Policy News Journal - 2016-17

The Chartered Institute of Payroll Professionals ……………………………………………………………Policy News Journal

Can a dismissal be implied by the inaction of an agency employer to find work for its employee?

No, held the EAT in Sandle v Adecco .

The employee was an agency worker employed by the agency but working on assignment at another company. When her assignment ended, the agency failed to take any steps to find her other work and assumed that she was not interested in further agency work. The employee made no attempt to contact the agency, but subsequently brought a claim of unfair dismissal. On appeal, the EAT held that in the absence of any communication of dismissal by the employer and no resignation by the employee, there was no dismissal, nor could one be implied by the inaction of the employer. The employment relationship was, therefore, still continuing when the employee brought her claim, she could not prove she had been dismissed, and her claim failed.

To prove dismissal, the employer's unequivocal intention to dismiss must be communicated to the employee.

With thanks to Daniel Barnett’s employment law bulletin which provided the details of this case.

Back to Contents

Misuse of personal data 18 October 2016

Is there a minimum level of compensation for workplace privacy claims following the misuse and disclosure of an individual's personal data?

No, held the Central London County Court in Brown v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis .

The Claimant was a former police officer who brought claims under the Data Protection Act 1998 , and the Human Rights Act 1998.

As part of a disciplinary investigation her employer, the Metropolitan Police, had made enquiries of another police force to find evidence that she had taken an unauthorised holiday while off sick. This involved the unlawful use and disclosure of the Claimant's personal data. Both police forces accepted there had been breaches of the right to privacy. The judge distinguished workplace privacy claims from hacking claims, and held that damages based on the facts of this case should be substantial, but less than the minimum £10,000 threshold adopted in hacking cases. Awarding a figure of £9,000 the judge found that, although the breach was serious, this was not a hacking case involving the disclosure of highly personal material for gain, wide distribution, or with the intent to injure or embarrass.

With thanks to Daniel Barnett’s employment law bulletin which provided the details of this case.

Back to Contents

Asda workers - equal pay for work of equal value 21 October 2016

The biggest private sector equal pay case ever brought, could cost Asda more than £100 million.

Thousands of workers at Asda have won the right at an Employment Tribunal (ET) to proceed with equal pay claims against the store, in the biggest private sector equal pay case ever brought, which could cost the supermarket more than £100 million.

The claim is that work in the retail stores is paid less than roles in the distribution centres, with women holding a higher proportion of the jobs in store, and men holding a higher proportion of the jobs in the distribution centres.

The ET has ruled that the store workers can compare themselves to the distribution workers. However, it has yet to consider whether the jobs are of equal value in terms of their demands, and if they are, consideration will be

cipp.org.uk

Page 97

of 588

Made with FlippingBook - Online magazine maker