guardian news - ISO Quality Services Ltd

GUARDIAN NEWS
September 2014
We provide you with a brief monthly
update on case law changes in
employment law and health & safety as well
as legislative compliance requirements
IN THIS MONTH’S EDITION
Human Resources (Page 3)
Failure to Enhance Paternity Pay is not Discriminatory
New Acas Guidance on Dress Codes
Labour’s next government plans to scrap Tribunal Fees
Health and Safety (Page 4)
Workers’ health put at risk by Hampshire firm
Hertfordshire Care Home fined after Resident Death
Other News (Page 5)
Employee Management & Diversity Training
Our most popular course is now On-Line
Health & Safety Posters
Page 2
HUMAN RESOURCES
Failure to Enhance Paternity Pay is
not Discriminatory
An employment tribunal has recently
concluded that a male employee was
not discriminated against when he
only received statutory pay during a
period of additional paternity leave
(APL), even though a female
employee on maternity would have
received full pay for a period up to 52
weeks. (Note that the tribunal found
that the Company’s policy of paying
full pay during maternity leave was
vindicated through justification of
one of its female employee retention
aims.)
Although this was only a first
instance decision that will not bind
other tribunals, it does serve to
remind employers to find a way of
approaching the impending shared
parental leave (SPL) system, as well
as the poignant issue of whether the
benefits of an enhanced maternity
scheme should be applied for those
on SPL.
This is one of the first cases in which
the difference in pay for APL
between men and women has been
considered. However, employers
should not believe their backs are
covered by this ruling, as the decision
is not binding authority. On top of
this, the introduction of SPL (for
babies born on or after 5 April 2015)
brings with it a variety of differences
from APL, such as the fact that SPL
can be taken from two weeks after
the birth – compared to 20 weeks for
APL. It is then, an ever-possible
occurrence that the courts will take a
different approach to discrimination
claims based on differences between
maternity pay and SPL.
For the majority of employers
reading this article, a pertinent point
to take away is that in order to
justify a decision to enhance
maternity pay but not for SPL, the
level of detailed evidence that you
will have to provide is extensive.
Here, the Company had carefully
considered the issue when APL was
introduced, had reviewed various
options and had identified sound
business reasons for the decision to
continue to enhance maternity pay
only.
New ACAS Guidance on Dress Codes
ACAS has issued new guidance on
dress codes and appearance in the
workplace. Dress codes are often
used in the workplace and there are
many reasons why an employer may
have one, for example workers may
be asked to wear a uniform to
communicate a corporate image and
ensure that customers can easily
identify them. Often an employer
will introduce a dress code for health
and safety reasons, for example
health care workers may not be
allowed to wear jewellery for safety
reasons when around patients and
certain clothing may not be allowed
in factories while operating
machinery.
The following link takes you directly
to the ACAS guidance: http://
www.acas.org.uk/dresscode
Labour’s next government plans to
scrap Tribunal Fees
The Labour Party plans to abolish
the current employment tribunal
fees regime if elected in May 2015,
shadow business secretary, Chuka
Umunna, told delegates at the Trade
Union Congress (TUC) conference
this week.
Umunna described the current
procedure as “unfair and
unsustainable” as well as
mentioning that a future Labour
government would reform the
employment tribunals system to
ensure that “all workers have
proper access to justice”.
Under the current regime, tribunal
claims have fallen by 45 per cent
since fees – as much as £250 for a
claim and £950 for a tribunal
hearing – were introduced by the
coalition government last year.
Neil Carberry, director for
employment and skills policy at the
CBI warned that scrapping fees
completely could be a step in the
wrong direction. “Firms have been
frustrated for years by delays in the
system and by false and misleading
claims that take up time and
resources. Businesses want to see a
return to a less bureaucratic system
that deals with claims more quickly
and is run by the Department for
Business, Innovation and Skills,
rather than the Court Service,” he
said.
We at Guardian Support take the
stance that the employment
tribunal system should be reviewed
on a regular basis to make sure that
it is effective for the employers as
well as the employees.
For more information : http://
www.labourbisteam.org.uk/labourwill-reform-employment-tribunalsso-income-is-not-a-barri
Page 3
HEALTH & SAFETY
resident, but the screws used were
not long enough to penetrate the
blockwork of the building, meaning
they were not adequate to stop
someone pulling the wardrobe
over.
