POPULARITY
20 episodes with employment rights
2 episodes with employment rights
3 episodes with employment rights
2 episodes with employment rights
3 episodes with employment rights
2 episodes with employment rights
3 episodes with employment rights
2 episodes with employment rights
2 episodes with employment rights
2 episodes with employment rights
2 episodes with employment rights
2 episodes with employment rights
2 episodes with employment rights
2 episodes with employment rights
10 episodes with employment rights
6 episodes with employment rights
4 episodes with employment rights
4 episodes with employment rights
In this exclusive episode of the Talking Recruitment Podcast, Neil Carberry sits down with Justin Madders MP, Minister for Employment Rights, Competition and Markets for a timely conversation exploring the Government's employment agenda and the future of work in the UK. With the Employment Rights Bill on the horizon and his recent fireside chat at RECLive25, this episode offers a front-row seat to the thinking behind the proposed reforms and what they mean for the recruitment industry.
Episode 142: The ADA and Employment Rights for Employees with Alcohol or Substance Use Disorders by Southeast ADA Center
Sarah Isgur and David French are coming to you from Gettsyburg with two free speech cases. Is posting aborted fetuses a religious practice? The Agenda:—Join us May 15th for a special live Advisory Opinions—Substantial disruption and school dress codes—Free speech, employment rights, and religious discrimination—Do we need a third founding? Advisory Opinions is a production of The Dispatch, a digital media company covering politics, policy, and culture from a non-partisan, conservative perspective. To access all of The Dispatch's offerings, click here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
In October 2024, the Government unveiled its Employment Rights Bill which is currently making its way through Parliament to become law. This Bill introduces major reforms to workers' rights.In part 2 of the Employment Rights Bill podcast in the ‘Talking Employment Law' series, Louise Keenan and Melanie Pimenta, members of the employment team at Clarkslegal, will discuss some of the main provisions of the Bill, including:Changes to collective redundanciesFlexible workingSick payPlease contact our employment team if your business needs help with any of these proposed changes. It's important to seek advice and plan for the changes now to be ready when they come into force.The Employment Rights Bill Podcast Series Part 1. Unfair dismissal and family rights
Are you ready for the Employment Rights Bill? What it means for health & safety in 2025 New year, new compliance challenges. The forthcoming Employment Rights Bill is set to reshape the health and safety (H&S) landscape, placing greater legal responsibility on employers to protect their workforce. In this episode, we dive into the major H&S implications of the Bill and what it means for your organisation. From enhanced reporting duties to new employer obligations, our experts break down the legal shifts and share practical strategies to stay compliant and mitigate workplace risks. Key topics include: What's in the Employment Rights Bill: A breakdown of the key H&S-related provisions and what they mean in practice Evolving duty of care: How the new rules change your legal responsibilities toward employees Enhanced H&S reporting: Streamlining compliance through better data and digital reporting tools Proactive risk management: Practical approaches for identifying and managing workplace hazards Building a safety culture: Embedding compliance into everyday operations and workforce behaviour Tech and tools for compliance: How digital solutions can help you meet your obligations more effectively Whether you're a compliance lead, HR manager, or safety officer, this episode will equip you with the knowledge you need to prepare for one of the biggest regulatory changes of 2025.
In October 2024 the Government launched a major overhaul of employment law in the form of the Employment Rights Bill. A number of important amendments have been introduced since the proposed legislation was first published. Stephen Simpson, principal editor at Brightmine, joins the podcast to provide an update and help HR departments prepare for the changes. Download the transcript What to read, listen to and watch next On your radar April 2025 employment law changes: Five-point checklist for HR Podcast: Neonatal care leave - a practical guide Webinar: Ethnicity data disclosure - fostering trust and building engagement for a better workplace
In our latest employment law podcast, David Hossack speaks to Hayley Johnson about various recent changes to employment law, including the introduction of neonatal leave, as well as discussing where we are with the Employment Rights Bill.
In our latest employment law podcast, David Hossack speaks to Hayley Johnson about various recent changes to employment law, including the introduction of neonatal leave, as well as discussing where we are with the Employment Rights Bill.
In October 2024, the Government unveiled its Employment Rights Bill which is currently making its way through Parliament to become law. This Bill introduces major reforms to workers' rights.In part 1 of the Employment Rights Bill podcast in the ‘Talking Employment Law' series, Louise Keenan and Lucy White, members of the employment team at Clarkslegal, will discuss some of the main provisions of the Bill, including: Unfair dismissal Family rightsBereavement leave Unpaid parental leavePaternity leave Extension of protection for pregnant women and new mothersPlease contact our employment team if your business needs help with any of these proposed changes. It's important to seek advice and plan for the changes now to be ready when they come into force.
The goverment has tabled a number of amendments to the Employment Rights Bill since our last podcast. These will affect collective redundancies and Statutory Sick Pay, and introduce the Fair Work Agency to help employees enforce their rights. Our podcast outlines the changes you need to be aware of.The second part of this month's episode looks at injury to feelings awards. What are they? How does a tribunal assess how much to award? Does a claimant need medical evidence to support their claims? We answer these questions, and more.
The government has said it supports bereavement leave for couples who experience a miscarriage before 24 weeks gestation. Business Minister Justin Madders told MPs he "fully accepts" the principle of bereavement leave for pregnancy loss and promised to look at adding the right to the Employment Rights Bill. Nuala discusses the issues with national baby loss campaigner and founder of George's Law Keeley Lengthorn and the BBC's Employment Correspondent Zoe Conway.A couple of days ago the owner of a Welsh Rugby club put up a social media post to promote an upcoming match against a local rival. He hoped a few thousand people would maybe ‘like' it and ‘share' it and some would come along to watch the match. What he didn't expect was that the post would get more than a quarter of a million views, generate outrage and condemnation and become national news. Accompanying the text was an image of rugby players, with the words, ‘Not For Girls' stamped across the top. Nuala discusses the idea behind the tweet and the reaction with Matthew Young from Neath Rugby Football Club and the sports broadcaster, Stella Mills, one of the first people to see the post and comment. Yesterday the Education Committee heard evidence from professional membership organisations, charities and young people with lived experience of the special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) system, as part of its inquiry into solving the SEND crisis. One teenager invited to address the committee was 17-year-old Katie. Katie is autistic and was a member of the panel for Woman's Hour's SEND: Mums Bridging the Gap programme that was broadcast in September 2024. Katie, her mother Ruth Nellist and Helen Hayes MP, Chair of the SEND Education Committee all join Nuala to discuss the committee's work so far and the importance of the cross-party MPs who make up the committee hearing the experiences of children and young people with SEND.Have you heard of the ‘Attagirls'? They were pioneering women pilots who flew RAF planes throughout the country during World War Two, and achieved equal pay in 1943, but their work as part of the Air Transport Auxiliary has often been overlooked. A new play ‘Spitfire Girls' is inspired by the true stories of these women. Nuala speaks to cast members Katherine Senior and Laura Matthews to find out more about what it was like for women pilots and why it's important to celebrate their stories.Presented by Nuala McGovern Producer: Louise Corley
People who work in hiring and deal with employment issues have reached out to Josh, telling him that the media is blowing it on what Trump has been doing. So today, Josh sets the record straight, explaining what has changed and what crucial rights against discrimination remain untouched. He also shares his own experience with a legal case that put him on the front page of the New York Times. Meanwhile, the media is missing a big related story: Trump's moves on gender put him up against his own Supreme Court pick -- someone he called the very best judge in the country. Josh explains. Plus, the Washington Post gets sneaky, using an article about a movie to lie and rewrite history about the Munich massacre. Send in your thoughts, ideas, and questions! Two ways: Get Josh's free newsletter. If you become a paid subscriber, you get exclusive content and the ability to message Josh directly. Anyone can use this great form. Action item! Former Microsoft CEO and Clippers owner Steve Ballmer saw what a mess government data was, and decided to organize it to help us all understand the country better. For a limited time, sign up for the free weekly email from USA Facts using this unique link: bit.ly/3WNiEhJ. Thanks to a paid partnership, you'll be helping support They Stand Corrected.Josh has events coming up in Atlanta (Feb. 6), and Albany, NY (Feb. 23). Bookings and more at joshlevs.com.
Alasdair Henderson discusses some of the trickier aspects of Labour's Employment Rights Bill with Henry Tufnell MP. Law Pod UK is published by 1 Crown Office Row. Supporting articles are published on the UK Human Rights Blog. Follow and interact with the podcast team on Twitter.
In our latest podcast, Alan Delaney and David Hossack discuss how employers can take steps now to prepare for the significant new rights set to be introduced by the Employment Rights Bill.
In our latest podcast, Alan Delaney and David Hossack discuss how employers can take steps now to prepare for the significant new rights set to be introduced by the Employment Rights Bill.
Alice Jolly taught at Oxford for 16 years ... until she had the temerity to complain about her pay. Sacked from a job she loved, she took the university to court over her employment rights and won a famous victory. But what are the broader lessons for the world of academia? In this Quiet Riot special, Naomi Smith talks with Alice, an award-winning writer and academic, about a sector that contributes £265billion to the economy yet where a deeply disturbing number of universities are running at a loss. Are neo-liberal managers destroying the heart of Britain's higher education sector by prioritising areas such as property development over teaching? ‘When it is very difficult I remind myself that we are fighting for the future of higher education ... it is the basis of our civilisation' 'I loved Oxford University and the dream of that world' ***SPONSOR US AT KO-FI.COM/QUIETRIOTPOD*** Find out more about the University and College Union Find us on Facebook and Twitter as @quietriotpod and on Bluesky. Click here for your Quiet Riot Bluesky Starter Pack. Email us at quietriotpod@gmail.com. Or visit our website www.quietriotpod.com. ***SPONSOR US AT KO-FI.COM/QUIETRIOTPOD*** With Naomi Smith, Alex Andreou and Kenny Campbell – in cahoots with SandStone Global. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
This is the fourth and final episode of a series of four podcasts about the Employment Rights Bill. In this episode, Partners Louise Bloomfield and Tim Gooder, and Knowledge Lawyer Joanne Bell, discuss the planned restriction of "fire and rehire" practices, as well as the proposals targeted at ending what the Government refers to as "one sided flexibility". These include requiring employers to offer a contract for a guaranteed number of hours to zero and low hours workers, and to provide reasonable notice of any cancellation of or changes to scheduled shifts.
Amy: Hello and welcome to the Employment Law Focus podcast. I'm Amy Stokes. Charlie: And I'm Charlie Ray Amy: and we're both employment law partners at TLT and today we're going to be discussing the Employment Rights Bill and well all 150 pages of it, well not quite but what we've done is we have discussed amongst ourselves Charlie and I and pulled out our top 10 takeaways from it. By way of background, this was introduced to Parliament on the 10th of October and is the first phase of delivering the government's plan to make work pay. It brings in 28 individual employment law reforms. And the bill is a wish list of reforms, and it builds in some of the labour manifesto but a watered down version so it's not quite set in stone. Despite the headlines in the papers, it's a while before any of these changes are going to happen. Much of the details are going to be provided via regulations which won't be passed until consultation with stakeholders has concluded. Four of those consultations were very quickly turned around and have actually already started. Those include on zero hours contracts and their application to agency workers, beefing up the remedies for collective redundancy consultation, all the updates to trade union legislation and also statutory sick pay. The government doesn't expect to start consultation however for the rest of the reforms until 2025, with the result that most reforms in the bill will not take place until we anticipate at least 2026, although there's been no commitment on that just yet. The bills also got to go through both houses of parliament before it gains royal assent and therefore may be changed along the way after the consultations as well. So the bottom line is really that the proposals in the bill might well change and employers are going to have plenty of time to feed into the proposals and to prepare for them. What Charlie and I have done to prepare for this podcast today is that we've picked out what we think are the most interesting elements of the bill, the reforms to the bill, primarily to employers. And we're going to run through them, not in the order of importance, just kind of in a more general order, just to give you a flavour of what they are. So, we'll talk through the background to them, the detail of the reforms, to give you a bit of an explainer on those. And then we're going to give you some of our insights from practice about what we think the real impact of those are going to be. So, Charlie, do you want to kick us off with your first one? Charlie: Yeah, we're going to start with probably what's been the main headline grabber from the bill, which is the proposal to remove the unfair dismissal qualifying period. Now, as we know, at the moment, we've had for some time a two -year qualifying period to be able to claim ordinary unfair dismissal. That doesn't take into account automatic unfair dismissals like whistleblowing, for example, where you don't need the two-year service, but for most unfair dismissal claims, two years service is required. So the idea is that it's going to become a day one right, and that so long as you started work from day one, you will have the right to claim unfair dismissal. The government are proposing to consult on introducing a new statutory probation period. So, the idea is that during that probation period, an employee could be dismissed using a lighter touch process, where if the dismissal is because of capability, or conduct, or contravention of illegal duty, or potentially for some other substantial reason, which are all reasons that we're familiar with now, that that would be a valid reason for an employer to terminate at the end of this probation period. We need some detail on this, obviously, and one suggestion is that a redundancy dismissal wouldn't be subject to this lighter touch dismissal as a result of the statutory probation period. So it will be interesting to see how that one plays out. The suggestion is that the government's preference is to have a nine -month probation period in this so -called initial period of employment and I think the indication is that they would expect an employer to at least hold a meeting with the employee to explain the concerns about say their performance if that's the reason before making a decision to dismiss. So, it's going to be interesting to see how the government will develop that. Amy: Yeah it's really interesting actually Charlie, I think that there's going to be the consultation on that's going to bring out some interesting points. But actually, it sounds like it's going to have a really big impact on employers. What do you think in practice that's really going to be? Charlie: Certainly one of the implications is likely to be that more litigation may follow as a result of widening out the net to who it covers. I saw a statistic that suggests that this will grant unfair dismissal rights to another 9 million employees. So, straight away, the prospect of litigation is going to be increased. There's a question that I've seen floated as to how long an employer would need to be able to make a decision about whether an employee should stay in the role beyond this initial employment period. And nine months, is that long enough? I think many employers would probably be hard pressed to think that nine months isn't long enough to make a decision about whether an employee is suitable for their role. What I think it will be in practice is that employers are going to have to tighten up their processes. I mean, many employers at the minute do follow quite good probationary review processes where issues that might lead to an employee failing their probation period are flagged in good time and discussed, and therefore no surprise to the employee if they fail their probation period as a result of it. But not all employers do that. And so, I think if you're going to take advantage of this new statutory probation period, it's going to mean employers have to tighten up their processes in handling probation reviews and probation decisions. I think it's also going to mean employers are going to need to ensure that they follow their redundancy processes in all cases because of the suggestion that redundancies wouldn't be part of this probationary review dismissal option. So, yeah, I think it's going to be quite a big change for employers this, if it comes in the way suggested. So, yeah, keep your eye on that one. Amy: Yeah, and plenty of time to plan as well. I think that's a key point. As you say, some employers are already utilizing probation periods pretty well. So actually looking at that and expanding that practice more widely, I think is important. So, Thanks, Charlie. So the first one from me moving on is the very hotly anticipated reform in relation to fire and rehire. It gets all the headlines that the way that it's been described. It's hit the press enormously given the large scale and perceived abuse of this by some employers. And so just to explain, firing rehire is essentially a tool, and actually in some cases a very useful tool, that employers use to change terms and conditions in the event that employees won't agree to those through a consultation process. Importantly, the employees retain their continuous service, so that's the rehire piece. It's not just fire, it's rehiring the retain that continuous service. And it's often after a consultation period with unions or staff reps, and in my experience, and I'm sure yours as well, Charlie, it's very much used as a last resort. It was to be banned initially but then Labour realised that if they only addressed fire and rehire businesses are simply just going to fire employees and then rehire different employees which is what P &O Ferries did and that was all over the press as well. What the bill proposes is that dismissals for refusing to agree to a variation will be automatically unfair where either the employee or another employee will be re -employed or employed to carry out substantially the same work. An exception there is going to be where essentially a business is on its knees and about to fall over. And so to use the proper term for that, it's where the employee can show evidence of financial difficulties, which or carry on the activities of the business and that in all of the circumstances, it could not avoid the need to make the variation. Charlie: Yeah, I mean, what do we make of that defence, Amy? Is that going to be a way, do we think, of keeping in the right to fire and rehire through the back door or is it going to be difficult to meet that defence? What do we think? Amy: Yeah, it's an interesting one. So, we thought that this would be a complete