The HR world is complex, especially within the UK as we go through rapid changes in the next couple of years following the Good Work Plan in Great Britain. Employment laws in the UK are predicted to change as we move away from EU laws. HR statistics are changing swiftly with record-breaking long-term sickness statistics, working from home, and pushing for greater inclusivity and equality.
Throughout 2022 we experienced the war for talent, and providing insights into the engagement and retention of employees is essential. Are employees truly engaged in their roles? What is the driving force behind their decision to seek new employment? What are the effects of a highly engaged workforce on profitability?
The role of the work environment on employees’ mental health is also a key aspect of our investigation. How does mental ill health affect the bottom line of UK businesses? What is the annual cost of mental health-related issues to employers? We have outlined statistics on mental health in the workplace and how by implementing mental health strategies saves your business financially.
We also look at stress in the workplace, acknowledge the responsibility employers have for managing stress in the workplace, and provide insights into menopause statistics in the workplace. Menopause is going to have an impact significantly in the coming years. Finally, we shed light on the increasing presence of disabilities in the workplace and the need for inclusivity.
We have outlined HR statistics, which we feel influence how HR consultants, owners and managers operate within a company. HR statistics cannot be ignored as we see new generations enter the workforce and as the age of the workforce continues to increase.
Key HR Statistics
Average UK worker stays in a job for 4.5 years.
32% of UK workers are concerned about job security.
UK workers rank flexible working as the most desirable benefit followed by job security and competitive salary.
27% of UK employees reported experiencing bullying or harassment.
The UK has one of the highest gender pay gaps in Europe, with women earning on average 13.1% less than men.
In 2020, UK employers invested £42 billion in employee training and development.
The number of HR professionals in the UK I expected to grow by 3.2% between 2019 – 2024.
The average UK worker spends 8 hours and 41 minutes at work each day.
HR statistics on HR professionals
The HR profession has grown by 42% in the last decade.
More female HR professionals overall
11% of HR professionals have a disability.
At the top-level men are paid more than women +3.7%
78% of HR professionals work in the private sector compared with 21% in the public sector.
Bad reputation forces companies to offer 10% higher salaries.
7 shocking HR statistics you need to know about the workplace.
85% of workers aren’t engaged in their roles.
81% of employees are seeking new employment.
21% more profitable businesses when their workforce is highly engaged.
Revenue boosts by x4 when there is a healthy working culture.
68% of HR professionals cite that employee retention rates improve with employee recognition
Satisfaction in career development opportunities is only 29%
75% of employees leave their jobs because of their boss – not the organisation.
Labour market overview UK: January 2023
The UK employment rate was estimated at 75.6% from September to November 2022
Female employment rate September 2022 – November 2022 – 72.2%
Male employment rate Sept 22 – Nov 22 – 79%
The estimated job vacancies fell by 76,000 between November 2022 to January 2023, falling to 1,134,000. Job vacancies have decreased consistently for 7 quarters from May to July 2022. Recruitment is currently being held back due to economic uncertainty and pressures.
Whilst the employment rate has increased in the last quarter, employment rates haven’t reached pre-pandemic levels.
Labour disputes: working days lost due to strike action: UK (thousands)
467,000 – 417,000 days of work were directly lost to industrial action in October
£1.7bn cost to the economy
Employment tribunal for Q2 2022/23
In Q2 2022/23, there were 18,000 Employment tribunal receipts, 44% 7,800 of which were single claims receipts and the remaining 56% (10,000) were multiple claims receipts.
The ET disposed of 13,000 cases in Q2 22/23 an increase of 6% compared to Q2 21/22.
29% increase in registered special educational needs and disability appeals when compared to 2020/21
Employment tribunal and employment appeal tribunal 21/22
Mental Health statistics in the workplace
1 in 6.8 people experience mental health problems in the workplace (14.7%)
Women in full-time employment are nearly twice as likely to have common mental health problems as full-time employed men (19.% to 10%)
Evidence suggests that 12.7% of all sickness absence days in the UK can be attributed to mental health conditions.
Better mental health support saves UK businesses up to £ 8 billion annually.
The cost of mental ill health for employers is approx. £56bn each year
Annual costs
Presenteeism approx. £28bn
Staff turnover – £22bn
Absenteeism – £6bn
The annual cost of mental ill health to employers has increased by 25% since 2019
Workplace and Employee stress statistics
Employers have a responsibility to minimise stress in the workplace, this includes undertaking a stress risk assessment. This risk assessment will help to identify situations where stress levels may become too high and how to reduce them.
Factors contributing to stressful environments include overloaded work requirements, no work-life balance due to long working hours, and lacking or no control over work.
Champion Health shared insights on workplace stress, including that 30% of employees indicated that financial well-being caused stress outside of work.
Whilst just under 35% of employees stated their work-related stress was impacting them negatively. Furthermore, employees feel anxious at work is just under 60%, and over 50% experience low moods.
Over the last few years, we have seen greater empathise on the impact menopause has on individuals in the workplace. Many people have been calling for greater menopause support, including making menopause a protected characteristic. However, this was rejected by the government due to already having gender and age as protected characteristics.
Surveys have shown shocking statistics including;
Due to menopausal symptoms 1 in 4 are considering leaving the workplace, whereas 1 in 10 is leaving the UK workforce due to extreme symptoms.
As people are working for longer, 8 out of 10 people going through menopause are still in work.
On average, people begin to go through menopause at 51.
Menopause has an impact on both people’s physical and mental health, their general well-being will be impacted.
Disabilities in the workplace Statistics UK
Disabilities in the workplace are increasing, and employers need to create an inclusive work environment, accommodating the requirements of all employees. Disabilities accommodations should be made where possible and reasonable, enabling employees with disabilities to complete the responsibilities with ease.
It has been reported that of the working-age population 1 in 5 are classified as disabled, with 8% reported having a severe disability.
Between 2013/14 to 2020/21, long-term health conditions increased by 17%, a total of 2 million. More women have been classed as disabled compared to men, 920,000 against 450,000. Furthermore, the younger generation those between the ages of 16 and 34
2022 was the beginning of the tribunals relating to coronavirus and how employers handled these situations.
