Question:
Discuss the new challenges in the business environment?
Answer:
1A Common law
As per the Act of employment right 1996, Bill as a treat as Misconduct and Gross misconduct with their employees. It has been said that Thomas has been dismissed by the management in the form of disciplinary process. As per the employee’s Act, an organization has no authority to pressure their employees to work overtime. In addition, as per the unfair dismissals Act 1977-2007, it has been observed that Bill told to Thomas not come to his organization or they are dismissed. But as per act, Bill has no authority to dismiss his employees and if they want to dismiss then they need to take notice period of his employees (legislation.gov.uk, 2016). Therefore, from above discussion it has been said that worker needs to claim against his management.
1B Remedy for Breach of contract
An employment contract is a legal agreement between employee and employer and it is binding for either party to the contract. A breach of contract is a situation whereby either party to the contract break the terms of the agreement (Barnard, 2012). It may be related with employer not paying the agreed remuneration or employee not maintaining the agreed hours of work. It is not possible that all the terms of the agreement are documented in the contract. A breach of contract can be related with terms agreed verbally, written or even an implied term of contract.
With reference to the case scenario Thomas working as customer service assistant in local convenience store Fast shop Ltd refused to work late night and faced humiliation from colleague and manager Bill (Barnard, 2012). He misbehaved and left the job. This is against the employment law and he needs to take mediation with the manager.
Contract Law
Employment legislation Act is an important branch of Law that is concerned with the rights of workers and employees under an agreement of work. Numerous cases in regards to worker status and rights are administered by the European Convention of Human Rights 1950 and the Employment Rights Act 1996 and nearby with ACAS Code of practice (Busby and Smith, 2011). The principles in respect to whether there is an agreement of job are the same for all agreements, however, the statutory procurement of Section 230 (1) ERA 1996 states that ‘a workers or employer is somebody with an agreement of occupation, who works under an agreement of services. From the given situation it is clear that Vince is a representative who has been terminated by the organization. Besides Section 230(2) ERA 1996 states that an agreement of vocation can be made either explicitly, in composing or orally and impliedly. In considering the scenario of taking a dismissal at the situation including the rejection of Vince it is clear that there are numerous issues that should be exhorted inside of occupation law (Chapman, Gibson and Hardy, 2003). While exhorting Vince, the discourse will be whether he has ruptured his worker status and whether he has the privilege to propose and what he may be entailed for.
As per the case study, it has been seen that Vince, who is twenty-five years old employment at the South wood college for previous three years. Vince main work at Good Caterers Ltd. is to provide catering services at several sites around the college. In addition, they serving and preparing foods, operating the till and clearing tables. After some time, it has been observed that the organization Good Caterers Ltd wants to cut costs and to achieve this objective they decided to reduce employees and replace them with implementation of new innovation technology i.e. automatic vending machines. Thus, the organization has given two week’s notice period to Venice to leave from the organization.
Thus, to implement a new technology within work place, the termination does not end with the workers relationship. As a rule of redundancy act, organization needs to explain that there was redundancy and that implementation of new system was not only one or main reason for the discharge. On the other hand, as per the termination by notice express term S86 ERA 1996, organization needs to express real situation why employees are terminated or dismissal (legislation.gov.uk, 2016).
In addition, it has been found that, organization established\ new gadget or system in its workplace which work automatically, thus as per the equality and human rights commission under the industrial training act 1964, an organization needs to establish better training process and with help of this workers are able to operate new machine effectively.
On the other hand, management needs to discuss with their workers, who are at risk of joblessness as soon as possible, discussing them with other alternative and telling them of the current scenario. Failure to the accurately consult may lead to a judgment of unfair dismissal by the job committee. In addition, there is the lawful duty for organization, to consider whether there are any employments available which their workers are able of working. If there where such type of job is offered immediately, it should obtainable immediately. As per the Redundancy act, if any employees worked with organization last two years, they are allowed at least to a smallest amount statutory redundancy salary form the management.
Therefore as per the above discussion and analysis, it has been understood that, in the absence of flexibility clause, employees have a right to refuse the termination letter or demand for other job or wages. In addition as per the jurisdiction under employee’s laws, change with the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction Order 1994 showing that the contractual claims is to be submitted before the court. Apart from that, it is clear that Vince has representative status and in view of the suspicion that he has coherence of occupation he can bring numerous cases against Good Caterers Ltd. The recommend given to Vince would be that if a case is purchased under out of unfair dismissal then he ought to claim for either compensation or reinstatement, this is just in the event that he is prepared to do a reversal to work and is guaranteed that he can keep working with the organization. Under Section 126 ERA 1996 a case for both unfair and wrongful for rejection can’t be honored together, I will however encourage Vince to apply for both because of the way that if one does not succeed he will be made up for the other and might likewise be made up for the damage to his emotions (landaulaw.co.uk, 2016). On the off chance that Vince feels that he can’t backpedal to work then an activity. In conclusion Vince can assert for wrongful rejection as he was not given adequate time of notification will even now have the capacity to get a net compensation of the week he has been off because of his release.