ban on it, and theyobviously introduced that defence. And the financial difficulties defence seems quite a hard one to run, given that an employer essentially needs to show that in all of the circumstances, the employer could not reasonably have avoided the need to make that variation. So they're going to need to be in some serious financial difficulty to satisfy that test, so in liquidation or in solvency. So I think it's going to be really narrow, but I think the important kind of take away from this is, as I mentioned at the beginning, this does fall short of a total ban on fire and re-hire hire, which is what Labour had initially committed to do. However, it may as well be a ban with the enormously high bar that's been set to that exception. As we say with all of these, the devil's going to be in the detail. And I do think that these provisions will be contested by some employees in the consultation, there certainly needs to be a bit more clarification given on that financial difficulties, defence as well. Employers are undoubtedly going to have to produce accounts and all that kind of stuff as well, which would be quite interesting. Charlie: Yeah, no, it certainly is. And actually, another area that we heard might have been banned is the third topic we're going to look at, which is the ending of exploitative zero hours contracts. And that's the phraseology that was being used by the Labour Party prior to the election, that they wanted to end the use of exploitative contracts that are zero hours ones. And many had speculated that meant they were going to ban them all together. And the bill makes clear that's not what they're planning to do. Instead, what it's going to do is propose to put an obligation on employees to have to offer these so -called guaranteed hours contracts to those who are on mainly zero hours contracts, but also those who are on minimum hours contracts as well to reflect the hours that they're regularly working over a reference period. And we're understanding that reference period is likely to be 12 weeks. So that's going to be quite an interesting change for employers that use zero hours contracts, that the stats show over a million individuals are engaged on these type of contracts in the UK. So, it'll affect a lot of people. The idea of this offer is one that the worker wouldn't have to accept it. So what we might find, and this is where some of the detail will be quite interesting, is that if hours become more regular over time or increase over time, whether subsequent reference periods are going to mean that the workers are going to have the chance to be offered, again, the opportunity to have one of these guaranteed hours contracts reflecting what they might think is a better offer and is there going to be this ongoing obligation to update offers? I guess the expectation is that if the offer is then accepted that then they go on to one of these guaranteed hours contracts and they're no longer on the same basis that they were prior to that as an ordinary zero hours worker. So, going to be interested to see how that detail plays out. I think And this will affect quite a lot of businesses, particularly those in say the hospitality industry which traditionally uses a lot of these zero hours worker contracts. There's going to be consultation on this with employers and trade unions about how these review periods are going to work. And the government have said, it's interesting actually, they said that where they think that the work is genuinely temporary, there's not going to be any expectation on employers to offer these permanent contracts. But I've seen a lot of commentary that suggests that this might encourage businesses to use fixed term contracts more, albeit how that'll interact with the removal of the qualification period for unfair dismissal will be interesting to see. A separate point actually of interest is that the bill also proposes a right for eligible workers to receive reasonable notice of changes to their working hours. And also a big change, I think, the idea that they can be eligible for compensation if their shift is cancelled or ended early. And there'll be a lot of detail in there then about what is going to trigger this right compensation, what's reasonable notice? All of those sorts of areas are the devil in the detail that you described at the start of the podcast, Amy. But yeah, lots of changes here, aren't there? Amy: There are really. And as you mentioned, the details quite significant there, and there's going to be a lot more discussion in relation to it. And it seems really complicated as one of the most complicated reforms that we've looked at when we've worked through it. Do we think it's really going to achieve what the government's aims are on zero -hours contracts and the exploitative nature of them. What's your view on that, Charlie? Charlie: Yeah, I mean, these are really complicated rules. It made my head hurt trying to get my understanding of what's going to be proposed and how the detail will be played out. I've seen loads of articles that go on for quite some time examining the what -ifs and the suggestion that there's going to be quite a few unintended consequences. So What we think might happen is that employers might be less likely to offer zero or low hours contracts or might offer fewer shifts to those on those contracts in order to avoid the prospect of then having to offer guaranteed hours contracts that might not reflect a pattern that they can then fulfil. Equally, there's lots of areas of concern about seasonal contracts, those that work in agriculture or in hospitality, where there are seasonal fluctuations. It's not clear how these rules are gonna address the prospect that there could be peaks and troughs in work. And so if an individual is entitled to say, well, I want my guaranteed hours contract to reflect that peak time. And yet then the business might not be able to fulfil it. So, the impact is gonna, I think, depend on how some of these key details get consulted on and what the government decided to do in respect of them. Things like what's the definition of a low hour is going to be, what's the regularity of hours required, what's the level of compensation for a breach of the advanced notice duty. A lot of the detail isn't there yet, but for businesses that use zero hours contracts, this I think will be a big change. Amy: The drafts people are going to have a good time with that one, aren't they. So, yeah, watch this space, I think, on that one. Charlie: Agreed. Amy: So, moving on to the next reform, which is the reforms to the sexual harassment, the duty to prevent sexual harassment. We had a new duty which came in on the 26th of October. And the new duty is that the employer will take reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment in the workplace and what the reform is doing is proposing to change that to take all reasonable steps rather than just taking reasonable steps. So, it's the inclusion of the word "all" which is important here as well. The new duty might include things like carrying out assessments, publishing plans or policies, reporting sexual harassment and handling complaints, but actually it's a much higher bar than the current duty that we're dealing with at the moment, so that's quite an important... There were previously going to include it as all reasonable steps, and then they removed the ‘all', and then obviously now they're proposing to add that back in again. It's amazing what a small single word can do in the circumstances to increase the duty so significantly. In addition to that, they're also talking about reintroducing a duty to prevent third -party harassment. That was a previous duty that we had a few years ago and then it was repealed and they're talking about bringing that in. Whether that's a duty to take all reasonable steps to prevent third -party harassment or just to take reasonable steps remains to be seen and is subject to consultation. This is going to have a real impact, particularly in the leisure and hospitality industry where you're working with customers potentially under the influence of alcohol and things like that as well, it's going to be quite a tricky duty to comply with and I think that was part of the reason why it was repealed previously. So that's certainly an important point and a takeaway, I think, from that element of the bill. And then in addition to that, the reforms provide that disclosures relating to sexual harassment will be protected as qualifying whistleblowing disclosures. Currently, they're not specifically protected in that way. It would have to fall normally under kind of victimization elements, but actually they're talking about increasing that and including it in a whistleblowing disclosure as well. Charlie: Interesting, those aren't they Amy? I think, and in fact, it reminds me that we were talking only the other day about what our experience was of our clients preparing for the duty that came in only a few weeks ago to take reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment. And what do you think about whether this change will alter the approach we've seen our clients taking so far? Amy: Yes, it's interesting, really. Obviously, it's quite a surprise that suddenly it's brought back in again when the duty was only imposed a few weeks ago, really. And we've had a real wide change of how clients are prepared for this. Some have introduced training, have taken it extremely seriously, looked at their policies, reporting processes, all that kind of stuff. So they are essentially taking all reasonable steps already because of all of the different elements that they put in. And then other clients are quite comfortable with the current processes that they have in place. They've done very little. It's passed them by a little bit as well. I think that actually potentially that's part of the reason for reintroducing the all -reasonable steps piece, actually, to ensure that employers do take positive, proper positive steps in order to prepare for this, and I think that it will focus the mind, I think, in relation to what employers are doing there. Certainly, it's going to increase the potential for employment tribunal claims, particularly with the whistleblowing piece, although question whether that's already protected in a different way. But certainly the third party harassment side in the hospitality industry, there has been some concern in relation to that already and it's a real hot topic about how that extension of the duty will be managed by those types of employers. Charlie: Yeah, okay, no interesting stuff. And another change that we wanted to have a look at is the proposed changes to the Right to request flexible working. Many of our listeners will know that at the moment Employees can make a flexible working request up to two times per year and that the employee would have to deal with that request reasonably and Can then potentially refuse the request if they decide that that's what they want to do for one of those eight reasons Which are pretty wide reasons as we know The proposal here is that the government wants to try and tighten up what the rules say