Dempster V The Gill Corporation Europe Ltd 2022 case related to unfair dismissal, coronavirus, and redundancy. Dempster had been employed for 4 and half years from April 2016 to October 2020 as a General Operative. Unfortunately, due to the pandemic, The Gill Corporation ended up in financial difficulties. The company had furloughed employees, but the scheme changed in October 2020 meaning The Gill Corporation had to take on more of the costs associated with furloughing employees.
As the furlough scheme was changing, the company took the decision to write to all their employees, explaining that their situation was ‘not good’. The letter stated that those wishing to take voluntary redundancy should make themselves known to the company. Mr. Dempster believed he only needed to respond if he was willing to take voluntary redundancy, so took the decision not to respond.
The company sent further communications to Mr. Dempster on the 28th October 2020, declaring that he ‘qualified for the first round of staffing adjustments.’ The communication meeting also stated Dempster could take advantage of a consultation with the Managing Director. Furthermore, the communication included details of Mr. Dempster’s last working day with The Gill Corporation as being 30th October 2020.
The communication left Mr. Dempster feeling that he was dismissed without prior notice, with the dismissal being on the grounds of redundancy.
The Tribunal stated that Mr. Dempster was correct and had the right to a full consultation, where the company needed to highlight the current situation. Making him aware that he was being made redundant.
The tribunal stated that the company failed to follow the 3 steps of the redundancy process, detailed in the Employment (NI) Order 2003. Another issue was when Mr. Dempster appealed the decision for redundancy, the appeal was also handled by the Managing Director.
Due to failing to follow the correct processes, Mr. Dempster was automatically unfairly dismissed. The tribunal awarded Mr. Dempster £4,114.84 in compensation.
Lessons for employers
COVID-19 was a very difficult time for many businesses; however, this case highlights that employment protection will always stand. Therefore, all businesses should, and must, follow the correct procedure for dismissals.
The claimant had applied for, and was offered, the role of Support Services Manager with the charitable organisation Footprints Women’s Centre in West Belfast. During a phone call between the CEO Ms. Loughran and the claimant, the claimant indicated that she would like to discuss the terms and conditions included in the role of the Support Services Manager.
The claimant questioned if there was any flexibility regarding leaving and picking up children from school. The respondent and claimant disputed over the initial conversation, where the claimant believed she was told the organisation would be flexible, however, the respondent explained they stated they would try ways to accommodate the claimant.
Evidence was also put forward that Ms. Loughran pointed how the organisations maternity leave provisions were ‘not great’ after the claimant discussed the terms and conditions and the salary. The claimant stated Ms Loughran had said any requests needed to be in writing but this was later rejected by the respondent. Ms. McCaughley still accepted the role when the formal offer was made on the 30th October 2019, subject to receipt of acceptable references.
Fast forward to 8th November 2019, when the claimant received an email indicating she did not meet all the necessary requirements and the organisation was now not in the position to recruit her. The claimant requested further information, however, the respondent did not provide further information.
This led to the claimant filing a claim on the grounds of sex and age discrimination.
The Tribunal subsequently found that the respondent had not provided the real reasons for the claimant’s offer being removed. Furthermore, the tribunal found that the claimant had provided proof of the discriminatory elements i.e., concerns re school pick-ups. The tribunal also rejected the respondent’s reasons for removing the claimant’s offer, which included how the claimant had made too many requests prior to commencing work.
The tribunal upheld the claim on grounds of discrimination, awarding the claimant £8,500 for hurt feelings.
Lessons for employers
This case underlines the importance of how employers need to provide evidence for behind their decisions. The tribunal was able to state discrimination due to the respondent not putting forward sufficient reasons and issues relating to flexibility for school drops offs together with the fact that Ms. Loughran stated that the maternity provisions were ‘not great’.
The claimant (Mr. McClung) brought forward an unfair dismissal and a discrimination claim following the Equality Act 2010. The claimants’ grounds for discrimination claim were religion and belief. The claimant believed his supporting Rangers Football club was an intrinsic part of his life after being a supporter for 42 years.
The claimant also stated that supporting Rangers Football Club went further by demonstrating his loyalty to Northern Ireland and the Monarchy. He also cited that his membership and support of Rangers football club was at the same level of importance as individuals who attended church.
The discrimination arose when a Celtic supporting manager failed to offer the claimant work. The claimant felt he was being discriminated against due to being a Rangers supporter.
The Tribunal found that the respondent had not been discriminatory against the claimant due to the supporting of the football club as this did not fit within the 5 characteristics of being a philosophical belief. Rather it found that supporting Rangers football club was a lifestyle choice of the claimant.
In order for constitute a philosophical belief, it needs to be;
Be genuinely held
Be a belief rather than a viewpoint based on information available
Be a belief having a substantial impact on human behaviours and life
Reach certain levels of seriousness, importance, and cogency
Respected in a democratic society, one cannot have conflict against others’ fundamental rights and the belief is capable of coexisting with human dignity.
Should this case have been in Northern Ireland, discrimination may have occurred on the ground of the employee’s political belief.
Lessons for employer
Employers need to review what constitutes a philosophical belief including the 5 characteristics, in order to ensure discrimination does not occur in the workplace. Previously we have seen cases regarding veganism and climate change which have amounted to a philosophical belief, as it has an impact on the claimants daily lives. It is notable that, those in Northern Ireland must be aware of the complications which could arise in relation to employees supporting Celtic or Rangers football clubs.
Age Discrimination
Irving V TUI Airways 2022
Ms. Irving (the claimant) worked for TUI (the respondent) the travel company for 20 years and had been working as a cabin crew at the Glasgow Airport. Due to COVID-19, the respondent made job cuts which led to the claimant’s position becoming redundant.
It came to light that the respondent was using the length of service as the main selection criteria for redundancy which resulted in employees over the age of 45, keeping their jobs. The claimant described herself as an ‘inbetweener’ due to the fact that she couldn’t benefit from the companies’ policies which benefited older employees or younger employees.
During her redundancy consultant meeting, the claimant immediately indicated that she felt discriminated against due to her age and highlighted how she was unable to benefit from the company’s policies for both younger and older employees., raising issues of equality in the workplace.
The claimant at this stage had emphasised that she wouldn’t have been able to have the same length of service which was required due to her age. Emphasising further, those over the age of 45 would have been safe from redundancy. During this meeting, the respondent assured Ms. Irving that other factors were being considered, such as attendance records and sanctions.
Nevertheless, the tribunal concluded that the sole determining factor for redundancy selection was length of service. This was due to the claimant being able to provide evidence that employees based in Glasgow had not been marked down for any attendance triggers nor, live sanctions or warnings.
The tribunal found that the respondent had indirectly discriminated against the claimant on the grounds of age. Furthermore, it was deemed as an unfair dismissal and breach of contract. Ms. Irving was awarded £6594.
Lessons for employers
Employers can learn from this case, by ensuring that they have clear criteria when electing employees for redundancy. Length of service should be the last resort when it comes to redundancy selection and should not be used as the sole factor. Furthermore, employers must be able to provide evidence to accompany any decision taken regarding redundancy selection.
Mr. McCann (claimant) brought forward an unfair dismissal and disability discrimination case against the Department of Communities (respondent).
The claimant worked as a Quality Assurance Checker involving Universal Credit, where the claimant was investigated for breaches of procedure and for accessing the personal information of their ex-partner and their new partner via the unauthorised use of the departments computer system, on multiple occasions.
The ex-partner first raised complaints in August 2019, after the claimant sent text messages including personal information to the ex-partner.
Due to the security system set up in the Department of Communities, the security team could view the claimant access and the number of times it had been accessed. The claimant had accessed the ex-partner’s information on 92 days and accessed the new partners’ information 44 times.
The respondent had a clear Family and Friends policy, in their employee handbook, which detailed how employees could not access personal information on friends or family, the policy also made reference to estranged partners. The respondent dismissed the claimant, as his actions amounted to gross misconduct.
The claimant subsequently brought an unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claim to the tribunal. The claimant defence was that he was not given the opportunity to properly explain his versions of events and that the respondent did not fully explain what amounted to ‘legitimate business reasons’ when accessing personal information on their system. The claimant’s disability claim was in relation to tinnitus and PTSD.
It was found that the claimant did not provide enough evidence at tribunal on how the disability impacted his daily activities. The tribunal subsequently dismissed his claims that the claimant was treated less favourably due to his disabilities.
The tribunal dismissed the case.
Lessons for employers
This case highlights the importance of having robust workplace policies, particularly concerning computer equipment and personal information. Therefore, employers should ensure all policies are up-to-date.
Ms. Bozova (the claimant) was employed at the Kilmorey Arms Hotel (the respondent) as a bar person between July 2018 to 2nd September 2019. The claimant had been deemed hard-working, who at times could be volatile. Having one live written warning at the time of her dismissal. However, this was not a final written warning. The claimant had admitted her fault in the situation which resulted in a written warning.
On 1st September 2019 a customer known as ‘Customer X’ during the case, came into the bar threatening the claimant, saying he would get her sacked and knew where she lived. This was following an incident on the 29th August 2019 relating to Customer X’s drunken behaviour and the claimant was instructed by the director to ring the PSNI.
Following the incident, on the 1st of September, the bar manager instructed the claimant to either stay behind the bar or either do not serve customer x. It was stated that either the instruction was for the claimant not to get involved with Customer X or to stay behind the bar. However, the claimant was at Customer X table leading to the doorman getting involved and putting his hand on the claimant. It was cited the claimant was at Customer X’s table silently.
The doorman Mr. Grant put his hands on the claimant’s shoulders to try to turn her away from the Customer X’s table and to apparently diffuse the situation. The Tribunal found this to be ‘battery’ and found there to be no rational reason for the doorman to do this.
The claimant was invited to a meeting the next day 2nd September 2019. The claimant was not made aware of the reasons for calling her to the meeting, nor that there was the possibility of disciplinary action. During this meeting, the respondent made the claimant aware she was being dismissed. Further to this, the respondent sent a letter to the claimant stating she was being dismissed due to misconduct.
The tribunal determined this was automatically unfair dismissal, due to the respondent not following the correct procedure for dismissal. Which included not outlining why the claimant was being called to a meeting in the first place.
The tribunal concluded that this was unfair dismissal and, the tribunal awarded the claimant £7695.86. The The tribunal made a Polkey reduction of 50% due to the claimant already having a written warning, and a further 35% reduction due to the misconduct of placing herself near customer x. However the 35% deduction was counteracted with a 30% increase due to the company not following statutory procedures.
Lessons for employers
This case illustrates the requirement to follow statutory procedures when dealing with disciplinary action and employee performance.
Mr. Dinsmore was employed by Terex GB from June 1988 up until October 2020. Terex GB Ltd (the respondent) provides washing, mobile screening, and washing equipment for the mining and quarry industries.
An accident occurred on 25th June 2020, when an employee operating a forklift pushed a pump off the shelf in a warehouse, weighing 41kg and fell 13 feet. The employee reported the accident the next day, and the claimant reported it to the quality inspector who requested the pump to be scrapped.
The pump was valued at £1500 and queries rose, leading to the commencement of an investigation. Through this investigation, it was highlighted that there was a failure to follow the ‘near miss incident reporting and investigation’ process. The claimant was employed as the Dungannon site’s Store Supervisor, making it his responsibility to ensure the near-miss accident was reported to the Area Supervisor or Manager, or the HSE representative. The claimant had asserted it was up to the employee to report the near miss.
The respondent put the claimant on suspension with full pay for the duration of the investigation. The reason for the suspension was a ‘serious breach of trust and confidence’ and a ‘serious breach of safety’.
The investigation concluded that disciplinary action would follow due to the failure to report the near-miss accident. During the disciplinary meeting, the claimant admitted he would have done things differently and reported the near miss to HSE. The meeting concluded on the 14th October 2020 finding that the claimant’s failure to report this near miss amounted to gross misconduct, leading to the dismissal of the claimant.
The tribunal needed to establish if the dismissal came within the band of reasonable responses. The tribunal highlighted the respondent had provided a high level of training prior to and after the coronavirus shutdown. This training made the claimant aware of his responsibilities and actions that were needed. They noted the claimants response to deflect the blame onto another employee for reporting.
The claimant had longstanding service, and the tribunal concluded his misconduct did amount to a fair dismissal. This, they claimed was due to the misconduct falling into the band of reasonable responses. The case was dismissed.
