Last updateTue, 24 Feb 2015 5pm

Employment Law Journal: November 2017

Jo Broadbent rounds up the latest case law and developments affecting employers and their advisers

The EAT recently had to decide whether a misconduct investigation was unreasonable because it was too thorough. Corinne Hough investigates

In NHS 24 v Pillar [2017], the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) concluded that an employment tribunal was wrong to find a dismissal unfair because the investigation report included details of previous incidents which had not resulted in disciplinary proceedings. The EAT found the tribunal’s decision perverse given that the tribunal also decided the dismissal was reasonable based on the information available to the dismissing officer, which included the details of the previous incidents.

Eleanor Boyd and Michael Halsey share some practical tips on managing employees’ annual leave in light of the Ryanair debacle and recent holiday pay decisions

Many readers will have seen (and possibly been affected by) low-cost airline Ryanair’s mass flight cancellations during September and October this year. Ryanair later confirmed that it was cancelling a further 18,000 flights between November 2017 and March 2018, which it was anticipated would cost the airline up to €25m.

Keystone Law

Michelle Last explains why probationary periods can be so valuable for employers and how to obtain maximum advantage from the inclusion of a probationary clause in employment contracts

Employers often question the value and appropriateness of probationary periods for new employees. But when an employer faces the dawning realisation that their new employee may be more ‘super fail’ than ‘super star’, a well-drafted probationary period clause in the employment contract can prove invaluable.

Sam Harris reviews recent cases on whether a job evaluation scheme complied with the Equality Act, whether staff in different locations doing different work could compare their pay and whether multiple equal pay claims could be brought on a single claim form

The equal pay storm in the public sector started in around 2004 and lasted for a good ten years. That storm has since calmed, with most local authority claims being gradually resolved (at tremendous expense). However, that is not to say that we have seen the back of large multiples of equal pay claims. Such claims have now spread into the private sector and there is evidence of further unsettled weather on the horizon.

Following the publication of revised government guidance, Charlotte Jayaseelan explores what checks employers need to make to comply with the duty to prevent illegal working

Employers must carry out ‘right-to-work’ checks on prospective employees to prevent illegal working in the UK. The Home Office has published guidance to assist employers with meeting this obligation, an updated version of which came into effect on 16 August 2017.

Dominic Stuttaford and Amanda Sanders discuss the procedures employers need to put in place following new legislation which makes it a criminal offence not to stop employees or contractors from facilitating tax evasion

The Criminal Finances Act 2017 (the Act) came into force on 30 September 2017. It introduces new corporate criminal offences of failing to prevent an employee, agent or any other person who is performing services for the organisation from criminally facilitating tax evasion, whether the tax is owed in the UK or a foreign country. The new offences do not alter what is criminal, but change who can be held to account for the acts. Employers may therefore find themselves liable and need to assess how they will deal with the new offences.