about refusing a request and the proposal is that employers would be able to refuse a flexible working request on specified grounds, which are the same grounds that we currently have actually, but that they'd only be able to do so if it was reasonable to rely on that ground and that in addition an employer would need to explain in writing to the employee, why their refusal is reasonable in the employer's view. So more narrow changes there, I think, to this. Amy: Yeah, Is there much change here at all? What do you think, Charlie? I don't know. Charlie: Yeah, it's a fair question. I think what we probably remember is that the government, when they were talking about this change prior to the election, we're using phraseology along the lines of that they wanted to make flexible working the default position for all and that only if an employer could prove that it's an unreasonable request could they get out of the obligation to allow a flexible working request. I mean, the argument I've been reading about is that the bill doesn't really go as far to do to do that at all. As all of these things are, it's subject to consultation. If all we're going to see is an adding of the requirement that the reason has to be reasonable and has to be expressed as to why that's reasonable, but it's based on the same grounds and the same obligation to follow it reasonably as a process and the same potential compensation. Ultimately, it might just ball down to employers just need to give clearer reasons as to why they're turning it down. So a lot of the talk prior to the election was about how they're going to introduce a right to a four -day working week. I saw that narrated quite a bit and this certainly doesn't get anywhere near that. So yeah, to your question, is there a lot of change here? Probably not on this one. Amy: So, I'm now going to move on to my next one, and I think you need to strap yourselves into this one because this is trade union reforms now, and there's quite a lot to go. We could have done the whole podcast on this really, so what I'm aiming to do really is just take you through the headlines of that and then talk about the key impact and insights that this proposed reform might have. So there are several provisions that have been badged as empowering workers to organised collectively through trade unions. And essentially, the Labour government are badging in the press that this is removing the red tape on trade union activity. So just to give you a little bit of the detail, and I think it's important that you understand this, is that they are intending on repealing much of the trade union act from 2016. And this includes, importantly, the requirements for at least 50 % of union members to participate in a ballot for industrial action for that industrial action to then be legal. They're also talking about repealing the requirements for 40% support amongst union members to proceed with industrial action in vital public services. And then this is a key one, reducing the notice for that needs to be given for industrial action from 14 days, which is what it is currently, once there is a successful ballot and they need to give 14 days notice of any actual strike action, they've been talking about reducing that down to seven days, so not a lot of time there at all for businesses to prepare for industrial action. And then also kind of linked to that, they are talking about currently there is a six month mandate in place, so where there is a successful ballot for strike action, that mandate remains in place for six months. That's in consultation to increase it to a 12 -month period. So if there is a dispute, they could potentially call for strike action any time in 12 months rather than six at the moment. So in addition to that, they're also looking at repealing the Strikes Minimum Service Act, and that was introduced not that long ago actually, to mitigate industrial action and the effect on critical sectors such as health services, education, transport, etc. And then in addition to that, there's some other reforms that I wanted to pull out. The first is that they are going to require employers to notify new employees of their right to join a union and regularly remind them of that. In addition, granting unions, and I think this is quite an important one, so granting unions the right to request workplace access to both recruit and organise, so that's not where there is a recognised trade union, that's any union can request right to a workplace. Currently they can't actually access that, they have no right of access, but they're talking about introducing the right to request, I think it's important to request that as well. And then they're also talking about simplifying the statutory recognition process, so statutory recognition of a trade union by removing the requirement for unions to secure backing of at least 40 % of the workforce in the bargaining unit in order to start that process. The government have said that they are committed to a for consultation on this and actually that's already started and is one of the ones that's already started as well so I think that the general consensus is actually the trade union reform is going to be one of the first elements of the bill that will be introduced along with fire and rehire, just because I think that's a key part of the labour manifesto, obviously, with them being back for it so heavily by the trade unions. I think the key point here is the real impact that this is going to have on businesses. So whilst the collective voice of employees is of course important and a number of the employers that work with and focus heavily on maintaining positive industrial relations. There is a concern that the repeal, in particular of the Trade Union Act, the reduced notice period for strikes, that could actually hinder employers' ability to manage effectively during a period of strike or industrial action. And the minimum service levels as well being repealed, there's all sorts of chatter and I've seen both sides of this in relation to that, about whether it's going to increase the burden on the public and employers and all this kind of stuff. But actually, when it was introduced, it was deeply unpopular and the consensus was, and the CIPD actually put forward a point on this as well, that they actually thought that the Minimum Services Act damaged the relationship between employers and unions as well and created this mistrust. And also, it was really of in terms of which employees were to provide that minimum service and all that kind of stuff. So it was actually quite unpopular really. Charlie: A lot to get our heads around there, isn't there? I wonder whether employers that do unions a bit, but not a lot, but whether that's going to have quite an impact on them if all of these changes are made. There'll be a lot to change in their approach. Amy: You're absolutely right, Charlie. And I think that that's, We have these clients, don't we, that regularly deal with unions, and I do a lot of work in the union field. That's kind of my specialism, but I think that the key thing is those smaller employees that are not unionized already, the right of access for trade unions to recruit, it's certainly going to lead to further requests for recognition. And actually, because it's really unknown that some of these are smaller employees. There's a real kind of reluctance to engage with unions. There's a there is a lot of concern that surrounds that. And actually, if it is looking, and I do think that going forward, if these proposals are implemented, because of the how much easier it will be to obtain statutory recognition, there is a piece for employees that are approaching that process of statutory recognition to look at a voluntary arrangements in place, so doing a bit of work in terms of kind of trying to work with unions already, or actually implementing staff representative organisations and working more effectively with them as well, just to ensure that there is engagement and looking at it in a positive way. And just a kind of closing point on this. For those employers who have heavily unionised workforces, a lot of the clients that we work with at the moment are looking at their contingency plans for dealing with industrial action, what those might look like, because undoubtedly this is going to lead to more industrial action if it is implemented. So considering now kind of comms strategies for that, what you'll do, how you'll manage it, all that kind of stuff as well, I think is a really key takeaway from this one. Charlie: Yeah, there are big changes there. An ally to engaging with unions actually, our seventh highlight is about collective redundancy consultation. And many of us will remember, gosh, it was it's almost 10 years ago now, the decisions in the Woolworth case when Woolworths became insolvent. And as part of the redundancy consultation exercise, each store was deemed to be treated as a separate establishment, which meant that employees who were employed in a store that had fewer than 20 employees weren't entitled to a redundancy protective award. We've lived with that position ever since so that redundancies at an establishment are what might trigger the potentially 20 or more up to 99 and then when you get beyond 100 you're into a 45 -day consultation rather than the 30 -day consultation that applies when you're under 100. So that's the position we've left with since the Woolworth decision and that we've abided by. So the proposal is going to remove the requirement that redundancies need to be at one establishment in relation to the duty to consult representatives and the duty to notify the Secretary of State. And what it will mean is that employers who are making redundancies, and we remember that the definition of redundancy goes beyond just the pure definition of redundancy under the Employment Rights Act, so it could encapsulate, say, any changes to terms and conditions, subject to what you were talking about earlier, Amy, and that they're going to need to top up the numbers of employees who are affected by these proposals over a rolling 90 -day period. And if they trigger the 20 or more, then that would trigger the obligation to carry out the collective consultation requirements. So a big change for employers, this is already subject to consultation as we do this podcast that opened on the 21st of October. It goes on to ask for views on increasing the maximum protective award from the current 90 days up to 180 days, or even to removing it altogether, which would be a massive change from what we've been used to in this sphere. In addition, there's this suggestion that an employee or employees, as might well be the case, in a collector situation, might be able to apply for an interim relief application that would give them the right to continue to be paid until their case is heard, which at current rates could well be, say, a year or even more hence. So big changes here in this area. Amy: There really are and it's just picking up on one of the points that you made about the protective award. It's the only compensation award which is punitive in nature. Everything else is based on losses or