Last updateTue, 24 Feb 2015 5pm

Employment Law Journal: December 2014/January 2015

Sarah Parkin rounds up the key employment law developments, cases and policies that practitioners can expect in the coming year

Next year is currently set to be relatively quiet as far as new employment legislation is concerned, although the new shared parental leave system coming into force in April marks a significant change to the landscape of family-friendly rights. With the political parties gearing up to the general election in May, however, we are starting to get an indication of how employment law could change over the new few years, depending on which party is elected. This article sets out ten predictions for 2015, outlining the main parties’ proposals and the key developments and cases employment lawyers can expect next year.

Dechert LLP

Recent decisions highlight the need to consider carefully who is ‘in scope’ for the purposes of a TUPE transfer, warns Charles Wynn-Evans

A central issue to determine on the transfer of an undertaking or a service provision change is which individuals fall within the transfer’s scope. This determines not only who moves over to the new employer but is also essential to ensuring compliance with two key requirements of the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (TUPE). These are the obligation on the transferor to provide employee liability information (ELI) to the transferee (under reg 11) and the requirements on collective information and consultation (under reg 13).

Keystone Law

Stephen Levinson summarises the response from the Employment Lawyers Association (ELA) to the latest proposals on bankers’ accountability and remuneration

Employment lawyers have given a lukewarm reception to new proposals to regulate the financial sector. The ideas in two consultation papers, issued jointly by the Prudential Regulation Authority on behalf of the Bank of England and the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), are considered by ELA to give rise to serious concerns about the way they will operate and their potential for unfortunate consequences.

Simon Kerr-Davis and Gemma Parker take a detailed look at the practical and legal issues that employers face when deciding whether to offer enhancements to employees on SPL

Many employers currently choose to enhance pay above the statutory rate for women on maternity leave. Although there is no statutory obligation on such employers to also enhance pay for men and women on shared parental leave (SPL), where men are not offered (or are offered less) enhanced pay, there is a risk of successful discrimination claims. There are also many other reasons why employers might consider enhancing pay for SPL, including recruitment and retention objectives, matching employees’ expectations and employer branding and ethos.

David Widdowson outlines concerns about the government’s proposals to prevent employers from evading the prohibition on exclusivity clauses

In the summer of 2013, zero-hours contracts (ZHCs) became something of a political football following the significant upward revision of the Office of National Statistics’ figures for the number of UK employees working under these arrangements. A year later, in August 2014, the government published its response to its initial consultation document on the issue.

Abisola Latunji examines the complex rules governing the employment of apprentices

The TV show The Apprentice is back on our screens and once again the merits of each of the candidates are dividing the nation. In workplaces across the land, it will no doubt also spark debate about the benefits of using apprentices to help businesses grow.

Christopher Bushnell discusses what employers and their advisers need to know about the EAT’s latest ruling on holiday pay

Over recent years, a series of cases about holiday pay has made what was once a relatively straightforward issue into an increasingly complex one presenting many practical difficulties. Employers using established holiday pay calculations as set out in legislation now find that this interpretation of the law was wrong and they have been in breach.