header-logo header-logo

13 October 2017 / Ian Smith
Issue: 7765 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Employment law brief: 13 October 2017

This month Ian Smith explains why, whatever diplomatic wrangles lie ahead, our European obligations will continue

  • Monitoring employee communications.
  • Forcing contractual change by proposing change and letting employees choose.
  • Don’t expect to be paid for ‘working time’.

At a time of party conferences when questions arise (if allowed to) as to the speed or otherwise of our departure from the EU, the three cases chosen for this month’s column all show the continuing significance legally of our European obligations, which is likely to continue for some time to come. The first concerns the topical issue of the monitoring of employee electronic communications, with the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in effect reviewing its previous rather indulgent view on the matter. The second concerns linked cases from Poland in which the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) considered the employer tactic of forcing contractual changes by ‘proposing’ changes and leaving it up to the employees to decide whether to accept those changes or not. Both of these show a relatively expansive interpretation of the relevant laws

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

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll