Coronavirus National Crisis – Employee Rights
What rights do you have if you can’t work because of Covid-19?
With schools closed and estimates that up to a fifth of the UK working population could be off sick at the height of a Coronavirus epidemic, what rights do employees have if they can’t attend work?
The recently introduced Furlough scheme (Coronavirus National Crisis – Furlough Leave) doesn’t necessarily apply to those who can’t attend work because they are (for example) vulnerable and therefore need to self isolate or have child care commitments due to school closures. So what are the options if you fall into these categories? Here’s what you need to know:
- All employees should be allowed to work from home where possible, and if they are from a vulnerable group, display symptoms, or are living with someone who displays symptoms, then they should not be attending work, even if they would usually be required to do so.
- Those individuals, who are unable to attend work due to displaying symptoms, living with someone who displays symptoms or being directed as vulnerable by the Government, should all qualify for sick pay, either company sick pay or SSP.
- Statutory sick pay is £94.25 and applies to those who earn at least £118 per week before tax. In normal circumstances, sick pay starts on the fourth consecutive day that you are unable to work. However, this week it was announced that employees will receive statutory sick pay from the first day that they are sick or self-isolate because of Coronavirus. Many organisations offer their staff sick pay which goes beyond the statutory minimum. Speak to your employer.
- Agency workers, casual worker and workers on zero hours contracts are likely to be entitled to receive at least statutory sick pay.
- Employees may be able to arrange to take time off as holiday or unpaid leave (but employers do not have to agree to this).
- Dependants leave is a right an employee has to take a reasonable amount of time off to care for dependants in an emergency. The amount of time off must be “reasonable” – for example, you might take 2 days off to start with, and if more time is needed, you can book holiday or request parental leave (see below). There is no statutory right to pay for dependant leave. However, some employers might offer pay depending on the contract or workplace policy. If a dependant such as a partner, child or relative in the same household gets Coronavirus symptoms, you should receive Statutory Sick Pay (SSP) as a minimum for this time.
- Parents who have been with their employer for a year or more also have a right to request parental leave. Parental leave is unpaid and limited to 18 weeks for each child. A week must be taken at a time and a maximum of 4 weeks can be taken a year in respect of each child. Whilst an employee takes parental leave their employment rights will remain protected, including their annual leave entitlement and right to return to work. Usually 21 days notice must be given in order to take parental leave but employers may be willing to waive this in the current circumstances.
- There are protections in place for employees who exercise their right to take emergency time off to care for dependants or parental leave. It is unlawful for your employer to dismiss you or subject you to any other detriment if you exercise these rights.
If you require advice in relation to the above please contact our free helpline on: 01904 528 310
Follow us on Twitter/Facebook using the handle @PB_Employment
Pattinson & Brewer Solicitors – Employment Law Blog
Coronavirus National Crisis – Protective Awards
Regardless of the industry you work in, everyone is feeling the effects of the pandemic which has swept across the world. COVID-19 is bringing about an unparalleled change to the working landscape in our country unlike we’ve ever seen before. Unfortunately, despite the recently announced government support for businesses and workers alike, there are more and more stories of employers laying people off every day. It is a strange situation in which thousands, if not millions, of individuals are concerned about their short-term employment prospects and many have succumbed to widespread redundancies, often those with less than two years’ service. If you have found yourself in this situation, regardless of length of service, you must seek urgent legal advice as to any claims you may have, including whether you have a claim for a Protective Award which could be worth up to 90 days’ pay.
As specialist employment rights lawyers, dedicated only to seeking justice for working people, we are experts in pursuing such claims, as highlighted by our recent success on behalf of Superbreak employees [https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/18260519.former-superbreak-staff-york-get-150k-tribunal-claim/].
