Policy News Journal - 2012-13

HR Magazine reports:

In the case of NHS Leeds v Larner, Mrs Larner had been employed to work at NHS Leeds and her terms and conditions stated that she would accrue annual leave during sick leave but that it could only be carried over in exceptional circumstances. The leave year ran from 1 April to 31 March. Mrs Larner went off sick on 5 January 2009 and on 6 April 2010 NHS Leeds dismissed her and informed her that "a payment in lieu of notice and any outstanding leave will be made to you". Larner brought an employment tribunal claim for unpaid holiday pay under the Working time Regulations (WTR) 1998 because NHS Leeds hadn't paid for holiday leave that had accrued in the 1 April 2009 to 31 March 2010 holiday year. NHS Leeds argued that as no holiday requests were made, and the employee did not ask to carry the leave forward, the annual leave was lost at the end of the 2009/2010 holiday year. It therefore did not have an obligation to "buy out" that leave at the end of Mrs Larner's employment, as would usually be the case. However, the Court of Appeal found that Larner was entitled to be paid for the annual leave, which she had no opportunity to take because of her illness, even though she never actually requested any specific holiday. The holiday carried forward to the next leave year automatically. The decision resolves a conflict between two decisions of the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) in 2011. The EAT decided in Larner that the entitlement to be paid for accrued but untaken leave from an earlier leave year is not dependent on the employee having to submit a request for the leave before the end of the relevant leave year. However, a later decision in Fraser v South West London St George's Mental Health Trust found that an employee could only carry leave forward if he or she asked to do so. The Court of Appeal has now confirmed the approach taken by the EAT in Larner. The Government is considering amending the WTR as part of its "Modern Workplaces" consultation to make the law clearer and to resolve the current conflicts with the case law. We are still waiting for a response to this consultation but this case will surely lend support to the case for detailed amendments to the WTR in relation to carry forward of leave."

SECOND MANSLAUGHTER PROSECUTION SINCE ACT INTRODUCED IN 2008

30 July 2012

A company has been fined £480,000 over the death of a maintenance worker. Three directors of the company were charged with manslaughter by gross negligence.

Lion Steel Equipment Ltd, admitted corporate manslaughter over the death of Steven Berry, 45, at its factory in Hyde, on 29 May 2008. The firm was fined £480,000, to be paid over four years with £84,000 costs. Greater Manchester Police, which carried out a joint investigation with the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), said Mr Berry fell through a perspex sheet in a roof he was trying to fix and landed on a stone floor.

The investigation found that Lion Steel never offered health and safety training to Mr Berry and it also emerged that considerable sections of the roof were fragile.

No risk assessment was made to any employee working on the roof, the investigation found.

Read the full report from BBC News

CIPP Policy News Journal

12/04/2013, Page 53 of 362

Made with FlippingBook - Online magazine maker