Professional December 2017/January 2018

Payroll insight

Exit cap and repayments provisions Whilst it is understood that the

● in respect of an outstanding entitlement ● of compensation under the terms of a contract ● in lieu of notice ● in the form of shares or share options. Following a consultation in 2016 the government said that it expected different departments to produce their own plans in respect of the cap from mid 2017 onwards. However, at this stage there is no clear evidence that such plans have been finalised. In addition to the above, there is also a Private Members Bill currently with about the plans for public sector employees being required to repay exit payments above £80,000... ...precious little information

Parliament called the Public Sector Exit Payments (Limitations) Bill 2017. This was introduced into Parliament on 5 September 2017 and is due to have a second reading on 1 December 2017. No details of the contents of the bill have been published. This casts even more doubt on what the government’s intentions are on this particular matter. Repayment provisions Since the idea was first mooted almost two years ago, there has been precious little information about the plans for public sector employees being required to repay exit payments above £80,000 if they are re-employed by another public body within twelve months of leaving. It is not clear whether the government still plans to introduce this change; however, as it has not been expressly stated that these plans have been dropped, it must be assumed for now that this will still go ahead. Payroll managers in the public sector should brace themselves for another wide-ranging set of legislative changes potentially from April 2018 requiring a significant amount of research, training and time input from early next year. n

government still plans to introduce a cap of £95,000 on exit payments in the public sector, no regulations yet exist to create the cap itself. Whilst the UK Treasury, Scottish and Welsh Ministers have had the power to bring forward regulations since 1 February 2017, they have not yet chosen to do so. In addition, at the time of writing this article, no clear timetable appears to be in place to bring these changes into effect. Rumours are circulating that this could be happening in April 2018 which would align with the tax-related changes. For the purposes of calculating the cap it is understood that it will include any payment: ● on account of dismissal by reason of redundancy ● on voluntary exit ● to reduce or eliminate an actuarial reduction to a pension on early retirement or in respect of the cost to a pension scheme of such a reduction not being made ● that is ex gratia

Worker status cases

This is a brief outline of the status of various notorious cases and recent developments S everal momentous cases involving disputes over whether workers in parts of the so-called gig- disputes in England, Scotland and Wales, either by voluntary agreement or, if

appeal to the Court of Appeal. The case involving Pimlico Plumbers had already reached the Court of Appeal where it was held that the claimant is entitled to employment rights. It is understood that Pimlico Plumbers has been granted leave to appeal to the Supreme Court. Although the trend of decisions in the above and other status cases is generally against the businesses, in November 2017 the Central Arbitration Committee (CAC) decided that Deliveroo riders are self-employed contractors not workers. The CAC, which is a tribunal non-departmental public body sponsored by the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy, encourages fair and efficient arrangements in the workplace by resolving collective

necessary, through a legal decision. Among its responsibilities is disputes involving the statutory recognition of trade unions. The Independent Workers’ Union had sought union recognition on behalf of Deliveroo riders, which required the CAC to decide whether the riders were workers and not self-employed. The CAC found that, as the riders had a genuine right to substitute another person to carry out their work for them and there was evidence this took place, they could not be classed as workers. However, 45 Deliveroo riders have lodged employment status claims at employment tribunal which could lead to a different outcome. n

economy are self-employed or workers/ employees have made UK headlines in the last year or so. The actual status has significant impact on the statutory rights of the individuals (e.g. entitlement to national minimum wage, holiday and sick pay) and the operational basis of the businesses in question. In November 2017, the employment appeal tribunal rejected Uber’s appeal against the decision of the employment tribunal delivered in October 2016 which was that the drivers are workers. Uber has 50,000 drivers in the UK. It remains to be seen whether Uber will seek leave to


Issue 36 | December 2017/January 2018

| Professional in Payroll, Pensions and Reward |

Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker