Categories
Anna Denton-Jones Disability Employment Law Employment Rights Act 1996 Equality Act 2010 Reasonable Adjustments Right to Work

Reasonable adjustments for a disability

I have had a handful of recent cases where Occupational Health have advised employers in relation to employees with anxiety problems that the employee’s duties exacerbate their condition.

In all of these cases a recommendation has been reducing telephone duties so that the employee is taking less calls during the day or completely stopping telephone duties altogether so the employee is, for example, focusing on emails rather than telephone calls. In these cases, the employer has done entirely the right thing in trying to follow the Occupational Health advice, adjusting the duties accordingly, but there has been no plan for the long term. What is accommodatable initially and what is planned for when, after a few months, the employee has got into the habit of not dealing with telephone calls either at all or dealing with only a few? If you aren’t careful you end up in a situation where the employee is not performing large parts of their role and everyone is stuck.

Rather than agreeing outright to the adjustments, it may be sensible to agree to a temporary adjustment with a discussed plan for how you get from that place of a reduced requirement to carry out a particular activity and back to the contractual duties being performed.

To put it another way, given the cost it takes to support somebody’s mental health to make adjustments, it is misleading to alter things that are not going to be able to be accommodated in the long run. That just creates false expectations and could be achieving more harm than good over time.

Alternatives to reducing the duties completely might be:

  • Less calls, so allowing more time between calls in order to take breaks;

  • If there have been difficult calls, having a strategy for what steps will be taken around managing the feelings that arise from those difficult calls; maybe discussing it with the manager or taking a time out;

  • Other steps that might be agreed as part of a work related action plan.

Remember Occupational Health are just providing you with suggestions – it is up to you to decide, as an employer, whether or not you can accommodate those suggestions. It is possible that you will have roles within your organisation that cannot actually be adjusted to prevent some core duty of that role taking place. In that scenario you might actually be saying no you can’t make a particular adjustment because it is not reasonable to do so.If we aren’t making an adjustment then we need to be able to justify why not to a Judge, if that ever became necessary, so having evidence to back up that decision will be useful. Is there  evidence of how many phone calls a day are taken in that role?  What is the proportion of the day spent doing other activities? Are the phone calls critical to generating the work that the person then does?

Anna Denton-Jones
Refreshing Law

Categories
Anna Denton-Jones Employment Contract Employment Law Employment Relations (Flexible Working) Act 2023 Employment Rights Act 1996 Part-Time Working Remote Working Return to Work Right to Work Video Working from Home

Video | Remote working vs office working

Our latest video is available to view on the Refreshing Law YouTube channel – please click here to watch the video where Anna discusses a recent case that has shed some light on the debate that a lot of employers are having around employees returning to the office from home working.

Anna Denton-Jones
Refreshing Law

 

Categories
Anna Denton-Jones Confidentiality Disclosure Employment Law Employment Rights Act 1996 Equality Act 2010 Recruitment Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 Right to Work

Reform to the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974

On 28 October 2023, the 1974 legislation was amended by the Crime Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 and accompanying Regulations.

In the past, some offenders were required to disclose their sentences for the rest of their lives. Now, custodial sentences of 4 years or less and of more than 4 years for some less serious crimes, will be spent “after a period of rehabilitation” of up to 7 years after the sentence has been served, provided that no further offence is committed in that period.

PenaltyPrevious Rehabilitation PeriodNew Rehabilitation Period
Community Order1 year beginning with the last day on which the order had effectNow it is the last day on which the order had effect
Custody of 6 months or less 2 years 
Custody up to 1 year 1 year
Custody of 6  months up to 30 months4 years 
Custody of more than 1 year up to 4 years 4 years
Custody of more than 30 months up to 4 years7 years 
Custodial sentences of more than four yearsNever spent7 years
Convictions for serious sexual, violent or terrorist offencesNever spentNever spent

Stricter disclosure rules continue to apply to jobs that involve working with vulnerable people.

The time frames that I have detailed are in relation to offenders who are over the age of 18. Slightly lower periods apply if the offender was under 18 at the time of conviction.

The new time periods are extended in the event of re-offending during the declaration period. A new conviction attracts its own disclosure period and the previous conviction and the new one need to be declared until the end of the original conviction’s active period or if later, the end of the new disclosure period applied to the more recent conviction.

Anna Denton-Jones
Refreshing Law

 

Categories
Anna Denton-Jones Employment Contract Employment Law Immigration Recruitment Right to Work

Reporting duties — Sponsored workers

More and more organisations are sponsoring employees from an immigration perspective, which means those that are working in HR are having to be more familiar with the duties that they have to report to the Home Office in respect of the staff. This means that the issue of immigration isn’t just something that we deal with on recruitment, it means that throughout the life cycle of the employment relationship, we need to be thinking, in any situation, about the sponsorship implications.

