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
In the end, 2013 did not disappoint, with resurgence in equity offerings, promising company valuations and greater market liquidity.
ACAS has published proposals to change its code of practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures as a result of a surprise EAT decision earlier this year.
Analysis from The Lawyer
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
The Russian legal market faces a new era as the government opens the door to greater business transparency, but not everything is open to scrutiny