injury to feelings or something like that and employment tribunals, but so increasing it is going to have a significant impact and removing it all together. I don't even know where you would start with that. Charlie: It is, I completely So that would be a profound change and a much bigger risk to employers if, say, the protected award was uncapped and not subject to a limit. I mean, it already can tot up to quite a big number, and as you say, being a putative award, they tend to say, well, we'll start at the top of the range and reduce it if we think you've done things that And, you know, it can actually, when you're looking at the numbers involved, it can be quite a big liability for businesses. And what I can see is that this is going to just create potential more banana skins for businesses if they're going to have to look at 90 -day rolling periods. You take a multiple site larger business, they're going to need to look potentially across their whole business and see whether they trigger the numbers. And a lot of businesses might not have the systems in place to ensure that that gets picked up all the time. So big changes would be needed for businesses if this is what happens. Amy: Absolutely. And I don't think, I like the use of the word banana skins, by the way, Charlie, that certainly we should use that more often is that it's creating more banana skins for businesses. But yeah, interesting point and probably something that's not going to be that welcomed by employers, I would say potentially either. Yeah, like a few of the changes we're describing, that this is not one that employers are likely to find very welcome. Amy: No, just a couple of kind of notes to point. So, the eighth one that we've picked out is actually the single enforcement body. We don't have a lot of information on this, we just thought it was quite interesting. And so, what they're allowing, the bill allows for the establishment of a new fair work agency. And what this is going to do is enable enforcement of labour market legislation, which includes legislation relating to holiday pay and SSP by the Secretary of State. It's anticipated that this agency is going to bring together all the different government agencies and enforcement bodies with the aim to create what they say is a stronger, recognizable single organization that people know where to go to for help. And just to point just an observation on this really, it talks about people to know where to go to help. And obviously they mean employers there and they're looking at kind of enforcement of different elements of it. But actually also from our perspective kind of feeding into the consultation, looking at whether there should be better support for employers as well, particularly smaller employers who really want to comply with the law. And it's very complicated. There's lots of banana skins, as Charlie mentioned before, but actually ensuring that they have the assistance where they want to have that compliance to actually work with them. So, we very much welcome the single enforcement body, but actually looking at it from a kind of wider perspective so that all stakeholders who will engage with them are properly involved because it's not always the case at the moment with some of the enforcement bodies that we have currently. Charlie: Yeah and let's look at our ninth highlight which is some of the day one leave rights and the new bereavement leave entitlements. So the plan is that the government wants to remove the qualifying period for unpaid parental leave which presently is that eight weeks entitlement to leave up to a child's 18th birthday and the two week statutory paternity leave rights. The idea is that they will make those day one rights for employees. And in addition to that, another point to flag is the new day one right to bereavement leave. So this is any employee that's going to be bereaved. And the current thinking is that it would be up to two weeks bereavement leave paid at statutory rates. If it's a child that the individual is bereaved for and one week if it's not a child. So we'll need to get more detail around this. The relationship, for example, with the deceased isn't clear at the moment and things like, you know, how to exercise the right to the entitlement or no doubt be fleshed out in regulations as time goes on. But some changes there that I So, some of the clients that we work with already allow some of those rights in a more enhanced way than they already existed. That might not be seen as a big change for many businesses. Amy: Yeah, I think you're right there, Charlie. It kind of reflects the direction of travel that we're seeing at the moment, aren't we, in terms of kind of support for employees and all that kind of stuff as well, certainly. I don't think that's going to be one of the biggest changes out of all of the bills. So, The final takeaway that Charlie and I had from the bill is actually what's not in the bill. It's not an element of it, it's what wasn't there. And I think we've touched on a couple of these already in terms of the kind of fire and rehire and zero hours, we expected there to be more in relation to that than they actually ended up being as well. But also in relation to that, and alongside the bill, there was a next steps document which had been published and outlined, amongst other things, how the government was going to deal with the promises that it made in its manifesto that have not been covered off in the bill. So just to pick out a couple of those things that weren't in there and how they're going to be dealt with. And the first one is this right to switch off, the right to disconnect, which is another one that's hit the press. And obviously, I think it's the French, isn't it, Charlie, that they have this right to disconnect as well currently so kind of following on from what they had introduced and what this means essentially is that employees are prevented from being contacted out of hours and they're talking about introducing that still but by way of a statutory code of practice, so slightly different in terms of how that will be introduced. And then the much anticipated and very important element that relates to the Equality, Race and Disability bill. And what that is, is that we'll make it mandatory for large employees to report on their ethnicity and disability pay gaps, much in the same way as they already have to report on their gender pay gaps, which I think is a welcome addition in there as well. And they're also starting a consultation, they're committed to starting a consultation on a move towards the single status of worker and talking about transitioning towards a simpler two -part framework for employment status. This has been in discussion for years and years now because employment status is super complicated, overly complicated. The legislation isn't fit for purpose. It's confusing for everybody involved in it and kind of links with all the zero hours stuff and all these other bits as well. I do wonder whether that was kind of put into the too hard box. They were rushing to get through the parts of the bill, they were rushing to get through all of that. And potentially that was put into a bit of a too hard box, I'm not sure, really. Certainly something that requires further consideration, along with reviewing the TUPE legislation as well, which has been in discussion really since Brexit, so that's quite an important element that needs some exploration and there will be a consultation on those. Charlie: Gosh, so that's our 10, isn't it, isn't it Amy? We could have picked another 10 if we'd wanted to talk about because there's so much in the bill. It was being trailed as the biggest reform to employment rights in a generation and I think it's fair to say it probably meets that brief, doesn't it? There's so much in there that's being proposed as new ways of interpreting a lot of the existing and new rights. So one of the things that I think you and I have both said, haven't we, is that the likelihood is this is going to place an increased strain on the Employment Tribunal Service and on ACAS, and it's unclear how an already stretched service is going to be able to cope withwhat's likely to be an increase in demand, isn't it? Amy: Yeah, absolutely, Charlie. I mean, just to put it into context, I has a hearing listed in one of the London tribunals who are particularly overwhelmed at the moment. It was listed last week and that was listed for March 2027. It's a 15 -day hearing, so it's a long hearing, but the dismissal took place in 2021. So, it's just a huge amount of time and it's in no one's interest in those circumstances, not the employee, not the employer. Nobody involved in that process for things to take so long to get to a conclusion. So, we've already got a hugely overwhelmed tribunal system, so it'd be interesting to see what funding is proposed to the system to support them in dealing with the undoubtedly significant load that they will be having to deal with as part of that. Whether the single enforcement body will have some kind of involvement in that for certain types of enforcement of rights they might be taken away from the tribunal and put into that, we don't know. Again, over to consultation, it'd be interesting to see what happens with that. But certainly, there's additional work to be done on the periphery to ensure that this bill, if it's going to be the biggest shake -up, then it needs to have a system that reflects that as well. So the enforcement piece is really important and making sure that's fit for purpose. Charlie: Yeah, no, that's a definite case of watch this space. And I think there's many people that might be a bit worried about the extent to which the system can cope. Anyway, let's wrap up because we've covered a lot here and I think our only reminders and maybe main takeaways are we don't know when these changes are going to take place. We're expecting them to be in 2026. So, what that means is employers, businesses, employees have got time to adjust to what's coming down the path and there's going to be a lot of consultations we think next year into 2025. That will put a lot of flesh on the bone. That will pick out a lot of the points that we've been covering in some of the topics we've talked about today. So I think we'd encourage all of our clients and contacts to keep an eye on the developments. We at TLT will certainly be updating through our regular updates and through these podcasts on any of the changes that we see starting to take shape in due course. If you don't, subscribe to our updates. There's a note notes on this podcast as to how you can do so if you wish to. But other than that, thanks for listening. Amy and I have enjoyed chatting through all of these 10 topics today and we'll look forward to hopefully have you as a listener on our next series of these podcasts. Amy: Yeah, thanks very much. See you at the next one. The information in this podcast is for general guidance only and represents our understanding of the relevant law and practice at the time of recording. We recommend you seek specific advice for specific cases. Please visit our website for our full terms and conditions.
