Category Archives: Terminate

Apprentices – Four Reasons and a Risk

160607 Apprenticeship Training CareerSUMMARY: Four reasons to engage an apprentice and how to overcome the main risk

The government has been encouraging employers to engage apprentices and many employers are now seeing the benefits of them.

Four key benefits

1. National Insurance Contributions (“NICs”)

Since 6 April 2016, employers do not have to pay class 1 NICs for apprentices who are earning less than £827 a week (£43,000 a year) and are:

  1. under age 25; and
  2. following an approved UK government statutory apprenticeship framework.

Specific evidence is needed to show that these two requirements are satisfied. For example, an appropriate agreement.

 2. Apprentice rate minimum wage

If the apprentice is in the first year of their apprenticeship or is under the age of 19, employers can pay the apprenticeship rate, which is currently £3.30 per hour.

3. Gain skills in areas your organisation needs to grow

Organisations will be constantly considering and implementing new ways to grow.  Apprentices can be a cost effective way of supporting the larger strategic aim.

4. Funding

There could be funding available from the Skills Funding Agency to your business to support apprenticeship programmes.  Further information can be found at www.gov.uk/government/organisations/skills-funding-agency

Risks

The intention is for the apprenticeship relationship to be a positive and beneficial one for the organisation and the individual. However, not all working relationships will be harmonious.  If things do not work out, employers need to be able to address problems and ultimately dismiss individuals both fairly and lawfully if problems subsist; this is often where the risk lies.  Why?  Apprentices can have enhanced rights on dismissal, which limits the ability to terminate the agreement without potentially a significant financial liability.

Having the right agreement in place lowers the risk by ensuring an apprentice can be dismissed in the same way as an employee.

More Information

For more information on apprenticeships and how you can make them work for you, please visit: http://www.fgsolicitors.co.uk/news/apprenticeships-make-them-work-for-you/

Alternatively, if you would like more information on other contract essentials, please visit: http://www.fgsolicitors.co.uk/news/contract-essentials/

Contact Details

If you are considering recruiting an apprentice and want to benefit from the above advantages, without worrying about the risk, please contact us:

fgmedia@fgsolicitors.co.uk

+44 (0) 808 172 93 22

This update is for general guidance only and does not constitute definitive advice.

Misconduct & Punishment in Employment

Punishment at workSummary: Disagreement between employer and employee is as old as the very concept of Master and Servant itself. As a general rule, where disagreement ends with an employer forming the view that an ending of the relationship is the outcome it desires, there are some mandatory steps that will need to be addressed.

An employer seeking to dismiss an employee will generally have to consider 2 key areas of law:

  1. the first answers the question, what if anything is owed to the employee as a result of the ending of the employment? – the contractual question;
  2. the second, is the dismissal fair in all the circumstances? – the protection afforded to the employee by Parliament; the statutory question.

The first question is arguably the one to answer. Consider the case of an employer wishing to terminate the employment of an employee for misconduct who has a contract entitling them to 6 months’ notice. Except for where the misconduct is of such an extreme nature that it amounts to gross misconduct, ending the employment without payment is likely to give rise to a successful breach of contract claim.

In a recent case, the High Court decided that an employee who sent a pornographic e-mail from a work account had committed an act which entitled his employer to dismiss him without paying him the 12 months’ notice to which he was entitled. This was in spite of the fact that the sending of the e-mail was discovered some 5 years after it had been sent and only as part of a fishing exercise conducted by the employer, specifically to find a reason to dismiss.

It is extremely important that an employer intending to dismiss in these circumstances does not, after discovery of the conduct, behave in a way that would lead to a view that it had waived its right to dismiss in these circumstances.

By contrast, whether or not the dismissal was fair, in all the circumstances, would largely depend on the procedure leading up to the decision to dismiss. In short, did the employer have a reasonable belief in the guilt of the employee based on the employer having undertaken a reasonable investigation? Finally, whether the decision to dismiss in those circumstances, as opposed to applying some other sanction, was reasonable.

Tackling the risk of a successful unfair dismissal claim is a juggling act requiring an employer to engage in a fair procedure free from bias, permitting the employee an opportunity to properly understand the allegations, to address them and to be accompanied if requested.

Having managed all of that, dismissing the employee as a result of the allegations must, on an objective view, be action that a reasonable employer would take. Applying this thinking to the case mentioned above, while the age of the offence might not matter, particularly if the employer had no knowledge of it, the decision to go on a fishing expedition to find misconduct that would allow an employer to dismiss for gross misconduct and in so doing avoid the obligation to pay notice, may very well be considered unfair. This is so even if in so doing the employer would not be in breach of contract.

Other considerations:

  • Ensure that if contemplating dismissing for gross misconduct, and your policies define types of conduct that you consider fall within that category, the current offence does not fall outside it. In a recently decided case where a tribunal found the dismissal of an employee to be unfair, one of the factors that influenced the finding that the dismissal was unfair was the fact that the employer’s policy stated that the offence which the employee was facing would be dealt with by a maximum sanction of a written warning.
  • Ensure that you follow your own laid down procedures.
  • Ensure your investigation is thorough, including follow up investigations.
  • Ensure the process is well documented including witness evidence and statements.
  • Wherever possible, ensure that each level of the process is chaired by someone different.
  • Permit an appeal.

Above all, obtain proper advice and support.

Contact Details

For more details please contact:

fgmedia@fgsolicitors.co.uk

+44 (0) 808 172 93 22

This update is for general guidance only and does not constitute definitive advice.

Geys –v– Société Générale: The Implications for PILON Clauses

Handshake with Coins (123rf ref 8989911)

SUMMARY: In light of the recent Supreme Court case of Geys –v– Société Générale (‘SG’) employers are encouraged to ensure that their usage of PILON clauses would be effective to terminate employment with immediate effect.

Continue reading

Whistleblowing Update

17663630_sSUMMARY: The Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill is currently progressing through Parliament and proposes three significant changes to the current whistleblowing legislation. The recent case of Onyango –v– Adrian Berkeley t/a Berkeley Solicitors has also widened the concept of a protected disclosure to include a disclosure made after an employee’s employment has terminated.

Continue reading