Lessons for employers
Tribunals have used the ‘band of reasonable responses’ as a test for a long time. It has been seen to favour the employer over the employee. During these cases, the tribunal will look at what they find reasonable, but reflect from the employer’s perspective and if it falls within the band. This case supported with the employer due to the employee having a supervisory role and their safety-first policy.
Avoiding festive fear after your Christmas Work Party
Christmas work party season is underway!
From now until Christmas (and maybe even beyond) employers all over the country may be treating their employees to slap-up meals and alcoholic refreshments to thank them for their hard work over the course of the year.
Over the last couple of years, employees may have missed out on their Christmas Work Party due to COVID-19 cases, so this year may be many companies’ first Christmas work party. Reminding employees that whilst it’s outside normal working hours the Christmas Work party is still a work event.
The Christmas work party season is a great team-building opportunity, turning workmates into real mates and giving colleagues the opportunity to get to know each other in more informal surroundings. Unfortunately, because of various pieces of legislation, employers need to set out the standards of acceptable behaviour for their workers at the Christmas Work Party (or at least explain this clearly to staff beforehand).
This is because:
Employers can be held liable for harm (under health and safety laws) or harassment caused to or by their employees, or for negligent acts of their employees.
Employers have a responsibility for their staff’s actions, even outside of normal working hours or outside of the normal working environment. Any social event organised by the employer is an ‘extension’ of the workplace – regardless of the place or time of the event
Workplace policies on bullying and harassment and discrimination still apply at the Christmas work party. Just make sure everyone knows this and knows what they are. Employers should remind staff that it is how a person perceives the behaviour that is taken into consideration, should a claim arise, and not how the behaviour is meant.
How can you avoid party problems this Christmas party season?
· Pre-Party Communications Aside from details such as date, time, and venue, employers should provide employees with a gentle reminder that the Christmas party is an extension of the workplace and that certain standards are expected of them and that the normal disciplinary rules will apply should any incidents arise (in the least killjoy way possible!)
· Open to all It is vital that you ensure the party is timed so that all employees, regardless of age, gender, religion, disability or any other factor have the opportunity to attend. Should any section of the workforce be seen to be favoured or discriminated against in this way, employers could find themselves under question.
· Limit the Free Bar In order to prevent people behaving in an unacceptable manner, employers need to take a sensible approach to the provision of alcohol and be alerted to take quick action to nip any unruly behaviour in the bud.
· Getting Home Consider how your employees will get home after the party. Issue advice in advance about not drinking and driving. Can the employer provide transport home, e.g. taxi pooling/coaches? At the very least encourage employees to think about how they will get home.
· The Morning After Where possible arrange for your party to be held on a night were as few people as possible are working the following day. Be clear about your expectations regarding absence the next day and explain that disciplinary action may be taken if your expectations are breached.
What amounts to gross misconduct?
Gross misconduct may vary from business to business, gross misconduct should be detailed within the employee handbook. Misconduct at a Christmas work party, may include;
Harassment or bullying
Physical violence
Theft
Rude behaviour
A piece of case law that emphasises the pitfalls and problems that a work party can bring is Gimson v Display By Design Ltd Mr Gimson was employed as an operative. While walking home with a group of colleagues after their Christmas work party, he disagreed with one of his colleagues and then punched another colleague in the face.
The employer subsequently instigated its disciplinary procedure and summarily dismissed Mr. Gimson for gross misconduct, finding from its investigation that there was no provocation. Mr. Gimson’s appeal was rejected.
When dealing with situations like behaviour misconduct at Christmas work parties, previous actions should be consistent when taken action. Taking time to consider any comparable situations, the employee may have, minimising the risk of unfair dismissal cases.
Investigations should be started without delay with a further and meaningful investigation completed. Gathering evidence is a critical aspect of the investigation together with consulting with employees.
Steps for minimising misconduct at Christmas work party
Creating a policy for conduct at work-related events
Clearly detailing expectations for employee behaviour
Employers should remind employees of the work-related policy prior to the Christmas work party
Written and verbal communication may be necessary to further minimise the possibility of breaching policies leading to disciplinary action
The communication may detail starting and finishing times of the Christmas work party, expectations for employee conduct, and reminding employees not to act any differently than they would in a normal working environment.
The Christmas work party should be a time to celebrate the successes of the year and enjoy spending time with colleagues outside of the work environment. If certain precautionary preparations are made, employers can relax at night, safe in the knowledge that they have taken steps to ensure the safety of their staff, therefore avoiding potential liability.
Christmas Work Party memo example
‘The Christmas parties will be held on INSERT DATE.
We would like to take this time to celebrate 2023’s achievements. It has been a very busy year for everyone.
Please remember however, that it is a work function and an appropriate standard of conduct is expected. I have attached details of the Bullying & Harassment (Dignity at Work) policy. Please also note the Alcohol, Drugs, & Solvent abuse policy. Both policies are included in the employee handbook.
Please familiarise yourself with these policies and be mindful of your obligations with respect to each of them.
Employees who organise informal events after work, particularly in venues close to the workplace, should recognise that such events may be classed as work-related functions. It is therefore imperative that employees conduct themselves in a proper manner and avoid bringing the Company into disrepute.
Whilst I would like everyone to enjoy themselves, I must make it clear that any employee found to be guilty of misconduct during any such event will be subject to the Disciplinary Procedure in the same way as they would had the misconduct occurred in the normal course of employment.’
If, unfortunately, an incident occurs at the Christmas work party, contact our HR consultants for HR support to ensure the company is following employment laws and procedures.
Under the Equality Act 2010, religion and belief are protected characteristics, meaning an employee should not be discriminated against due to their belief or lack of belief. Belief may cause some confusion in the workplace, as it is incorporated with religion and philosophical belief is not defined as clearly as religion is defined.
Philosophical belief is part of employment laws and is complex to understand, employers must tread carefully when dealing with situations involving philosophical beliefs ensuring not to discriminate. Employers should seek advice from HR consultants and remind themselves of the Equality Act 2010, as it sets the president for a philosophical belief.
