Employee grievances — handle with care
In Martin v Devonshires Solicitors, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) found that it was not victimisation to dismiss an employee who had raised a number of unfounded grievances against her employer alleging sex discrimination.
According to the EAT, there were a number of factors leading to the decision to dismiss that were ‘properly and genuinely separable’ from the fact that the complaints had been made. These included the fact that the claimant’s allegations were linked to mental illness and that it was likely that similar allegations would be made in the future. The dismissal of the claimant because of a breakdown in the employment relationship caused by the grievances was not an act of victimisation.
Last week, another EAT decision, Woodhouse v West North West Homes Leeds Ltd, reminded employers that the decision in Martin is applicable only in truly exceptional circumstances. The mere fact that an employee has raised a number of grievances over a period of time is not in itself exceptional…
If you are registered and logged in to the site, click on the link below to read the rest of the Hogan Lovells briefing. If not, please register or sign in with your details below.
News from Hogan Lovells
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Hogan Lovells
Companies in the federal supply chain have an opportunity to prepare for the expansion of government’s anti-human-trafficking rules
This update highlights the salient aspects of the proposed rules and the requirements that are likely to be of most interest to contractors.
Companies should assess their business operations and relationships in Ukraine.
Analysis from The Lawyer
When a firm shouts loudly about a landmark merger, as SJ Berwin did when it joined forces with King & Wood Mallesons, departures are always likely to come under the spotlight.
The Lawyer’s latest Top 50 litigation firms list shows that business for dispute specialists is roaring along while new in-depth detail reveals the winning strategies