A round up of the latest HR and Employment Law updates and related stories.  

WHISTLEBLOWING – WHAT AMOUNTS TO A PROTECTED DISCLOSURE

The case of Underwood v Wincanton Plc UKEAT/0163/15/RN means that theoretically a dispute between group of employees and their employer could be relevant to “whistle blowing” and amount to a protected disclosure under section 43B(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. A qualifying disclosure is any disclosure of information which, in the reasonable belief of the worker making it, tends to show one or more of the malpractices listed in that section which include their employer’s involvement in any criminal offence, failing to comply with legal obligations, a miscarriage of justice, threat to an individual’s health or safety, damage to the environment or concealing information relating to any of these issues. Please do refer to our blogs to consider the importance of your whistleblowing policy for CQC inspections and here.

In this case Mr Underwood and his colleagues had a grievance relating to “victimisation, favouritism, forms of bullying, unfairness, stress” which related primarily to overtime allocation. Mr Underwood was subsequently dismissed in June 2014 and made his application to the Employment Tribunal on the basis that his dismissal was unfair because it related to his protected disclosure regarding his employer’s malpractice.

The Employment Appeal Tribunal agreed on the basis that:

• It was possible for a contractual dispute between employer and employee to be “in the public interest”, even if only a few people were involved and because
• Mr Underwood had had a reasonable belief that the matter had been raised by him “in the public interest”

The Employment Appeal Tribunal made it plain that any similar claims will very much depend on the individual’s circumstances and facts of the case and that there were “very special circumstances” in Mr Underwood’s case.

NEW GUIDANCE FOR ZERO HOURS CONTRACTS

Zero hours contracts have been the subject of some controversy and the Department of Business Innovation and Skills have finally published a guide for employers.

The guide “Zero hours contracts: guidance for employers” is available from the government website explains that a zero hours contract “is one in which the employer does not guarantee the individual any hours of work. The employer offers the individual work when it arises, and the individual can either accept the work offered, or decide not to take up the offer of work on that occasion”.

The guide explains that Zero hours employees are still entitled to statutory employment rights and outlines what are considered good uses of this type of contract (such as covering absences/special projects) and when they are inappropriate (not an “alternative to proper business planning” or as a “permanent arrangement if it is not justifiable”). It also recommends best practice guidelines of clarity and transparency when they are used.

Employers are urged to consider alternatives to zero hours contracts which include:

• overtime to existing workers
• recruiting a part-time or fixed term employee
• using agency workers

If you use zero hours contracts remember that employers should no longer have exclusivity clauses in them because s153 of the Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Act 2015 renders them unenforceable, meaning that there can be nothing to stop workers accepting or looking for work with other employers.