We set out more information below:
Collective Consultation
Where an employer proposes to make large scale redundancies of 20 or more employees within a period of 90 days or less, it must consult on its proposal with representatives of the affected employees. In most COVID-19 related scenarios to date, this clearly hasn’t happened. Nobody was elected nor did any consultation take place. Staff have simply been told that they are redundant with immediate effect. Enforcement of the obligation to consult is by way of complaint to an employment tribunal. Complaints can be made in relation to a breach of the statutory rules governing the election of employee representatives and in relation to a failure to inform and consult more generally. If successful, a Tribunal can award up to 90 days’ pay per employee bringing the claim, otherwise known as the Protective Award.
In the event that the employer has gone into administration, the claim can still be pursued and compensation can be obtained from the Redundancy Payments Office although they cap such claims at 56 days’ pay.
What if I am laid-off/made redundant?
If you have found yourself in a similar situation as set out above, please contact Emily Bradshaw, Partner and Head of the Employment Rights team at Pattinson & Brewer, who will be able to discuss how we can assist on a no win no fee basis.
Emily can be contacted on ebradshaw@pattinsonbrewer.co.uk alternatively, contact our helpline on: 01904 528031.
Follow us on Twitter: @PB_Employment
Pattinson & Brewer Solicitors – Employment Law Fact Sheet
Coronavirus National Crisis – Furlough Leave
As the Coronavirus pandemic continues to propel the UK into unprecedented times, our employment team at Pattinson & Brewer are busy working hard behind the scenes to bring you the latest need-to-know information.
Furlough Leave
We are all now familiar with the need to ‘stay at home’ in order to try and slow the spread of the virus, which means many of us cannot attend work as normal. As part of its measures to try and distil the impact on the workforce, the government announced a “Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme” which will see any employee currently paid via the PAYE system guaranteed their wages up to 80% (capped at £2,500).
Here’s what you need to know:
- If your employer cannot cover staff costs due to the Coronavirus pandemic, it can elect to ‘lay off’ its staff temporarily (you would be classed as furloughed) rather than make redundancies;
- You will remain employed by your employer and kept on your employer’s payroll during this time but you must not carry out work for them;
- Your employer can claim a non-repayable grant of up to 80% of your wages (capped at £2,500) and if it can, it can elect to make up the difference to pay your entire wage;
- If you consider you may struggle under this scheme, you can also make an application to Universal Credit to see if you qualify for additional support; and
- The scheme is intended to run for 3 months and has a start date of 1 March 2020.
What do I do now?
Firstly, talk to your employer and try to do this as soon as possible. Selection for furlough should be based on your job responsibilities and whether you would be otherwise laid off or made redundant and your employer will need to get your written consent to such, having discussed all of your options with you.
Once it is agreed you will be furloughed, your employer must sign on to an online portal in order to inform HMRC of your new employment status.
What if I am laid-off/made redundant instead?
The whole purpose of this government package is to avoid redundancies and lay-offs at a time of national crisis. If your employer is refusing to access the grant, even though you consider you fit the criteria for being furloughed you may be entitled to bring a claim in the employment tribunal. Ordinarily you would have three months less one day to submit your claim.
However, in the first instance please redirect your employer to the following link which should help them to understand the scheme a bit better. If you are still experiencing difficulties please contact our free helpline on: 01904 528031.
Follow us on Twitter/Facebook using the handle @PB_Employment
5 GMB members working as security guards for Cardinal Security Limited and based at an ASDA warehouse in Didcot have won their Employment Tribunal claims for redundancy pay and holiday pay.
In January 2018, the members were informed that their employment would transfer to another company. However, there was evidence that the members were in fact redundant and that Cardinal Security were trying to avoid responsibility for paying the members redundancy pay.
GMB supported the members to bring claims in the Employment Tribunal.
At a hearing on 6 March 2020, the Reading Employment Tribunal held that the five members were made redundant and awarded them all of the money that they had claimed from Cardinal Security.
One of the claimants, Prem Gurung, who gave lead evidence on behalf of all of the claimants said, ‘I would like to say thank you to GMB for supporting us over such a long time. I am really grateful to the GMB.’
