REWARD
What’s the latest in the world of employment law?
Nicola Mullineux, senior employment specialist for Peninsula, provides us with details of the interesting outcomes of three different recent employment law cases
Excluding union rep from meeting is unlawful Although a disruptive or obstructive meeting companion can be frustrating for employers to manage, a recent tribunal case confirmed the extent to which organisations can act against this. In Brown v IQVIA, the employee was invited to a grievance appeal meeting to be held on 25 April 2022. He was also invited to a disciplinary hearing on 6 May 2022 for failing to turn his camera on during video meetings. He exercised his statutory right to be accompanied to both meetings, choosing to bring a representative from the Equality For Workers Union, who had attended previous meetings leading up to the two formal ones dated. In earlier meetings, the companion had raised several legitimate issues with the processes being followed by the respondent, including highlighting that they: l were in breach of their own disciplinary policy l had failed to include evidence with the disciplinary invite
l hadn’t disciplined others who had not had their cameras on. However, the employer deemed that the union representative had acted inappropriately, interrupted the meeting chair, was obstructive and rude. As such, the employer excluded him from the planned meetings and said to the employee he could be accompanied by a different individual. As a result, the employee raised a claim to the employment tribunal (ET) for failure to comply with Section 10 of the Employment Relations Act 1999, which sets out an employee’s right to be accompanied by a work colleague or trade union representative at formal meetings.
such claims are successful, under the Employment Relations Act 1999, claimants can receive up to two weeks’ pay for each breach. Since there were two breaches here (namely, the meetings arranged for 25 April 2022 and 6 May 2022), the employee was entitled to receive up to four weeks’ pay. But the ET chose to reduce the compensation from four weeks’ pay to three weeks’ pay, due to the union rep’s inappropriate conduct. This case is a reminder for employers that even where the chosen companion of an employee is disagreeable, this isn’t reason enough to exclude them from formal hearings where the law gives the employee the right to be accompanied. This may mean some managers will need additional support for meetings, if they’re finding the companion particularly difficult, or may even need to be replaced with a manager more confident in dealing with difficult behaviour. What this case shouldn’t do is deter employers from holding formal meetings with employees, as they’re a necessary and often valuable means of managing
The ET upheld the claim, saying the statutory right is the right to be
accompanied by an individual chosen by the employee from within a specified class of individuals. The statutory right doesn’t provide for the employer having a say over who can accompany the employee. The tribunal judge then had to consider the level of compensation to be awarded to the employee in this situation. Where
| Professional in Payroll, Pensions and Reward | June 2023 | Issue 91 46
Made with FlippingBook - Online magazine maker