The case depicts Charles an employee of Annoying Phone Calls Ltd who fails to achieve the sales target in the 10th months and gets taunting from his boss Ewan. The regular harsh behaviour of his supervisor leads to mental stress (Weiler, 2009). The colleagues also make joke of him and make the workplace intimidating for Charles. In the context the employment law and how to handle the situation is explained to him.
Employment Law
Employment law explains the association between employers and his staff based on the legal implication pertaining to the work, worker and workplace. It includes all the potential issues related with employee from the time an individual joins the company to the dismissal (Zimmer, Sullivan, and White, 2008). The various sources of Employment law can be found in the statute that deals with employment rights act 1996 and the working time regulation (SI 1998). In addition some case law related with the various areas employment law based on the reference of common law. Apart from this EU law also play significant role in field of employment law in context to the providing legislation and various decision taken in the employment contract jurisdiction.
Jurisdiction
The jurisdiction was completely statutory till 1994 but with the employment tribunal extension of jurisdiction order 1994 it changed (Zimmer, Sullivan, and White, 2008). It allowed scope for presenting contractual claims to tribunal. According to the new change incorporated a claim related with breach of contract along with the claim for dismissal of employee on unfair ground.
Discrimination
An employer hiring people in the organization needs to treat them with equality based on the equality act 2010. It explains that discrimination of any form is not permitted in the workplace namely discrimination based on education, public services, private services apart from employment. This law is based on three major directives of European Union and it is designed on other legislation like the protection from harassment act 1997 (Stewart, 2008). It further states discrimination in the workplace like status of employment namely full time employee, part time employee, agency employee or membership in union is barred owing to the combination of trade union and labour relations act 1992 and statutory instruments. The types of discrimination in the workplace can be classified into
- Direct discrimination – The direct discrimination in the workplace is related with employer treating employee with less favourable treatment based on protected characteristic (Exall et al., 2008). The case of James v Eastleigh BC 1990 explains the direct discrimination in the workplace.
- Indirect discrimination – The indirect discrimination in the workplace deals with a neutral facially measure extended to all people equally but due to the protected characteristic some people cannot comply with the same. The case of Mandla v Dowel Lee 1983 explains the indirect discrimination in the workplace.
- Harassment – The harassment in the workplace deals with conduct of an individual with another that result in violating the dignity of other individual. It leads to creating an daunting, degrading, hostile, humiliating or distasteful atmosphere in the workplace (Exall et al., 2008). The case of Insitu cleaning co ltd v Head 1995 explains the workplace harassment.
- Victimisation – The victimisation in the workplace is discrimination related with the providing less approving conduct of an individual who is responsible for discrimination or supporting an individual involved in the action of discrimination. The case of Waters v commissioner of police of the metropolis 1997 explains the victimisation.
Case analysis
On evaluating the case of Charles who is working with the telesales company Annoying Phone Calls Ltd for the last 9 months is a successful employee with zeal for the job. Unfortunately he was unable to achieve the sales target in the last and was taunted by his supervisor in front of his co-worker by charging him with laziness. The supervisor continued with his humiliation of Charles on several occasion stating that he cannot sell water in a desert. He also said that he take job in the supermarket so that he can learn to sell to customers (Moran, 2008). Charles felt offensive and explained to his supervisor that he is diagnosed with stress by the doctor but his supervisor further humiliated him saying this part of the workplace teasing and Charles should not complain about such activities. The supervisor also told him that all sales team needs to work together as a team and anybody who cannot accommodate can lose the job. This continuous harassment by Ewan leads to other co-worker joining the process of harassing Charles and they started tittering as soon as they see Charles in the workplace.
Based on the case study analysis it was evident that Charles was subjected to harassment in the workplace based on the fact that he could not achieve his sales target in the 10th month. It was not a onetime issue but continued for prolonger period (Moran, 2008). In addition the supervisor was joined by the team member that made the environment in the workplace completely distasteful for Charles. Based on the discrimination act that is part of employment act 2010 that explains that no individual can be harassed in the workplace that impact the health by enhancing the stress level as observed in the case of Charles.
References
Barnard, C., 2012. EU employment law. Oxford University Press.
Busby, N. and Smith, R. (2011). Core EU legislation. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Chapman, C., Gibson, J. and Hardy, S. (2003). ADR In Employment Law. London: Routledge-Cavendish.
Exall, M., Greene, S.S., Rogan, F., Helms, V., Tomko, J., Reeks, T. and Paulk, D., Employment Law Compliance, Inc., 2008. System and methods for employment law compliance, establishment, evaluation and review. U.S. Patent 7,330,817.
landaulaw.co.uk, (2016). landaulaw.co.uk. [online] Available at: http://www.landaulaw.co.uk/notice/ [Accessed 14 Jan. 2016].
legislation.gov.uk, (2016). legislation.gov.uk. [online] Available at: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/18/part/IX [Accessed 14 Jan. 2016].
Moran, J.J., 2008. Employment law: New challenges in the business environment. Pearson Prentice Hall.
Stewart, A., 2008. Stewart’s guide to employment law (Vol. 3). Federation Press.
Weiler, P.C., 2009. Governing the workplace: The future of labor and employment law. Harvard University Press.
Zimmer, M.J., Sullivan, C.A. and White, R., 2008. Cases and materials on employment discrimination. Wolters Kluwer.