In order to claim a philosophical belief, the belief held must meet 5 characteristics and impact how the person interacts in society;
The 5 characteristics of a philosophical belief
Be genuinely held
Be a belief rather than a viewpoint/opinion based on information available
Be a belief having a substantial impact on human behaviours and life
Reach certain levels of seriousness, importance, and cogency
Respected in a democratic society, one cannot have conflict against others’ fundamental rights and the belief is capable of coexisting with human dignity.
Is supporting a Football club a Philosophical belief?
In the case of McClung V Doosan Babcock Ltd & Others in Scotland, McClung brought forward a discrimination claim, and an unfair dismissal claim under the Equality Act 2010, claiming discrimination based on religion and belief grounds.
McClung has been a Rangers Football supporter for 42 years which is an intrinsic part of his life and has a ‘buzz’ on days when Rangers are playing. To support his claim, he also stated the other aspects of being a Rangers fan including showing loyalty to the Monarch and Northern Ireland. Furthermore, stating his support and being a member of Rangers Football Club has the same importance as others attending Church.
The claimant cited that a manager purposely did not offer him work due to the manager being a Celtic fan and this manager was discriminating against McClung due to being a Rangers fan.
The Employment Tribunal came to the conclusion that Mr. McClung supporting Rangers did not fall into discrimination against religion or belief under the Equality Act 2010. Supporting Rangers Football club did not amount to any of the 5 characteristics outlined above and was simply supporting a particular football club, seen as a personal lifestyle choice and not a belief.
Alternatively, if this particular case was tried in Northern Ireland, the claimant could have cited discrimination based on their political belief, due to the nature of this particular case involving a Celtic fan and a Ranger fan.
Examples of successful claims for philosophical belief
Is veganism a philosophical belief?
Ethical veganism has been determined to be a philosophical belief, in the case of Casamitjana Costa v The League Against Cruel Sports in Wales and England found that ethical veganism is a philosophical belief meaning it is protected under employment laws. However, vegetarianism was found not to be a philosophical belief but rather a lifestyle choice during the case of Conisbee v Crossley Farm Ltd & others.
If a claimant is raising a claim based on the belief of ethical veganism, they must provide sufficient evidence their reasons for being vegan are based on animal welfare and/or environmentalism but not solely for health purposes making it a lifestyle choice rather than belief.
Can belief in Climate Change amount to a philosophical belief?
In the case of Nicholson v Grainger plc, the claimant filled unfair dismissal claims with discrimination on religion and belief grounds, arguing his belief in the environment and climate change fell into the Equality Act 2010 (in particular Employment Equality Regulations 2003 for religion and beliefs) protection. Mr. Nicholson believes “mankind is towards catastrophic climate change”, leading to Mr. Nicholson changing his life including how he travelled, influenced how he shopped and ate/drank alongside managing any waste he produced.
The Employment Tribunal held up his claim and found his belief to fit with the definition of philosophical belief under the Employment Equality Regulations 2003 for religion and beliefs.
Managing philosophical beliefs at work
Employers that are making quick conclusions about what is a philosophical belief and what is an opinion, need to be wary of tribunal cases. Prior to making conclusions, employers should fully investigate the claims and consult with the employee in question. This will provide a wider picture of the situation and a stronger understanding of the belief.
We recommend consulting with our HR consultants when managing claims of philosophical beliefs at work, HR consultants can provide clarity on employment laws and help in identifying if the belief is a lifestyle choice/opinion or in fact is a philosophical belief.
As an employer are you experiencing working from home productivity paranoia?
Many employers are becoming increasingly concerned that employees don’t have the same productivity levels when working from home compared to when in the office. So how can employers minimise working-from-home productivity paranoia?
Microsoft released a survey recently stating that 80% of managers disagree that employees work at the same efficiency when in the office, compared to 87% of employees feeling they work at the same level if not more efficiently from home.
What is working from home productivity paranoia?
Working from home productivity paranoia stemmed from employers focusing on employees’ activity and utilising tracking technology. If monitoring employees’ activity is not explained correctly it can be seen to have a ‘big brother’ effect, especially when employers/managers highlight, or query time spent on a particular task. Employees feel they are being undermined and untrustworthy when tracking technology is used in this manner, leading to lower motivation which could be the reason for decreased productivity rather than hybrid or remote working.
If this situation persists for a long period, companies/managers will begin seeing decreased retention levels as employees seek better working environments. Especially as the next generation has entered the workforce, Gen-Z is twice as likely to move jobs compared to other generations, throughout the pandemic 50% of LinkedIn users switched roles with 90% being Gen-Z causing the ‘Great reshuffle’.
The COO of Mondofora, Dion Kenney hits the nail on the head when he says ‘If a manager’s concern is whether an employee is busy every second, they are measuring the wrong metric. Productivity is a measure of achieved results.’ Highlighting that employers and managers should be looking to client satisfaction or results from reporting i.e.increasing engagement or impressions.
The world of work turned upside down in 2020, employees were fully capable of working from home without causing productivity paranoia with many employees working longer hours to minimise the risk of judgment from other colleagues. So, what has changed in employers or managers? Is it the loss of control or do they have key results highlighting their business outputs have decreased?
How can employers move past WFH Productivity Paranoia?
Employers can help by breaking the disconnect between employees and employers, open communication and understanding of the employee’s workloads can reassure companies that work productivity is not decreasing. Helping to decrease working from home productivity paranoia. Many employees find it easier to work from home with little to no distractions compared to when in the office, as employees feel they spend more time talking to colleagues.
Businesses need to have a clear and concise workplace expectation for all employees, including sending emails outside of business hours or conversations had to establish workloads. Limiting the likelihood of employee burnout. The key to minimizing working from home productivity paranoia is communication between managers and employees, digital communication is extremely effective when utilised correctly through voice, call, and messaging communication.
Other expectations to set for working from home are days employees can work from home or process for requesting to work from home more. Harsh measures have been taken by companies including Tesla, Elon Musk demands all employees back to the office full time and those who do not return will be assumed to have resigned.
If employers are keen to have employees back in the office, strategies or incentives may reduce negatively surrounding the return. Employees are more willing to come into the workplace by allowing them to socialise more freely with colleagues. The Work Trend Index Pulse reports indicate that 84% of employees would be motivated to come into the workplace if socialisation was encouraged, potentially through monthly team bonding incentives.
