header-logo header-logo

25 June 2015 / Ian Smith
Issue: 7658 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Employment law brief: 25 June 2015

nlj_7658_smith

It’s all in a day’s work for Ian Smith as he reviews the latest employment decisions

It could well be argued that the one thing you should never do in employment law is to ask a simple question—the chances of a simple answer tend to be disappearingly small. The decision of the Court of Appeal in Hartley v King Edward VI College [2015] EWCA Civ 455, [2015] All ER (D) 179 (May) given by Elias LJ, shows this nicely.

Hartley v King Edward VI College

The apparently simple question was this—if a salaried employee strikes for a day, how much pay does he or she forfeit? The apparently simple answer is “a day’s pay”, but how is that to be calculated? Here, the college hit by strike action deducted 1/260th of the annual salary (ie a “working days” calculation), on the basis that the contract provided for that number of days’ “directed” work per annum. The union argued that it should only be 1/365th of annual salary (ie a “calendar days” calculation). The difference per employee was not great, but the amount at

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll