much, this will be a real challenge!

She will be jumping from 10,000 feet and free falling for up to 40 seconds at 120mph! Lina said "I would be so grateful to any company or individual able to sponsor me and I would really appreciate your support. The easiest way to sponsor me is through this web page www.justgiving.com/linahogg".

There is also a display on the Picasso HR web site showing more information about the event and amount pledged so far.

Do you know of any organisations that might put a candidate forward to join Lina on the 7th and also do fund raising of their own for the Hospice? If so, let us know!

To meet or not to meet?

Imagine that you made an employee redundant four months ago. You carried out the procedures carefully and gave the employee seven days to appeal against her dismissal. Well she didn’t appeal, so after three months has gone by you breathe a sigh of relief because she can no longer take you to a tribunal.

Or can she?

What about that meeting you held with her six weeks after she left?

The normal rule is that an ex-employee wishing to claim unfair dismissal must make a claim to a tribunal within 3 months of being dismissed otherwise they are out of time. But there is an exception where “at the date the normal time limit expired, the employee had reasonable grounds for believing that a dismissal or disciplinary procedure was being followed”.

This clause was crucial for Anne Harris, who worked as an Insurance Broker for Towergate London Market Ltd (TLM) until she was made redundant. She didn’t appeal against her redundancy at the time, but at her leaving party some of her ex-colleagues (after a few drinks) told her she had been “stitched up”.

Anne was concerned about these comments and contacted her union representative who arranged a meeting with the company HR Manager. The meeting took place about six weeks after Mrs Harris’ dismissal. After the meeting, Mrs Harris was even more convinced that her redundancy selection had not been handled fairly and she wrote a letter of grievance to the Company.

The Company sent a fairly short reply back, stating that they were not obliged to deal with her grievance as it related to her dismissal.

Almost three months later, Anne Harris sent her application to the employment tribunal. It was five months after her dismissal and two months after the normal expiry time for tribunal claims.

The tribunal chairman rejected her claim as out of time - but read on.

Undaunted, Mrs Harris applied to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT). The EAT found that the Company had complied fully with the statutory dismissal procedure, including making it clear that Mrs Harris had 7 days to appeal against her dismissal. The Company was not obliged to re-open discussions by agreeing to a further meeting six weeks later. However, in EAT’s words they “graciously consented to hold some form of appeal well outside the timeframe for commencing an appeal”. When Mrs Harris wrote to them after the meeting, it could be said that at the time the normal time limit expired she had reasonable grounds for believing that some form of procedure was still in motion.

So Mrs Harris won the right to have her case heard by another tribunal. She may or may not win it, or it may be settled out of court.

The main learning point for employers is to be very careful about re-opening discussions once the statutory procedures have been complied with. “Graciously consenting” to this meeting with an ex-employee caused them no end of problems later.

New Statutory Holiday Rules Finalised

Under the Working Time Regulations, we are entitled to 4 weeks holiday per year but up to now there was no mention of Bank Holidays. That means employers can include Bank Holidays in the 4 weeks entitlement. Most employers are more generous and give Bank Holidays on top of the 4 weeks entitlement. But around 6 million workers miss out on the extra entitlement.

In a manifesto pledge in 2005 the Government announced it would increase the statutory holiday entitlement so that everyone will be entitled to a minimum of 4 weeks plus Bank Holidays.

The final draft of the regulations has just been published. The new entitlements will be applied in two phases with the first stage on 1st October 2007 and the final stage on 1st April 2009. Interestingly, the new regulations still don’t mention Bank Holidays, so nobody will have the statutory right to take a Bank Holiday off.  The holiday entitlement from 1st October 2007 will be 24 days for full-time staff (4.8 weeks for part-timers). From 1st April 2009 the entitlement will be 28 days for full-time staff (5.6 weeks for part-timers).

Are you Exempt?

You will be exempt from these regulations if you:

• Already give 4 weeks holiday plus bank holidays
• Don’t allow payment to be made in lieu of unused holidays (except for leavers), and
• Don’t allow any of the 4 week entitlement to be carried over into the next year.

If you are not exempt you will need to increase your entitlements to comply with the new rules. Calculating entitlements during the first two years will be complicated, but Picasso HR clients won’t need to be concerned because we will do the work for you.

The information in this newsletter is of a general nature and is not a substitute for professional advice. You are recommended to obtain specific professional advice before you take any action.

For further information, advice or assistance on any of the matters raised in this newsletter please contact Picasso HR on 01473 890037.

Copyright Picasso HR Ltd 2002-2010. Registered in England No 4173777

Email Martin to unsubscribe from this newsletter      Privacy policy.