March 2010 Archives - Employment Law Advocates

Christmas and New Year Office Closure

01-Dec-2011 / Employment Law Advocates / Comments Off

Our office will be closing for the holiday period at 12.00pm on Friday 23rd December 2011 and will reopen again until 10.00am on Tuesday 3rd January 2012. Advocates will be mostly unavailable but may have intermittent access to email or telephone during this period. If you are an existing client, please contact your Advocate directly by email or telephone. If you are a new client or are seeking advice, please email info@employmentlawadvocates.com or complete the enquiry form on our Contact Us page ...

Read & Comment

British Airways v Williams

29-Mar-2010 / James Medhurst / No Comments

If you would like to read the¬†lastest update¬†on this case, please¬†visit the news section of the website.

Read & Comment

Holiday pay

/ James Medhurst / No Comments

The Supreme Court has referred the case of British Airways v Williams to the European Court of Justice to rule on whether it is a requirement of the Directive governing working time for airline pilots and, by extension, the Working Time Directive, for Member States to provide a minimum level of remuneration for periods of annual leave and, if so, how it should be calculated. The suggestion that there is such a requirement arises from a comment made by the ...

Read & Comment

Relevant circumstances

23-Mar-2010 / James Medhurst / No Comments

The judgment of the Court of Appeal in Sarkar v West London Mental Health NHS¬†Trust is interesting in that it agrees with the decision of the Employment Appeal Tribunal¬†as to the law but disagrees as to the outcome of the case. The employer had initially treated the misconduct of the claimant as being minor and had tried to conciliate the matter accordingly but it later changed its position and dismissed him summarily. The tribunal found that the dismissal was unfair ...

Read & Comment

Coming soon at the Supreme Court

18-Mar-2010 / James Medhurst / No Comments

Surprisingly, in¬†nearly six months of operation, the new Supreme Court has yet to give judgment in an employment law case, but its helpful website reveals that there are currently four cases pending before it. O'Brien v Ministry of Justice, which¬†concerns whether tribunal judges are employees for the purposes of the Part-Time Worker Regulations, is due to be heard in June and leave has also been granted in Gisda Cyf v Barratt and Autoclenz v Belcher, reported on this blog. However, ...

Read & Comment

Language requirements

14-Mar-2010 / James Medhurst / No Comments

The Mail on Sunday is running a¬†front page story about a meat supplier which¬†advertised for workers with¬†the requirement that they be fluent in Polish. Like any language requirement case, the first thing to say is that this cannot be direct discrimination against English people because there are a small number of English people who are fluent in Polish and some Polish¬†nationals who are not. However, it is prima facie¬†an instance of indirect discrimination and so¬†the question arises as to whether ...

Read & Comment