People have differing opinions on working from home!
Including Mark Cook who published an opinion piece in the Financial Review, stating those between the ages of 35-50 years old are becoming the forgotten generation in the workplace. Declaring if you’re working remotely no one will know who you are or where you are. This apparently is limiting your chance of promotions within the company or equally damaging your career progression with fewer chances of learning new skills from colleagues.
Do we need a reality check on working from home or do businesses need to adapt their working environment to cater to working from home, ensuring their employees are developing and progressing within their company? Helping retention rates and increasing business outputs.
The working from home productivity paranoia can be managed and decreased with clear concise communications, keeping communication lines open, and establishing trust with colleagues is key to working from home.
Are you as a business owner experiencing working from home productivity paranoia? We can help guide you through measures to take ensuring your employees are continuing to be productivity at home and manage their performances.
Tribunals have seen a 45% increase in cases relating to workplace banter, where an employee has felt they are being harassed/bullied in the workplace.
ACAS highlight that there is ‘no legal definition of bullying but is unwelcomed behaviour from individuals/groups of people deemed intimidating, malicious, or offensive to another individual.
One employee may think it is workplace banter whilst another employee sees it as bullying, this creates a grey area due to it being subjective to the employee who is the centre of the workplace banter. Employers must be proactive in their approach to workplace banter, decreasing the risk of employees filing claims of bullying or harassment.
Good workplace banter can positively affect company culture, helping to develop workplace relationships and improving team contributions and collaboration abilities. However, there is a fine line between good and bad banter, including if the joke is related to protected characteristics or if the ‘joke’ is repeated multiple times.
Protecting your business against claims relating to workplace banter
Bullying and Harassment policies
Implementing policies for bullying and harassment is essential for minimising claims in the workplace, these should be highlighted to employees. Policies ensure that an employee can be held accountable for their actions toward another employee or generally about their conduct within the workplace.
The bullying and harassment policy should be within the employee handbook, this should be given to the employee on the first day of employment and signed to give the business extra coverage. Employers/managers should point out the company’s policies on inclusion, equality, and diversity alongside bullying and harassment, bringing the spotlight on these incidents can reduce of occurrence.
Training
Training managers and employees on inclusivity, focusing on appropriate behaviour in the workplace in particular good and bad banter in the workplace. Highlighting how employees can easily take offense to remarks/comments made or establishing if one particular employee is continually at the centre of ‘jokes’, employees should not be bystanders.
Creating a working culture where employees feel comfortable expressing their concerns, can come from training employees on inclusivity as well as employers being proactive in dealing with workplace bullying and harassment.
If the business is an SME it may be beneficial to outsource bullying and harassment training, to help cover various angles and scenarios. Examples of different scenarios can help individuals relate to or identify issues in the workplace, the earlier they are identified can decrease the impact on company culture and the risk of grievances/claims being raised.
Taking claims of bullying seriously and taking action immediately is essential, an investigation is required to establish the nature and seriousness of the claims.
Workplace banter that led to claims of bullying
Crompton v Eden Staff Ltd saw a case of workplace banter amounting to age discrimination, Mrs. Crompton was dismissed from her role following an extended probationary period due to poor performance. Following the dismissal, Mrs. Crompton submitted a grievance based on “I feel you have treated me unfairly in connection with age discrimination” following comments made by Crompton’s manager if she had forgotten something, the comments included “Is it Alzheimer’s again?”
The manager admitted to the external HR consultant, that the comments were in fact said but in a manner that was jokey and friendly, however, Crompton had stated these comments occurred weekly. As stated above repeated jokes/banter can lead to hurt feelings especially as a protected characteristic was involved covered in The Equality Act 2010.
Mrs. Crompton had submitted claims of harassment and direct discrimination based on her age to the employment tribunal, leading to Mrs. Crompton being awarded £900 with an interest of £100.41 due to evidence suggesting “injury having been slight” alongside complaints not being reported at the time.
Make sure your business is proactive and on the right side of employment law
By conducting policies indicating acceptable workplace behaviour.
Providing training to managers and employees on appropriate and inappropriate behaviours within the workplace.
Act immediately by beginning an internal investigation for any reports of bullying or harassment following the ACAS code of practice.
Complaints must be taken seriously and cannot be ignored, dismissing claims as to the perception of them being workplace banter will leave the company in negative situations.
Workplace investigations
Workplace investigations can be stressful situations for everyone involved, following the correct process is critical. Contact us today to speak to our HR consultants, who will guide you and reassure you that correct procedures are being followed when investigating bullying and harassment claims.
Our HR team can also provide expert training on bullying and harassment in the workplace.
Do you have suspicions the new employee has committed CV fraud?
Did you know? 40% of UK workers have lied on their CV, including falsifying qualifications or experience, or simply exaggerating their experience to stand out from other candidates.
Have you noticed that your new employee is not able to complete tasks that are on their CV? Or the quality of their work is not to the standard of a person with 5 plus years’ experience stated in their CV? There is a potential that CV fraud has occurred, and employers/managers may begin to ask questions regarding the new employee’s ability.
Supreme Court ruling on CV Fraud
Last week’s Supreme Court ruling may lead to other employees who commit CV fraud being prosecuted and required to pay back part of their earnings, those earnings deemed as profits for the employee.
How did this happen?
The legal precedent was set in the case of Jon Andrewes. He falsified his Doctorate to acquire a chief executive role in an NHS Hospice in 2004, Andrewes acquired two further paid roles within the NHS. The dishonesty continued for 11 years up until 2015. In 2015 Andrewes’s lies came to light following an investigation that began when Andrewes announced his retirement due to ill health, leading to his sentencing of 2 years in prison and repayment of part of his £643k earnings from 2004 to 2015, a total of £97k.
How to reduce the risk of hiring a CV fraud
Employers have the right to ask for any documentation to prove qualifications, i.e., university certificate. To identify experience of the candidate portfolios or examples of success can be used to verify information in their CV. Any gaps or queries should be identified during the recruitment process, the new legislation also highlights the requirement for hiring managers to review CVs in greater depth and analyse them further.