Kim Crangle, Employment Rights solicitor at Pattinson & Brewer, who acted for the claimants commented saying, “This is a great result for these GMB members, whose former employer sought to avoid paying them redundancy pay and holiday pay. Thanks to this successful claim, the members will finally be able to recover the money owing to them.”
Steve Hutchings, GMB Branch Secretary, commented saying, “This is a great result for our branch members. This is what GMB is all about – helping members”.
A GMB member who worked for a Children’s Centre has secured compensation of just under £3k after suffering an accident at work. The GMB member was closing a window when the window suddenly fell on her, crushing her finger.
The member, who does not wish to be named, said, “It was a painful situation and inconvenient. I didn’t initially think that I would be able to get any compensation but my family encouraged me to speak to the union. So I would now say to everyone to just be aware that, no matter what you may think, just put in a claim through GMB and see where it leads.”
Lisa Villanyi, lawyer at Pattinson & Brewer Solicitors who acted for the member said: “This member sustained an injury at work as a result of a faulty sash window coming down unexpectedly on to her finger. I was very pleased to obtain an early admission of liability from the defendant and to secure a prompt and well deserved settlement for her.”
Sheila Berry, GMB Regional Organiser commented saying, “Most accidents at work could be prevented if employers followed basic health and safety standards. I would encourage employers to work with GMB to protect employees against such injuries. I would also say to employees to always report things to management if you believe that there is any danger to you or your work colleagues.’
A GMB member has recovered over £11k in compensation following his redundancy. The member was employed for almost 40 years by Burgess Marine Ltd when the company suddenly ceased trading and went into administration. All employees, bar a select few, were made redundant without notice or any form of consultation with staff or the union.
GMB supported Employment Tribunal proceedings on behalf of the member and the Employment Tribunal agreed that there had been a wholesale failure on the part of the company.
As the Company was in administration, compensation was sought from the Redundancy Payments Office. The RPO made various payments at an early stage and have now made a final payment in excess of £11k.
Christopher Riley, solicitor of Pattinson & Brewer Solicitors who acted on behalf of the successful GMB member said, ‘This is a great result for the claimant who was working abroad when he unexpectedly heard that he had been dismissed. He was never actually contacted by the company but heard what had happened from colleagues.’
Frank Macklin, GMB Regional Organiser said, ‘This compensation couldn’t have come at a better time for this member. GMB has a proud record of assisting members in times of need and we urge any member who is going through a similar issue within their workplace to come forward and talk to someone from GMB as, you never know, you may also be entitled to compensation if your employer doesn’t follow the law.’
Kim Crangle, a specialist employment solicitor in Pattinson & Brewer’s employment team, represented Mr E in successful claims for unfair and wrongful dismissal, backed by the GMB Union.
Mr E brought claims for unfair and wrongful dismissal. His case was joined with six other claimants and heard across five days at the Central London Employment Tribunal.
Employment Judge Snelson first considered our application to strike out the respondent’s defence on the grounds that they had failed to comply with a number of tribunal orders. This application succeeded and the tribunal held that Mr E had been unfairly dismissed.
The tribunal judge then considered remedy. After considered submissions from all represented parties, he ordered that Mr E and the other claimants be reinstated and dismissed the respondent’s submissions that it was not practicable to do so. In 2016-2017, reinstatement was ordered in just 0.033% of all cases in the employment tribunals.
This remedy entitled Mr E and the other claimants to be reinstated in their former roles and to recover back pay from the date of their dismissal. The respondent has agreed to comply with the order for reinstatement and Mr E expects to be back at work before December 2019.
The exact value of the compensation owing is yet to be finalised but we expect the respondent to owe the claimants several hundred thousand pounds in total. Our client Mr E is owed two years’ worth of back pay. A further hearing is listed in the New Year to deal with any outstanding issues concerning remedy and to hear an application for costs.
Linda Levison, head of Pattinson & Brewer’s Clinical Negligence team has once again been recognised by her peers for the outstanding work she has done for her clients.