Delays to the commencement of work is something that will have to be notified – the reason for the delay. Illness, bereavement and travel disruption will all be legitimate reasons, as will working out notice with a previous employer but essentially, the Home Office want to know if there is any delay. There is a sensible reason for this (making sure the person does come here and start work and does not abscond).

Absences from work, whether that is for maternity or paternity leave, sick leave or strike action, is another notifiable event.

Any changes made to the role, which will include promotion, changing job title or reduction in salary, is something that needs to be reported. This will cover formal promotions but it can also cover less formal changes in core duties, so line management need to be aware that they can’t just make changes without there being implications.

A change of work location to a different site or working from a customer’s premises and working remotely from home on a permanent or full-time basis will all be things that need to be notified, which is another reason why employees should not be given carte blanche to work from anywhere and there are sponsorship angles to your hybrid policies.

You also have reporting obligations if there is any ending to the relationship or the employee is absent without leave for 4 weeks in total during a calendar year.

These changes have to be notified within 10 days so you don’t have a great deal of time to act.

Anna Denton-Jones
Refreshing Law

 

Categories
Anna Denton-Jones Employment Law Immigration Right to Work

Updating practices around right to work checks

From 1 October 2022, there will only be three main methods of checking an individual’s right to work in the UK – online, manual and using an Identity Service Provider (IDSP). The method an employer uses will depend on the immigration status of the individual and the documents they hold.

IDSPs
A list of those who are recognised IDSP is found at:

https://www.ukas.com/resources/latest-news/uk-digital-identity-and-attributes-trust-framework-pilot/

The fees for each can differ and they may offer different service packages.

An IDSP is intended to be used for holders of valid British and Irish passports only. Individuals with other immigration statuses or who do not hold a valid British or Irish passport will not be able to be checked using IDSP.

It is not mandatory to use one of these services – you can still check British and Irish nationals documents manually.

Temporary COVID changes ending

Temporary changes to right work check requirements introduced on 30 March 2022 due to the COVID-19 pandemic which allow checks to be carried out over video call and for scans or photographs of documents to be checked rather than original documents will also end on 30 September 2022.

To prepare for the changes, employers should:

• Consider the percentage of employees who hold various immigration documents and the rate of staff turnover. This will help to decide whether it is worth the employer using an IDSP.
• Determine how it will conduct manual checks on relevant employees following the end of the temporary COVID-19 related concessions.
• Create step-by-step guides for those conducting right to work checks and ensure whoever is conducting the checks understands when to use each method and what that involves.

Anna Denton-Jones
Refreshing Law

Categories
Anna Denton-Jones Employment Law HR Immigration Right to Work Video

Video | Right to work checks

Our latest video is available to view on the Refreshing Law YouTube channel — please click here to watch Anna discussing ‘right to work checks’ and clarifying the position for employers in respect of what they should and shouldn’t be doing in respect of these checks.

Anna Denton-Jones
Refreshing Law

Categories
Anna Denton-Jones Communication Employment Contract Employment Law Employment Rights Act 1996 Overtime Right to Work

The right to disconnect — Tread carefully

As more and more of us feel that we are losing the ability to switch off from work and take an uninterrupted rest, which is of course required under the Working Time Regulations, more and more discussion is taking place about whether we need some kind of “right to disconnect”.

The French led the way in 2017, amending their Labour Code to include this right for employers with more than 50 people – their law requires the employer to negotiate with employee representatives to control the use of digital tools. Italy, Spain, Slovakia, Luxembourg, Netherlands and Germany have all followed suit with Ireland being the most recent addition. In Ireland their Code of Practice requires employers to have a policy in place which confirms that employees have a right not to work outside of normal working hours, that employers and colleagues should not routinely email or call outside of those working times and the employee should not be penalised for refusing to work during non-working hours.

Whilst that Code of Practice doesn’t have the force of law of in the sense that breaching it leads to a claim for damages, it could be used as a supporting argument when somebody is bringing a claim about something like breach of working time, health and safety legislation or bullying and harassment or plain old breach of the implied term of trust and confidence for a constructive dismissal.

You may have seen email footers that more routinely now set out the times in which somebody is likely to be contactable and/or answering their messages. More and more employers are carving time out in diaries when meetings cannot be timetabled and dictating that meetings should not be timetabled at unsociable hours, save in emergency circumstances.

Initially I took the view that employers in the UK should not be waiting for our Government to legislate, (the TUC has called for the Government to include something in the Employment Bill but there is no indication that they are thinking of it) and encouraging employers to incorporate something into their policies and procedures.

