Mrs Roach has been awarded an undisclosed sum after an employment tribunal found in her favour that she was unfairly dismissed and most significantly that she was discriminated against on the grounds of her disability by her employer Marks and Spencer.  Mrs Roach, 55, took time off from her job at the Hereford branch of the business due to complications after gynaecological surgery in 2014, and was dismissed a year later. She said: “M&S was my life and I am devastated that a company with such a proud tradition of being good to its staff treated me so terribly.  The dismissal came despite the store failing to properly look into the prognosis for Mrs Roach’s condition and Marks and Spencer dismissed her in January 2015 before obtaining another occupational health report into whether she would be able to return to work.

In a written judgement, the tribunal members said that dismissing a ‘long-serving, vulnerable employee without proper medical advice and consideration was understandably distressing and more than trivial’.

Bringing more case law

The rules around social media and the work place have been well established now, but in Creighton v Together Housing Association Ltd, we still see people falling foul of the rules.

Mr Creighton had worked as a gas engineer for the housing association since 1987. There was an investigation into alleged bullying of another engineer, his employer discovered that he had made derogatory comments a number of years previously about his colleagues and employer on his open Twitter account.

The employer took disciplinary action against Mr Creighton and he was dismissed for gross misconduct over his tweets. He decided to go to tribunal. His case was based on:

• he had thought his tweets were private;

• he had posted them two or three years ago; and

• he “deserved to be treated sympathetically” after nearly 30 years’ service.

He lost his case as the tweets were published and out there, no exuse. The moral of this case is be careful what you put online.

Anyone can become a victim of workplace bullying, harassment or unfair treatment, no matter your size, age, religion, race, gender or length of service.

It may be hard to put into words how you feel; you might think that it’s just one of those things. You may feel that your allegations sound ridiculous or you don’t know who to complain to......

contactus@people4people.co.uk we can offer advice support and practical help. Tel:02086728464 / 07749870969             

With years of resolving workplace issues in favour of employees, there are not many issues that we have not come across.

Bringing more case law.

Using football analogy we are at half time in the 4 cases that see individual workers taking on their employers to secure basic employment rights, such as sick pay, holiday pay and the minimum wage. The taxi hailing firm Uber lost its battle last year, where the tribunal judges lambasted the way the company had tried to use made up terminology and double dutch in their workers contracts. Uber tried to say that its drivers were independent businesses, so are not intitled to those basic rights. It was a humiliating defeat for Uber but a great victory for the little man/woman.

Now in Dewhurst v CitySprint UK Ltd. The same tribunal has found that a CitySprint bicycle courier should be classed as a worker, rather than self employed and is intitlled to basic workers rights. Maggie Dewhurst has worked for CitySprint for the past two years, during which time she has been classed as an independent contractor, despite her role being more like that of a worker.

She told the tribunal: “We spend all day being told what to do, when to do it and how to do it. We’re under their control.”

The Judge said that CitySprint’s contractual arrangements were “contorted”, “indecipherable” and “window dressing”.

She added: “It is CitySprint which has the power to regulate the amount of work available, and it keeps its couriers busy by limiting the size of the fleet.

“This gets to the heart of the inequality of bargaining power present in this relationship, and shows that this is not a commercial venture between two corporate entities, as claimed by CitySprint.”  This second victory could have far-reaching implications for so-called “gig economy” Dewhurst said she was “delighted”

It has been announced today that the Post office will be closing a further 37 high street branches with a loss of 300 jobs. They have also announced that another 127 finacial advisors positions will go too. The CWU union has said this comes as a bitter blow to the Crown Post office workers, this follows a five day strike held just befor Christmas over the planned closures. Crown post offices are the larger branches usually found on High Streets. In April 2016, the Post Office announced plans to transfer up to 61 branches into WH Smith stores over the following year. It said the move was part of a 10-year plan to cut costs and save cash, and would act as a way of "safeguarding the future of the network". But who is safeguarding the future of those workers who will lose their jobs???

Research published by Acas has highlighted the question of line manager confidence and competency in supporting individuals with mental health conditions. It also calls for a “joined-up” approach to managing mental health at work and a shared commitment from senior and front line managers, and peers. Awareness has risen about the problems associated with mental health in society. With many celebrities and politicians publicly speaking about mental health issues the stigma attached to these issues has died down.

In the case of the workplace, it’s a question of both creating the right climate, and adopting appropriate practices and behaviours to support individuals who struggle with mental health issues. The Acas research also found that disclosing a mental health condition to a line manager can be something of a gamble, and found that 41% of people did not disclose their mental health condition because of a sense of shame. The Acas research hints strongly at the need to guard against creating “anxious organisations”: where external pressures translate into stress for individuals, or where change is poorly managed.          

Bringing more case law

In Majid v AA Solicitors Ltd

Ms Majid was a young lady who was taking her legal practice course to become a solicitor. She started working for AA Solicitors, a practice based in Bolton. Mr Ali was the sole solicitor of the practice. Ms Majid stated that, during the six weeks of her employment, she was subject to 40 or more acts of sexual harassment by Mr Ali.

The harassment included attempts to hug her, touch her arms, and invite her to the cinema. She also said that he suggested that a bed should be installed in the office. This made Ms Majid feel very uncomfortable. After declining Mr Ali’s advances, Ms Majid found herself subject to a redundancy process and was dismissed.

The employment tribunal found that Mr Ali, as an older man in a position of power, had made numerous sexual advances towards Ms Majid, abusing his authority and exploiting her vulnerability. They also found that the selection of Ms Majid for redundancy had not been on genuine grounds.

The employment tribunal awarded Ms Majid:

• £2,111 for loss of earnings;

• £14,000 compensation for injury to feelings

• £4,000 in aggravated damages.

The moral of this case is that if you are made to feel uncomfortable by acts of a sexual nature whether male or female, the employment tribunals are taking this very seriously and it doesn’t have to be tolerated.