Sian Jackson and Charles Pigott analyse what the Bill says about the proposed new protections for workers engaged on zero-hours contracts and other similar arrangements.
This is the third episode in a series of four podcasts about the Employment Rights Bill. In this episode, Partners Nick Chronias and Philip Harman, and Knowledge Lawyer Sara Meyer, discuss the Government's plans for trade union and industrial relations reform. These include the proposed repeal of many of the restrictions on industrial action that were introduced in 2016, as well as strengthened union rights of access to workplaces, simplification of the trade union recognition process and increased protections from detriment and dismissal for workers who participate in protected industrial action.
The Labour Government published its highly anticipated Employment Rights Bill on 10 October 2024. In this edition of the podcast, Brightmine employment law experts Zeba Sayed and Stephen Simpson analyse the key proposals in the Bill and offer advice on how HR can begin to prepare for the changes. Read the transcript The accompanying slides can be downloaded here Related resources Podcast: Employment Rights Bill Q&A Employment Rights Bill published: 10 highlights for HR from the first draft On your radar Webinar: Employment Rights Bill – how HR can get ahead of the changes
The Labour Government published its highly anticipated Employment Rights Bill on 10 October 2024. In this edition of the podcast, Brightmine employment law experts Zeba Sayed and Stephen Simpson answer questions on different aspects of the Bill, from the timeline for the measures coming into effect to the nuances of the proposed unfair dismissal and fire and rehire changes. Read the transcript Related resources On your radar Podcast: What changes should HR prepare for from the Employment Rights Bill? Employment Rights Bill published: 10 highlights for HR from the first draft Webinar: Employment Rights Bill – how HR can get ahead of the changes
This is the second episode in our series of four podcasts about the Employment Rights Bill. In this episode, Partners Sarah George and Anjali Sharma, and Legal Director and Knowledge Lawyer Joanne Bell, discuss the Bill's family-friendly, equality and harassment related proposals (including changes to flexible working, day one rights to paternity and parental leave and bereavement leave, protection from dismissal for maternity returners, the requirement for large employers to publish gender pay gap action plans and menopause support plans, and strengthening protections against harassment at work).
Fiona Longden and Charles Pigott explore the measures in the Employment Rights Bill 2024 which will remove the current two year qualifying period for unfair dismissal rights, and introduce a new light touch regime for dismissals during a statutory probationary period.
This is the first episode in a series of four podcasts about the Employment Rights Bill. In this episode, Partners David Speakman and Stuart Craig, and Knowledge Lawyer Sara Meyer, discuss the proposals to make protection from unfair dismissal a day one right, change the trigger point for collective redundancy consultation, strengthen rights to statutory sick pay and create a new single enforcement body for employment rights.
In our latest employment law podcast, managing associate Natalie Edwards and associates Dermot Neligan and Eirini Haidemenos discuss the Government's new Employment Rights Bill published on 10 October 2024, which has been described as a 'once in a generation' overhaul of employee rights. The Stephenson Harwood team discuss what employers need to be aware of, including changes to protections against unfair dismissal, entitlement to statutory sick pay, and rights for new parents.Many of the Government's proposals require further consultation, and several of the more major changes will take effect "no sooner than Autumn 2026". We recommend that clients listen to the podcast and review their policies and procedures considering the proposed changes. Please also keep an eye out for further advice that the Stephenson Harwood team will publish once we have clarity on the new legislation.
In this episode of the Recruitment Leadership Podcast, we're joined by a special guest who's perfectly positioned to share his expert insights—Neil Carberry, CEO of the Recruitment and Employment Confederation, and a key figure in shaping the upcoming industry changes. The UK government's new Employment Rights Bill and the Make Work Pay Plan are two initiatives that could reshape recruitment as we know it! With 28 measures already outlined and more details to emerge through secondary legislation, these changes are set to impact the industry by 2026. Now is the time to start thinking about how your business will adapt. Tune in as Neil Carberry shares his expert take on these initiatives and the biggest concerns and opportunities surrounding these upcoming regulations. You will find out more about:
Tom Hayes discusses the U.K Labour government's recently published Employment Rights legislation with London based international Labour and Employee Relations professional, Philip Bickerstaffe. They discuss whether the new law will shift the balance of power away from employers to employees... or, does it broadly reflect what most good employers already do?
On the 10th October 2024 the biggest reform of employment law for many years was published in the form of the Employment Rights Bill. In this episode 234 of the podcast I bring you all the detail about the changes to employment law. In this episode we cover: Sexual Harassment ‘all' steps prevention Employees who make a sexual harassment disclosure will become a ‘protected disclosure' for whistleblowing protection Employers will be liable to third party harassment Removal of the unfair dismissal qualifying period Introduction of a statutory probation period Regulation on zero and low hours contracts Additional rights for those on zero hours or low hour contracts Additional pregnancy protection from dismissal Additional protection for those who take family leave End to employers ability to dismiss employees who refuse a change to their contract terms Additional requirements for employers to justify the decision to refuse a request for flexible working Removal of the waiting period for statutory sick pay so it will be available from day 1 of employment Bereavement leave available for all Paternity and parental leave will be available from day one of employment Change to how you calculate the numbers for collective redundancy Creation of a fair work agency Trade Union reform including requirement for employers to set out in a written statement that the worker has the right to join a trade union You can read the full bill here: https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3737 Sexual Harassment prevention paperwork For £100 plus VAT you can now download the following documents to get you started with your obligation to prevent sexual harassment: Sexual harassment risk assessment – organisation wide Sexual Harassment Policy Template & Guidance Note Sexual Harassment Investigation flow chart Notice to issue to all staff Training record Timetable for annual review Investigation guidance for managers You can download now here: Sexual Harassment Prevention Documents for Employers Training for your Team Would you like to arrange training for your team to reduce the risk of both unhappy employees and claims being made against you? Please get in touch for a no obligation discussion, we can offer training anywhere in the UK in person or delivered remotely via MS Teams. Please drop me an email alison@realemploymentlawadvice.co.uk Fixed Price Advice from Real Experts As part of our HR Harbour annual subscription service for employers we provide guidance and training for employers, supervisors and managers. If you would like to know more about the HR Harbour Service and how you can get unlimited support from as little as £210 per month please contact me for a no obligation discussion – alison@realemploymentlawadvice.co.uk or you can find full details here: HR Harbour Don't forget you can contact us by telephone 01983 897003, 01722 653001, 020 3470 0007, 0191 375 9694 or 023 8098 2006 We have a variety of free documents and letters which are available to download here: DIY Documents We are also on YouTube! You can find a range of topics and also listen to this podcast on YouTube here: YOUTUBE Zoes Law Raising awareness of melanoma and skin cancer. You can find more information here: https://www.facebook.com/zoepanayilaw Photo by Deniz Fuchidzhiev on Unsplash