However, I also remember the days before the Blackberry when my desktop PC sat on my desk in the office and I was unable to deal with email correspondence if I wasn’t physically at my desk. I remember being given a small square to stick on the back of my hand by a colleague that I did some stress at work training with for a large employer. The square would change colour back to blue when your body chemistry changed and your body was full of the stress hormones, cortisol. As an experiment I kept this and placed it on my hand the next day that I was due in the office. I remember driving to work and monitoring the situation. During my commute to work, when I was beginning to think about work, the feedback was that I was not suffering from stress. However, as I approached the door and was using my door entry fob, that is when my stress levels rose, telling me that the anticipation of what I might find when I logged my computer on was stressful to me.

I approached my desk and duly logged on and my stress levels remained high until the time when I’d managed to see what was there and prioritise what was urgent and what else could take a bit longer to deal with. Once I had a handle on the situation, the colour of the square returned to normal.

When the ‘Blackberry’ was introduced (which is a form of mobile phone for those you who are too young to remember!), allowing me for the first time to have email on the go I remember thinking it was a positive thing and that now in the short moments that you might have waiting somewhere or when you have parked your car, you keep an eye on things, delete the rubbish and then arrive back at my desk ready to roll because I would know what things I needed to deal with and when. That’s many years ago now and I’ve still always thought that the ability to have your email follow you has actually been a positive thing on balance.

What is different now stems from a number of issues:

  1. The sheer volume of emails being sent. From employees being copied in on emails that they don’t need to be, to having email conversations with colleagues when actually a quick phone call would be much more efficient, those emails where people won’t let go of the conversation and so send another email…. The list goes on.
  2. Remembering email is just a tool – it is how we use it for good or ill that counts. What I am noticing is that the pandemic seems to have put everybody to a state of ‘high alert’ where everything is urgent and everybody expects a response now and timelines have become unmanageable and isn’t it that that is the issue rather than being connected?

Any employer considering how they deal with mental health issues and wellbeing particularly as we move towards more hybrid forms of working, will need to be putting in place guidance around employees not feeling that they need to work outside their set hours but the key underlying issue is workload and I would suggest that it’s workloads in general that need to be being looked at rather than focusing solely on something like the right to disconnect. It will only ever be part of the jigsaw puzzle.

On 21 January 2021, the European Parliament approved a Resolution asking the Commission to introduce a Directive to establish the minimum requirements for remote work across the EU which would include the ‘right to disconnect’. That would require employers to establish a detailed written statement setting out arrangements for switching off digital tools for work purposes; set out systems for measuring working time; encourage training and awareness of the right to disconnect in the workplace and make sure that workers don’t suffer adverse treatment or dismissal for having exercised their right. This will undoubtedly reinforce things across Europe and employees are naturally going to start to gravitate towards those organisations that they feel are looking after them and shunning those who they feel are abusing their private lives by intruding on them.

We are likely to see rapid change in this area but I would caution employers to look at the whole picture and not just this narrow aspect. A poll conducted by Owl Labs and reported in People Management found that lots of employers are considering implementing shorter working weeks with others concerned that focusing on core working hours could be to the detriment of those who have to work in a flexible way for caring reasons including parents. This is a topic I will return to.

Anna Denton-Jones
Refreshing Law

Categories
Anna Denton-Jones Brexit Employment Law HR Immigration Right to Work

Right to Work checks — What to do if you have an EU citizen starting

At the moment, we are in something called the “grace period”. New rules are going to come into force from 1 July 2021. Up until that point an employer is allowed to continue to rely on the checks to an EEA or Swiss National’s EU Passport or National Identity Card to evidence their right to work in the UK ie:- not differentiating between those who arrived before we left the European Union or after.

Provided the check is done and the employer doesn’t have any reason to believe that the employee doesn’t have the right to work here, they will have a statutory excuse against the civil fines that can be applied if an employee is subsequently found to be working here illegally (£20,000).

If the EU National has already registered for and achieved Settled Status in the UK under the EU Settlement Scheme where if they have been here for 5 years they qualify, they can evidence their right to work to you, using the Home Office online service (www.gov.uk/view-right-to-work). Not everybody will have taken those steps yet, so in the meantime, old fashioned paperwork can apply.

If the EU National has not achieved Settled Status or obtained pre-Settled Status (which applies to those who haven’t yet been here for 5 years) by the 1 July 2021 they will no longer be entitled to work in the UK from that date, unless they are an Irish National (separate rules apply to those from Ireland who are entitled to work here). Thus employers will need to see evidence of that Settled Status or Pre-Settled Status from 1 July 2021.

Further guidance is expected to be issued for employers in relation to this issue nearer that time.

Anna Denton-Jones
Refreshing Law