Ian Smith ponders on relaxed harassment laws, TUPE transfers, parental leave & the meaning of trade union
On at least a symbolic level (for a government wanting to be seen to listen to employers’ concerns on employment law) the big news last month was legislative, with the repeal of a provision of discrimination law which had caused much adverse reaction from employers’ organisations. Much of the Equality Act 2010 was mere consolidation, but one significant extension of liability on employers was made by s 40(2)–(4), which enacted a novel form of vicarious liability, whereby an employer could become liable for harassment of one of its employees by a third party (in particular, a customer or client) where it had happened twice before (though not necessarily by the same third party) and the employer could not show it had taken reasonable steps to prevent it. At least in theory, this was a significant extension, in that historically you were only vicariously liable for the acts of someone you controlled. Moreover, on a more practical level, the subsections raised a difficult question as to