In this episode of the IEA Podcast, we dive into the Adam Smith Institute's new "millionaire tracker" report, which suggests Britain is losing millionaires at an alarming rate. Maxwell Marlow, director of Research and Education at ASI, discusses the potential economic impact and reasons behind this trend, including productivity stagnation, high tax burdens, and an anti-prosperity culture. The conversation explores the broader implications for job creation, investment, and tax revenue. The podcast then turns to the government's newly announced Employment Rights legislation. The panel, including Dr. Kristian Niemietz and host Tom Clougherty, examines the potential consequences of these reforms on productivity, hiring practices, and overall economic dynamism. They express concern that these measures, while politically popular, may inadvertently hinder job creation and economic growth. Lastly, the discussion commemorates the 50th anniversary of F.A.Hayek being awarded the Nobel Prize in Economics. The panel reflects on Hayek's enduring influence on classical liberal thought, his key works such as "The Use of Knowledge in Society," and the importance of his ideas in shaping economic and political discourse. They emphasise the continued relevance of Hayek's insights in today's policy debates. We bring you a public affairs podcast with a difference. We want to get beyond the headlines and instead focus on the big ideas and foundational principles that matter to classical liberals. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit insider.iea.org.uk/subscribe
The government has published its Employment Rights Bill - so what will it mean for farmers and the staff who work for them? Its key proposals include protection against unfair dismissal from day one, flexible working, improved rights for sick pay, bereavement and parental leave, and a move to regulate zero hours contracts. Most of the planned changes won't take effect until 2026 and there'll be a period of consultation between now and then. Conservationists have long argued that the reintroduction of beavers can help reduce the risk of flooding - the dams they build slow the flow of water in rivers, holding it back from built-up areas further downstream. Well, beavers have been living wild on the River Otter in East Devon for at least 16 years, but last year, there was significant flooding in the area.And some Welsh farmers have claimed they are having to choose between the risk of polluting rivers or breaking the law, ahead of a controversial muck-spreading ban. New rules forbid slurry spreading across Wales from mid October to January, in an effort to protect water quality. NFU Cymru says there is "enormous concern" after wet conditions have hampered efforts to empty slurry stores ahead of the deadline. But the organisation representing Welsh rivers' trusts say farmers have had years to prepare for the changes. Presented by Caz Graham Produced by Heather Simons
The UK Government has proposed the biggest overhaul of workers' rights in a generation. What will this mean for employers and people professionals? Our panel reflects on the Employment Rights Bill announcement, examining the potential impact of the provisions, such as removing the two-year qualifying period for protection against unfair dismissal, probation period changes, ending ‘exploitative' zero-hours contracts and the role of a new, single enforcement body, the Fair Work Agency. CIPD Director of Profession David D'Souza is joined by Carl Quilliam, CIPD Public Affairs Manager; Mel Steel, former HR director and interim people and transformation leader; Gareth Neale, Head of HR at Crimson Hotels Limited; and Oonagh Johnston, Group People Director at Vesty Holdings Limited. Recorded: 11 October 2024
In this bonus episode, recorded just hours after the government published the Employment Rights Bill, I give my immediate reaction to the Bill and discuss:1. Unfair Dismissal as a ‘Right from Day One' policy2. Ending Fire and Rehire3. Ending ‘exploitative' zero hours contracts:4. Protection from Third Party Sexual Harassment5. Flexible working6. Paternity, Parental and Bereavement Leave7. Enhanced protection for pregnancy and new mothers8. Statutory Sick Pay9. Gender Pay Gap / Menopause:10. Collective Redundancy Consultation11. Written Statement of Particulars of EmploymentRegister NOW for a half day deep-dive into the Employment Rights Bill at www.danielbarnett.com/newbill.This podcast is supported by Occupational Health Assessment Ltd and didlaw Employment Lawyers.
Sam Lister and Lizzy Buchan host the Division Bell podcast where they discuss the final two Tory leadership contestants and Labour's new Employment Rights Bill. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Booming sounds in the north, measles warning, ANPR and facial recognition, employment rights consultation , armed police presence here & a new boss for IOM Energy (Manx Gas). It's Mannin Line with Andy Wint #iom #manninline #manxradio
In this episode, we delve into the key points from the King's Speech, the first since Keir Starmer became Prime Minister, with a particular focus on the announced Employment Rights Bill. This legislation aims to enhance employment protections and ban exploitative work practices, staying true to Labour's election pledges. We explore potential outcomes and implications on the job market, especially in the construction industry, questioning whether these changes may inadvertently push more workers into self-employment.
In recent weeks we have been advising several directors (who also happen to be shareholders) of companies where there has been some sort of fall out with fellow directors (and shareholders) leading to that person being dismissed from their role as director and in turn their employment. In this episode 229 of the podcast I bring you a run down of the employment rights that apply to directors who are employees of the business. I also cover my tips on avoiding disputes and how to resolve them quickly in the event of a dispute arising. In this episode of the podcast we cover: When a director is also an employee. The rights of directors who are also employees. Why you need to have an employment contract and clear terms in place at the outset. The importance of company documentation. Why you need to have targets and goals for directors that are measurable. Why you should caution against dismissing a director from their employment merely because they are no longer able to be a director. Training for your Team Would you like to arrange training for your team to reduce the risk of both unhappy employees and claims being made against you? Please get in touch for a no obligation discussion, we can offer training anywhere in the UK in person or delivered remotely via MS Teams. Please drop me an email alison@realemploymentlawadvice.co.uk Fixed Price Advice from Real Experts As part of our HR Harbour annual subscription service for employers we provide guidance and training for employers, supervisors and managers. If you would like to know more about the HR Harbour Service and how you can get unlimited support from as little as £210 per month please contact me for a no obligation discussion – alison@realemploymentlawadvice.co.uk or you can find full details here: HR Harbour Don't forget you can contact us by telephone 01983 897003, 01722 653001, 020 3470 0007, 0191 375 9694 or 023 8098 2006 We have a variety of free documents and letters which are available to download here: DIY Documents We are also on YouTube! You can find a range of topics and also listen to this podcast on YouTube here: YOUTUBE Zoes Law Raising awareness of melanoma and skin cancer. You can find more information here: https://www.facebook.com/zoepanayilaw
Oliver Slewa, a qualified lawyer proficient in various legal matters, will host a series of episodes explaining Australian laws across diverse life domains. In this instalment, he discusses the rights of employees in the field of employment.