For example, when hiring for a marketing role that involves content generation at a managerial level, candidates should provide a portfolio of content including the metrics establishing the quality of work and skill level.
References should be checked to confirm identity, researching on LinkedIn is a key method of confirming as well as asking for the person’s work email rather than personal. References for senior roles should include a phone call to confirm any details regarding experience or the person’s attitude in previous roles.
It is best practice to not accept handwritten references and to speak to the referee over the phone or set up an online system that sends a link directly into the referee’s inbox.
Identify and query any gaps in the CV, including random timelines of self-employment. Hiring managers can ask to speak to some of the clients the candidate worked for, allowing them to confirm all information is factual.
Dismissal following the discovery of CV Fraud
The scenario here changes depending on the stage of the recruitment and if the person is employed or the length of time they have been working for the company.
Before the employee accepts the job offer, employers have the right to withdraw the job offer and provide the reasons for withdrawing. Revoking the job offer could open up a claim based on discrimination; companies must protect themselves from such claims by rigorously documenting the whole recruitment activity and expressing the decision clearly.
Grounds for dismissal arise when CV fraud is discovered after the employee is employed.
The employer has grounds for dismissal on the bases of breaching the duty of trust and confidence implied between the employer and employee from the outset. Depending on how significant the CV fraud is i.e., falsifying qualifications like in Andrewes case, the employer can define the breach as gross misconduct, leading to the employee being dismissed without notice.
The tricky situation arises when the employee is longstanding, especially if they have over 2 years’ experience. Employees with over 2 years’ service can claim unfair dismissal. When taking steps to dismiss an employee, the employer must be able to respond with a reasonable defence for any actions taken place.
Speaking with HR consultants or seeking legal advice is highly recommended to employers prior to dismissing employees on the grounds of CV fraud in order to obtain new employment.
Our HR consultants are here to help provide HR support for these matters, guiding you through the correct processes.
Completing exit interviews is important because they offer a deeper look at your workplace culture, day-to-day processes, management solutions, and employee morale. When completed in a consistent and standardised way, these interviews can help you foster positive relationships and a welcoming working environment.
Completing exit interviews can help discover a problem and although it may be too late to fix it for that employee it can help shape a strategy to reduce your staff turnover which will in turn help to reduce costs.
Company culture has a massive impact on employee retention, during the current candidate-led market, ensuring you understand your company’s workplace culture is critical. A stronger understanding of the culture can come from exit interviews, analysing the feedback can create steps for improvement, as mentioned above helping to reduce staff turnover, especially during the ‘great reshuffle‘.
Forbes highlight that completing exit interviews helps to identify ‘critical themes’ of the workplace environment. Establishing areas requiring improvement helps to increase employee retention and positivity impacts the business culture.
What is an exit interview?
Completing exit interviews should be a neutral meeting between the employee and employer. It is designed to help the employer acquire feedback about their training, management style, benefits package etc. that may help them retain staff in the future.
It shouldn’t be too dissimilar to a job interview but instead of questioning their ability to do the job you are asking them about reasons for leaving and areas for company improvement.
It is normally best to conduct the interview face to face or via Zoom or Teams. Try and schedule the meeting with someone who isn’t the employee’s direct line manager, this will encourage more open feedback.
Why is completing exit interviews important to the business?
Make sure and ask the obvious question, why are they leaving? But also look for information on what the company are doing well and where improvements could be made.
It also helps employers to mitigate any future claims of discrimination or unfair conduct that may arise. However, you also need to be careful to avoid discussing any other employees with a departing employee.
This meeting is also a good opportunity for employers to remind employees of their post-employment obligations surrounding clients, data etc. We would encourage employers to remind employees of their restrictive covenants in their contracts of employment, where required and to organise the return of any laptops, mobile phones, company cars, etc.
You may also get an insight into recruiting, on-boarding and training needs may be revealed.
If done well they can deliver great insights into your business and improve employee engagement and satisfaction. Leading to more productive employees due to feeling more valued and rewarded, resulting in overall better business performance.
Does an employee have to attend?
Ultimately, the employer cannot guarantee the employee will attend this meeting, regardless of whether it is part of their policy. Disciplinary action could be taken as a failure to follow a management instructions; however, this may prove inconsequential as they will be leaving the business anyway.
Three main reasons for completing exit interviews:
Understand the positive and negative aspects of the business
Highlighting of any potential tribunal cases or claims
Post contractual obligations can be restated
Our COO Helen Hardy gives us more intel and reasons for completing exit interviews when an employee is leaving. Make sure to check out the video below:
Other considerations:
If an employee has verbally given their notice, prior to their official written notice, opting for a stay interview might get more insight to why the employees is wanting to leave. The business may be able to meet the new contract agreement offered to the employee or establish a plan to make working with the company a more positive atmosphere.
Looking for a better way to add exit interviews to your HR strategy?
Call us on 02825644110 (Northern Ireland) or 0800 111 4461 (GB) or by emailing [email protected]
We are experiencing rapid growth in the cost-of-living in 2022 and it is not set to stop any time soon with inflation hitting 9.4% in June. HR and business can play a key role in helping employees navigate through increased costs and narrowing disposable income.
Do not worry, whilst it will be mentioned increasing wages is not the sole thing businesses or HR departments can do to help employees.
HR has a responsibility to find solutions alongside senior management to mitigate rising costs for the business, including developing policies and increasing employee pay in line with inflation. Policies can be put in place which could see employees’ disposable income go further i.e., discount schemes with larger retailers.
Management will also need to consider the likelihood of employees potentially experiencing in-work poverty. Those experiencing in-work poverty are usually on the lower-earning scale.
In-work poverty
The CIPD define in-work poverty as; ‘when a working person’s income, after housing costs, is less than 60% of the national average, they don’t earn enough to meet the cost of living – they are living in poverty.’ They also highlight before the current cost-of-living crisis in-work poverty impacted one in eight workers.
Many employees believe senior management is not aware of or ignores in-work poverty, employees suffering from in-work poverty will begin to increase with the cost-of-living crisis.
Further to this, the Resolutions Foundation Thinktank carried out research which found on average those living in the UK are £8,800 worse off when compared to countries such as Australia, Canada, France, the Netherlands, and Germany.
