HR Doctor - The "aftermath" of workplace social events and an update on new employment legislation
First a
reminder about the three 'xmas
spirits':
Spirit number one was an argument between two
senior managers which ended up with one of them jumping on the
other manager's car roof.
Spirit number two and the police are involved
following a fight which an employee tries to stop and ends up with
a broken arm.
Spirit number three and a claim of sexual
harassment is made against an employee following a group of workers
who decided to have a few drinks after work.
The public vote was interesting, ignoring the person who
suggested corporal punishment and the return of national service,
responses ranged from 'give them a telling off' to dismissal for
gross misconduct. The majority did view the offences as serious and
put the offences in the ballpark of final written warning to
dismissal.
Of course the law would suggest that as long as an employer
operates within the band of 'reasonableness', then whatever action
they take is ok. What is reasonable was very nicely summed up by
Lord Denning as:
'Was it reasonable for the employer to dismiss him? If no
reasonable employer would have dismissed him then the dismissal was
unfair. But, if a reasonable employer might have reasonably
dismissed him, then the dismissal was fair. It must be remembered
that, in all these cases there is a band of reasonableness, within
which one employer might reasonably take one view; another quite
reasonably take a differnet view. Both views might be reasonable.
If it was quite reasonable to dismiss him then the dismissal might
be upheld as fair, even though some other employer might not have
reasonably dismissed him.'
So, all clear!!
My view is that all are very serious, and frankly I would not
want to work somewhere that treated incidents like these three as
just warranting a telling off. That of course is assuming that I
had a choice where I worked. A couple of people did question the
fact that none of the incidents happened in the actual workplace.
My view is, that its irrelevant they are all work related and need
to be dealt with by each of the employers involved. I am pleased to
say they all did, they all rang me and I have to thank them for
paying for my wife's Christmas presents (notice that is more than
one).
The standard response is to:
- Consider suspension
- Carry out an investigation and
- If necessary proceed to a Disciplinary hearing, with
finally
- An Appeal if required.
I am sure you all know this stuff and just want to know what
happened...
The manager who jumped on the car was dismissed. The two
employees who had a punch up were dismissed and the employee who
kissed his colleague against her wishes was also dismissed. In
terms of 'risk' to the business it was the sexual harassment
allegation that presents by far the biggest risk in money terms
with no limit to the compensation that tribunals can award for
'injury to feelings', although there are guidelines laid down for
tribunal to use.
Perhaps as well as publicising the dangers of 'drink driving'
the authorities should highlight the danger of losing your job as
drink makes some people stupid.
More scenarios to follow in the next edition for you to comment
on, I am thinking of having World Cup related scenarios.
Before I go though, at this time of year we get all the
new employment legislation. With an election
looming, not a lot to report but you should be aware of the new
sick note system and that you will get employees who are declared
as 'fit for some work' and have to consider if you can give them
some work. Connected to sickness is the recent case law on holidays
and sickness which technically only applies to the public sector at
the moment but will affect all employers shortly. The case law now
says that if an employee is sick whilst on a holiday then they can
claim the holiday back. This does only apply to the statutory
minimum holidays (28 days).
Other changes introduced in April were the right to request time
to undertake study or training, and the introduction of additional
paternity leave for fathers. The additional paternity leave is
applicable to babies born on or after 3 April 2011, so it will not
have happened yet! Biology and maths were not my strong
subjects.
All from me for the moment. If you wish to send me comments
about national service or anything else please do so at steve@myhrpeople.com