Employment attorney Patrick Dolan of Conti and Dolan joins Jon Hansen on Let's Get Legal to answer listener employment questions. Patrick talks about state law vs federal law protections, being penalized for taking days off, and more! For more information, call 312.332.7800 or visit www.contidolanlaw.com
Host Talaya Dendy discusses a sad and unfortunate incident involving a stage four cancer patient named Andrena McMayo. Andrena was let go by Wayfair while she was on disability, which came as a surprise to her. Talaya shares Andrena's story and highlights the gaps in support and understanding that exist for cancer patients. This episode sheds light on the challenges faced by individuals navigating cancer and emphasizes the importance of awareness and advocacy.✨Highlights from the show:00:01:29 - Andrena McMayo's Story: Job Loss During Cancer00:05:36 - Understanding the Americans with Disabilities Act00:06:44 - The Impact of Cancer on Career and Identity00:09:39 - Reevaluating Life and Career Post-Diagnosis00:13:27 - Strategies for Protecting Your Job00:19:24 - Focusing on What You Can Control
How, and to whom, should you disclose your MS at your job? And if you decide to disclose, is that information confidential? What does reasonable accommodation mean? If you need a day or two to bounce back after an infusion, is that part of your PTO? And what do you do when you no longer have days off available? If you're living with MS and you're employed, you absolutely need to know and understand your rights in the workplace. MS Navigator Christina Forster joins me to answer these questions and more as she shines a bright light on your rights in the workplace. I'll also remind you why I consider the MS Navigator program to be the gold standard when it comes to customized, one-on-one problem solving and support for anyone affected by MS. (And did I mention there's no charge???) I hear your questions, so we're taking a moment to review what the RealTalk MS show notes are all about, and where to find them. We're sharing study results that show a wheat-free diet may reduce MS severity (and it's not about the gluten!) We'll tell you about a call by experts to adopt a new framework for describing Parkinson's Disease (and we'll explain why that's relevant to the MS community) Scientists have identified 4 variant genes that place an individual taking some common MS disease-modifying therapies at higher risk of contracting PML. There's a test for that, and we'll tell you how to have that genetic testing done at no cost. We're talking about research that uncovered new details about how cells in the central nervous system communicate with the cells that produce myelin. And we'll tell you why zebrafish are the key to this research. And we're sharing a change in strategy for treating MS contained in the updated guidelines published by the Spanish Society of Neurology We have a lot to talk about! Are you ready for RealTalk MS??! This Week: Successfully navigating the health insurance maze :22 Why the MS Navigators are the gold standard when it comes to support for people affected by MS :56 Everything you need to know about the RealTalk MS show notes 2:12 STUDY: A wheat-free diet may reduce MS severity 5:28 Experts call for a new framework for describing Parkinson's Disease 8:31 A test to determine who is at high risk for contracting PML is available...at no cost 11:36 STUDY: Researchers identify specific proteins and signals involved in myelin formation in zebrafish 14:08 The Spanish Society of Neurology has updated its guidelines for treating MS 15:42 MS Navigator Christina Forster discusses your rights in the workplace 19:35 Share this episode 30:37 Have you downloaded the free RealTalk MS app? 30:57 SHARE THIS EPISODE OF REALTALK MS Just copy this link & paste it into your text or email: https://realtalkms.com/335 ADD YOUR VOICE TO THE CONVERSATION I've always thought about the RealTalk MS podcast as a conversation. And this is your opportunity to join the conversation by sharing your feedback, questions, and suggestions for topics that we can discuss in future podcast episodes. Please shoot me an email or call the RealTalk MS Listener Hotline and share your thoughts! Email: jon@realtalkms.com Phone: (310) 526-2283 And don't forget to join us in the RealTalk MS Facebook group! LINKS If your podcast app doesn't allow you to click on these links, you'll find them in the show notes in the RealTalk MS app or at www.RealTalkMS.com Contact an MS Navigator Phone: 1-800-344-4867 Web via chat: https://nationalmssociety.org Email: contactusnmss@nmss.org STUDY: Attenuation of Immune Activation in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis on a Wheat-Reduced Diet: A Pilot Crossover Study https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/17562864231170928 Progressive Multifocal Leukoencephalopathy Genetic Risk Variants for Pharmacovigilance of Immunosuppressive Therapies https://www.researchgate.net/publication/371965313_OPEN_ACCESS_EDITED_BY_Progressive_multifocal_leukoencephalopathy_genetic_risk_variants_for_pharmacovigilance_of_immunosuppressive_therapies No Cost PML Risk Genetic Test https://pmlrisktest.org STUDY: Synaptic Input and Ca2+ Activity in Zebrafish Oligdodendrocyte Precursor Cells Contribute to Myelin Sheath Formation https://www.nature.com/articles/s41593-023-01553-8 Consensus Statement of the Spanish Society of Neurology on the Treatment of Multiple Sclerosis and Holistic Patient Management in 2023 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2173580824000191 Join the RealTalk MS Facebook Group https://facebook.com/groups/realtalkms Download the RealTalk MS App for iOS Devices https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/realtalk-ms/id1436917200 Download the RealTalk MS App for Android Deviceshttps://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=tv.wizzard.android.realtalk Give RealTalk MS a rating and review http://www.realtalkms.com/review Follow RealTalk MS on Twitter, @RealTalkMS_jon, and subscribe to our newsletter at our website, RealTalkMS.com. RealTalk MS Episode 335 Guest: Christina Forster Privacy Policy
Breast cancer affects patients, survivors, families and health care professionals in many ways, one of them being the law. When someone receives a diagnosis, their job is often the first place that they may be legally impacted. Our jobs provide us with income and health insurance. Therefore, it is important to know your rights in the workplace so that you can protect yourself and have the knowledge of how to ask for what you are legally entitled to. Joining us today on the show is Shelly Rosenfeld, Director at the Cancer Legal Resource Center. She'll help explain your rights to take time off work, the antidiscrimination laws that apply both to an employee and an interviewee, and what reasonable accommodations are under federal and state laws.
In this episode, you'll learn about zero hours contracts, including:-· employment status and zero hours contracts· the legal rights of zero hours staff · annual leave and holiday pay calculationsThis podcast is supported by WorkNest and by Watershed and by the HR Inner Circle (the UK's leading community for smart, ambitious HR Professionals).If you're an HR Professional, come and join me at www.hrsecretstour.com
THIS EPISODE ORIGINALLY AIRED Have you ever had a question about your employment rights? Well Founding Partner of Samfiru Tumarkin LLP, Lior Samfiru, is here to answer all of them. He goes over everything from severance, to termination, to changes to your employment, and much more. That alongside your phone calls with host, John Scholes, on today's episode of the Employment Law Show. For information anytime, call 1-855-821-5900 or go to pocketemploymentlawyer.ca
The players are in as Wade Graham & Aaron Woods join Anthony Maroon and the boys are off the back fence on the NRL. Wade Graham explains why the players have lost trust in the NRL after years of mismanagement. Plus the guys talk Josh Reynolds selfless retirement & we take a look inside what the NRL is like post Origin! ------
In this episode, you'll learn about conduct dismissals, including:-how to deal with misconduct that takes place outside of the workplacethe interaction between misconduct dismissals and dismissals for some other substantial reasonhow to manage conduct issues where the employee suffers from poor mental healthDaniel discusses the topic with Imogen Egan from Outer Temple Chambers.This podcast is supported by rradar and by Breedon Consulting and by the HR Inner Circle (the UK's leading community for smart, ambitious HR Professionals).
Welcome to the Battle Buddy Podcast! In this episode, we are joined by Army Soldier Scott Klein, who shares with us his expertise on several topics related to military service and employment. Scott is a member of the Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve (ESGR), a Department of Defense program that promotes cooperation and understanding between military service members and their civilian employers. He shares with us the best practices for employers to support their employees who serve in the National Guard and Reserve, including effective communication strategies and how to understand the value that military service brings to the workplace. Scott also talks about his role as a Military Academy Liaison Officer, where he supports young men and women who are looking to pursue academy appointments. He takes us through the process from start to finish and provides valuable insights for anyone who is considering a military academy education. This episode is a must-listen for anyone who is interested in learning more about the challenges that service members face in balancing their military obligations with their civilian careers, and how employers can support their employees who serve in the National Guard and Reserve. Tune in now to hear from Scott Klein and learn more about ESGR and the Military Academy Liaison Officer program.In This Episode We Cover: Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve (ESGR) program Best practices for National Guard and Reservists to dealing with problem employers The role of a Military Academy Liaison Officer Military Academy Appointment information What the process looks like Battle Buddy Podcast Guest Links: www.shalomklein.com https://www.linkedin.com/in/shalomklein/ https://www.amazon.com/Get-Down-Business-Shalom-Klein/dp/1628655852 www.westpoint.eduwww.esgr.mil --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/battlebuddy/support
Nineteen dancers working for Wellington's Calendar Girls believe they were fired last month in retaliation for attempting to collectively negotiate their contracts.
America's Heroes Group Roundtable with Partner (VETS) Veterans' Employment and Training Service Panelist: William Kenan Torrans - US Army Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm Veteran and presently serves as Director for the Veterans' Employment and Training Service (VETS) Compliance and Investigation Division
Diego Franco was a food delivery rider. He worked for Uber, DoorDash and Deliveroo, to transport food in Australia. What happened to him, and his subsequent case at the Fair Work Commission was supposed to set a powerful precedent for people who work across the whole gig economy – and give workers in these industries the same rights as employees. But instead, his case faltered - and the reason was a High Court decision that he wasn't a party to. Today, journalist and lawyer Kieran Pender on the story of Diego Franco and how it put the Fair Work Commission at loggerheads with the most powerful court in Australia. Socials: Stay in touch with us on Twitter and Instagram Guest: Lawyer and journalist, Kieran Pender.
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
