Latest posts:
Rate this!
Mike Proudlove
Member - 5 posts
I have an employee with 11 years service - his attendance record has never been perfect but in the last 12 months he has had informal warnings and earlier this year a formal disciplinary meeting - the decsion of which was for him to maintain a 100% attendance record for a 3 month period. He has failed dismally and a second disciplinary meeting is about to be convened. We do not want to dismiss as we are a small "supportive" company but if there can be no improvement it is our only option. What notice if any do we need to give?
Rate this!
Mike Proudlove
Member - 5 posts
Probably, as many manufacturing companies, we are undergoing a difficult phase and suffering a squeeze as our major customers all clamp down on their annual budgets etc.
We have had financial losses over the past 2 years but are confident that we are strong enough to weather this period. With redundancy as a last resort we are considering short time working - possibly 40hrs per week down to 32 for a period but only for some departments.
Can we be selective within each department as to which personnel to put onto short time or does it need to be across the board. Do we need a consultaion period?
Rate this!
Mike Proudlove
Member - 5 posts
Hi Jeannette,
I attended the Workplace Law briefing at the IOD for Corporate manslaughter and found the day totally informative with many myths dispelled.
The new legislation is aimed primarily at organisations that have no regard for Health and Safety and at those who have significant or substantial failures within their culture - otherwise termed as serious poor perfomance.
Corporate Manslaughter is concerned with the corporate liability of the organisation itself and does not apply to individual directors, senior managers or other individuals - nor is it possible to convict an individual of assisting or encouraging any offence. Prosecutions under the legislation will be brought against the organisation itself and not specific individuals. There is no "go to jail card" under the new legislation - UNLESS it can be shown that the individual is directly responsible and guilty of gross negligence that had a direct link to the cause of an event to happen. However - this will come about under the benchmmark of the HSAWA 74 - section 37, - legal liability of individual board members for H&S failures. So - an individual may still be charged for manslaughter as In principle this legislation already exists.
A parent company cannot be convicted under the legislation due to failures within a subsidiary. Such companies within a group structure are separate legal entities. Duty of Care underpinning an offence are the responsibility more of the subsidiary rather than a parent.
Under any such legislation an organisation needs to be able to prove that its selected control measures are the best and most applicable that it could have implemented. Paperwork is useless unless you have designed and managed effective implementation. Under Individual failings - the legislation does not require to prove specific failings on the part of individual senior managers. It is sufficient that the senior management of the organisation COLLECTIVELY were not taking adequate care and this was a substantial part of the organisations failure. And strangely enough - when you ask the question of..."has the board actually brought in effective Health and Safety?" - as an individual the H&S Director is in the safest position.
Rate this!
Mike Proudlove
Member - 5 posts
Reading this months Workplace Law Magazine - Employment Law Updates.
Can anyone clarify the position on increased holiday entitlements?
We currently provide 20 days holiday entitlement but also allow the 8 Bank holidays in addition on the understanding that these are not statutory. But if legistalion is to be introduced making the inclusion of bank holidays within a 20 day annual entitlement illegal does this mean that the 2 stage rise in entilement will provide 24 days plus 8 bank holidays this year and then 28 days plus 8 next year? If so the ramification on cost to UK employers will be significant to say the least.
Rate this!
Mike Proudlove
Member - 5 posts
We are signage manufacturers and carry out installation and maintainance nationwide and across Europe. Many of us are aware of the ongoing consultations and attempts at removing the UK "opt out clause" under the standard EU WTD - but the EU Road Transport Working Time Directive has now been published and will come into force on March 23rd 2005.
This has direct effect with regard to mobile workers, commercial vehicle drivers and crews. Whilst not immediately effecting employees driving company cars on business, this directive is well aimed at reducing the frequency of "Driving at Work" accidents.
Can anyone inform me at this stage as to how the EU Road transport WTD will effect sub contract/ self employed installation/ maintenance crews using vehicles of under 3500kg GW as opposed to those directly employed.
Will the self employed/sub contractors be governed by the same legislation?
Mike Proudlove
Group General Manager
Chase Signs Ltd
0 (0)