Linda has concluded many high value cases including recent settlements of a brain injury case worth £10 million and a spinal injury case for £7.5 million. She has also recently been involved in a landmark catastrophic injury case that she successfully took to the Court of Appeal.
This year, she has been doubly recognised by ‘Best Lawyers’, the oldest peer review in the legal profession, who selected Linda for inclusion again in the 2018 edition of Best Clinical Negligence Lawyers in the UK, and at their 9th annual GLE Awards, Global Law Experts gave Linda the 2018 award for Clinical Negligence Lawyer of the Year (England).
Commenting, Frances McCarthy, Senior Partner, said:
“Our clients know that Linda Levison is a brilliant lawyer, and as her partners we are incredibly proud of the work she does, but it’s a great credit to Linda that she has once again been recognised by her peers and awarded the title 2018 Clinical Negligence Lawyer of the Year (England)”
For further information please contact Jamie Hanley (jhanley@pattinsonbrewer.co.uk)
The Time’s Up campaign has been described as a “unified call for change from women in entertainment for women everywhere”. The catalyst for the campaign was the string of sexual abuse allegations by high-profile women actors against film producer Harvey Weinstein. But, it is now a global movement whose fight to end sexual harassment is resonating loudly with women from every industry.
The strength of the campaign is not its message – as brilliant and powerful as that is – but the fact that it represents a collective fight. There have always been those brave individual women who are prepared to bring the fight on their own, taking on their harassers through employment tribunal litigation. But even with the support of a lawyer, family and friends, it can still feel like a solitary fight.
We may be witnessing the beginning of a seismic shift when it comes to the fight against sexual harassment and abuse. Rather than having to rely on the brave few to put their heads above the parapet and express the truth (in one form or another) for the rest of us, the truth now has a collective voice and it is growing louder and louder.
In the meantime we continue to applaud those women that have the courage and determination to bring their cases to the employment tribunal.
That includes actor Helen Haines, whose case was reported in various national newspapers this week. Ms Hains brought complaints of sexual harassment and sex discrimination against various employees, including the Director of the touring theatre company that had engaged her in 2016.
The complaints included being called a ‘slut’, comments on her breasts and repeatedly being asked if she wanted to have “a threesome”. She was awarded £10,500 in compensation.
Emily Bradshaw from Pattinson & Brewer’s Employment & Discrimination Department represented Ms Hains. The judgment is available here.
Commenting on her case Ms Hains said:
“I was forced to resign from my acting job due to sustained sexual harassment and discrimination. I made a formal complaint to my union, Equity. They fully supported my case and set me up with legal support from Pattinson & Brewer.
The perpetrators made me feel humiliated and intimidated. When I informed the company manager of what was happening he showed no sympathy. I was even accused of setting out to manipulate events so that I could sue them! Hearing my harassers admit their behaviour and winning the case felt like justice.”
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has upheld Chief Inspector Denby’s claims that he was subjected to sex discrimination and victimisation by the Metropolitan Police Service (the Met).
The case attracted media attention because of the seniority of the officers involved and because there are relatively few successful male claimants in a case of this type.
Backed throughout by the Police Federation, and represented by Sarah Bains, a specialist employment solicitor in Pattinson & Brewer’s employment team, Chief Inspector Denby won his claims of direct sex discrimination and victimisation at Central London Employment Tribunal in 2016. The Met appealed the decision on multiple grounds. All those grounds failed.
In a culture perceived as hostile to women, illustrated by such matters as men clad only in towels, under-representation of women and alcohol at work, very senior Met officers had taken the view that Chief Inspector Denby was not the right person to confront the issues. He was subsequently removed from his command. He was also placed under an investigation, put on restricted duties and suffered a downgrading of a performance review that effectively prevented his promotion to Superintendent.
The EAT upheld the tribunal findings that senior officers had been the relevant decision makers and that their decisions were taken on the unlawful ground of sex.
The Met was criticized by the tribunal for its “opaque decision making”. The EAT rightly held that employers should not be allowed to use a deliberate lack of transparency to hide the true identity of decision makers and so escape liability for discrimination.