Workers’ health put at risk by
Hampshire firm
A Hampshire manufacturer has
appeared in court after they allowed
employee health to be put at risk.
A precision engineering company
based in Andover, was prosecuted by
the Health and Safety Executive (HSE)
at Basingstoke Magistrates’ Court on
the 28th August 2014 for multiple
health and safety breaches. An
inspection by HSE revealed that
multiple risks to health from exposure
to vibration, noise and dust had not
been properly managed or controlled.
HSE discovered that the Company,
that produce metal castings for a
range of industries, had no effective
management systems in place to
control health risk exposure to their
employees. Consequently, workers
experienced a variety of symptoms
that required further investigation and
monitoring.
The Company was fined a total of
£7,000 and ordered to pay £1,379 in
costs after admitting to single
breaches of the Health and Safety at
Work etc. Act 1974; the Management
of Health and Safety at Work
Regulations 1999; the Control of
Vibration at Work Regulations 2005;
and two breaches of the Control of
Substances Hazardous to Health
Regulations.
After the hearing, HSE Inspector
Michael Baxter said: “The company
failed to fully control the numerous
risks arising from its business activities. This has meant several employees
developing symptoms relating to exposure to vibration, noise and dust,
which could have been picked up
sooner as part of a health surveillance
programme. The Company “did not
respond to changing workloads and
processes, and failed to act on advice
provided by its occupational health
provider or by contractors servicing
equipment.
Employees exposed to high levels of
vibration at work risk developing
Hand Arm Vibration Syndrome,
which is serious and disabling.
Damage impacts on hand and finger
dexterity, including the inability to
undertake minor day-to-day tasks,
and cold can trigger painful finger
blanching attacks. For information,
go to http://www.hse.gov.uk/
vibration/hav
The HSE investigation concluded
that although the care home was
aware of Mrs Hughes’ obsession
with clothing, the fixings used to
attach the wardrobe to the wall
were not of a suitable standard.
The Company was fined a total of
£85,000 and ordered to pay a
further £48,000 in costs after
pleading guilty to a single breach of
the Health and Safety at Work etc.
Act 1974.
Hertfordshire Care Home fined
after Resident Death
A Hertfordshire care home operator
has been fined after a resident with
clinical dementia was suffocated by
an unsecure wardrobe.
The Service User died from
compressions asphyxia following
the incident at a care home in
Watford, on 23 December 2011.
St Alban’s Crown Court heard that
Mrs Hughes suffered from a form of
dementia that resulted in an
obsession with clothing and an
insatiable need to wear excessive
layers. Accordingly, the wardrobe in
her room was locked in order to
prevent her from gaining access to
the clothes inside.
On the day she died, she was alone
in her room and had attempted to
get inside the wardrobe when it fell
on top of her, rendering her unable
to breathe. She was found when
staff checked on her and an
ambulance was called, but she was
pronounced dead at the scene.
HSE established that the wardrobe
had been attached to the wall
before Mrs Hughes became a
HSE Inspector Sandra Dias, said:
the death was a wholly
preventable tragedy caused by
unacceptable management failings
on the part of the Company. They
put her at unnecessary risk.
The company was aware of her
obsession with clothing and that is
why they locked her wardrobe. In
doing so it was eminently
foreseeable that she would
attempt to open it using force, and
that the wardrobe therefore
needed to be rigid and secure.
“Working in a care home is a
specialised job, which involves
dealing with vulnerable people.
Care homes must ensure that they
have the correct training in place
for all their employees, and that
they work to adequately assess and
eliminate all significant risks.”
Page 4
TRAINING / OTHER NEWS
Employee Management & Diversity Training
Birmingham - Thursday Oct 16th 2014
Bristol - Tuesday Nov 4th
London - Thursday Nov 13th
From “How To Conduct a Disciplinary” to your responsibilities in “Family
Friendly” matters such as Maternity and Paternity leave.
Email Andrew@guardiansupport.co.uk for syllabus and course details
Our most popular course is now On-Line
“Invest in people and they will invest in you”
Our NEBOSH National General Certificate is an
internationally recognised qualification which can
help any employee bring a high level of knowledge
and competency in Health and Safety matters to
your work place.
Click below for a FREE DEMO of our on-line learning
FREE NEBOSH E-LEARNING DEMO
“Prevention is better than Cure”
Posters start from as little as £22+VAT (including delivery)
Any & All Training Questions To
andrew@guardiansupport.co.uk / 07969 170223
Page 5