The Living Wage Foundation (LWF) has been campaigning for businesses to provide employees with a ‘real living wage’, this would be an hourly wage that meets living costs. Businesses who follow the Living wage will be honored through a scheme that rewards them with Living Wage Employer Mark – boosting the business’s corporate social responsibility image, and potentially helping to combat the current war for talent.
From the LWF campaign that began in 2012, over 9,000 employers within the UK are providing employees with a Real Living wage. This generated £1.6bn for lower earners and the UK government took inspiration from this with their method for minimum wage. The Government also introduced the National Living Wage in 2016.
Why help employees during the cost-of-living crisis?
As ‘one in four employees say money worries affect their ability to do their job’ as CIPHR research has found between 2021-2022. This is due to them becoming distracted and disengaged from work with the constant pressure and stress of seeing their finances stretched further.
Many employees may be counting the pennies month to month, revaluating how much they can spend on certain requirements and essential items.
Financial worries and stress will have both mental and physical impacts, including:
Enhanced symptoms of existing illnesses i.e., IBS/Crones
Struggling to concentrate on work tasks
Difficulty when making decisions at work
How can HR and businesses help?
Businesses and HR departments should be regularly reviewing their staff wages and benefits, exploring how the company manages their pay is critical. If not routinely reviewed, pay decisions within the company can become unfair and lack value for money. Senior management and HR departments should be reviewing individuals’ pay and the overall company pays, establishing if they could increase employees’ wages to help employees combat the rising cost-of-living.
Unfortunately, businesses are also feeling the pinch of costs going up especially following Brexit, coronavirus, and the war in Ukraine. Many businesses are struggling with production and overhead costs increasing. This is where creative benefits for employees can be a win-win situation for businesses, whilst helping employees with the rising cost of living alongside helping to improve the company’s culture.
What are creative benefits?
Offering retail discount schemes
Retail discount schemes help employees to make small savings on essential everyday products, helping their money to go further. The scheme works by providing a range of discounts for products as well as receiving discounts on gift cards and vouchers. Furthermore, employees can enjoy savings on other expenses such as days out, holidays, and cinema trips.
Selling annual leave
If an employee has annual leave remaining at the end of the year, businesses instead of making the employee take the leave or carry it forward to the next year, ask if they prefer to be paid for the annual leave.
Tax-free items
Employees that work from home can claim tax back, encouraging employees to do this helps with the increased costs of energy whilst working from home.
Businesses should not use this as a way of pushing employees back to the office due to the increased costs of fuel and decrease in work-life balance.
Health cash plan
Health cash plans help employees with routine medical expenses including eye tests and dental appointments/treatments. Many companies use this as a way of attracting employees especially if the policy is advanced providing cover for a larger range of health care.
Cycle-to-work scheme
This scheme helps employees save between 26-40% on a bike and their accessories whilst spreading the cost over 12 months.
How does it work? Firstly, the business needs to register with Cyclescheme then the employee will search for a bike of their choice in-store or online. The employer must confirm eligibility and pays for the equipment.
The employer will get the money back over 12 months as this comes out automatically from the employees’ salaries. The scheme can also help employers and employees save on National Insurance.
Contact us today if you require advice on implementing employee benefits into the workplace.
Back in February 2022, the Northern Ireland Government past new legislation known as Parental leave in order to manage grief in the workplace. This new legislation allows parents two weeks leave after the death of a child or stillbirth with full pay. We can all agree things are moving in the right direction, but should the same leave be provided when a parent or partner dies?
CEO Neil McLeese spoke to Newsletter and highlighted how more is needed for dealing with the challenges of grief, especially when managing grief in the workplace.
The new parental leave legislation began in April 2022 with further legislation to be introduced for anyone who suffers a miscarriage. Only a few countries worldwide have this legislation within employment rights, indicating this is a progressive move by the Northern Ireland Government.
As Neil discussed with the Newsletter; ‘It is certainly great to see Northern Ireland introducing new legislation that will provide vital support to bereaved parents during an unimaginable time.
However, it begs the question – why does such legislation have to be ring-fenced around parents alone? Surely anyone who suffers a profound loss should be entitled to the same measures.’
Law prior to Parental leave
Prior to April 2022, the business had complete control over how much leave an employee could have in order to work through their grief. Many businesses especially in the last year, could not afford to have an employee off for more than a week, due to staff shortages and business requirements.
Leading to grieving individuals being forced to return to work before they were mentally fit to do so. This leads to frustrated employees who are demotivated due to feeling ill-treated, employee’s performance may decrease for a period of time. Lower levels of productivity may decrease business outputs.
Managing grief in the workplace
Everyone reacts to grief in different ways and as Neil said ‘it is safe to say there can’t be a ‘one-size-fits-all’ policy when it comes to leave’. Meaning business may be best manage grief on a case-by-case outlook, supporting the employee as best the business can. Grief has no limits and can continue to impact a person for a long time, even after a period time where they have felt okay.
Forcing employees back to work before they have dealt with their grief fully, can prolong the process and intensify the situation for them. Decreasing their mental wellbeing.
Business should accept that the employee will require an adequate period of time away from the business following the death of parent, child, partner, or grandparent. This can play a part of the company’s culture and values, if deemed to force employees back quickly could negatively impact the employees’ attitude towards the company.
Do not assume the employee will return and begin preforming at their normal working level, line managers should have transitions in place to gradually reintroduce the employee back to all responsibilities and lower their expectations of their capabilities. Alongside this, employees should be reassured on the bases they will not expect judgement or loss of earning during this difficult time.
Parental leave is the right move, but more is needed
When we say this, we truly mean parental leave introduction is a fantastic move by the Northern Ireland Government, but further action is needed to ensure all those experiencing grief have the time to manage and deal with it effectively. Dealing with grief takes multiple sources of support from family members, friends, and employers.
We would suggest pushing forward with extending Parental Leave to ‘Bereavement Leave’ in employment law allowing adequate time for employees to manage their suffering. Allowing them to return the work when they are more ready compared to being forced back into work.
Does your company require assistant for managing grief in the workplace? Including if you feel the employee should have returned already. Call or email us for guidance on how to manage this effectively to not damage company culture and not impact the employee’s mental wellbeing.
Contact us for further guidance on how your business can support employees during periods of grief.
