This week, Sam provides a short pre-Easter update, discussing a recent unfair dismissal case involving gross misconduct and the importance of applying the ‘band of reasonable responses’ test when considering dismissal decisions.

Key Takeaways:

• The band of reasonable responses test considers whether an employer’s decision falls within a range of reasonable outcomes, rather than what a tribunal would have done itself.
• A dismissal for gross misconduct must meet a high threshold, particularly where the incident is a one-off occurrence.
• In the case of Billings v Nestlé, an employee was dismissed after allegedly vaping in a toilet, which triggered a smoke alarm and caused the evacuation of the premises.
• The tribunal found the dismissal to be unfair, as it was disproportionate to the misconduct.
• The incident was a single isolated act, with no prior misconduct history recorded.
• Employers must ensure workplace policies are clear and accessible, particularly when relying on them to justify dismissal decisions.
• Consistency in disciplinary outcomes is important, especially where similar incidents have been treated differently in the past.
• Even where misconduct has occurred, tribunals may determine that a lesser sanction would have been more appropriate than dismissal.
• Compensation may be reduced due to contributory fault, where an employee’s actions contributed to the situation.

Seminars & Events:

https://www.chadwicklawrence.co.uk/seminars/business-services-seminars/

Contact Us:

BoxHR@chadlaw.co.uk

SamPawson@chadlaw.co.uk

NilsODonoghue@chadlaw.co.uk

LinkedIn: ⁠⁠⁠www.linkedin.com/company/employment-law-chadwick-lawrence-llp/

This week, Sam & Nils discuss a recent Equality Act case involving a job applicant and the importance of reasonable adjustments during the recruitment process, alongside a government crackdown on large-scale fly-tipping and environmental crime.

Key Takeaways:

• The Equality Act applies not only to employees but also to job applicants, meaning employers must consider reasonable adjustments throughout the recruitment process.
• A claimant was awarded £7,000 after her anxiety was found to have impacted her interview performance, placing her at a disadvantage.
• Employers should consider adjustments beyond physical changes, including how interview performance is assessed and scored.
• Factors such as interviews starting late can contribute to anxiety and may require adjustments, such as offering additional time or rescheduling.
• Where a candidate is deemed “appointable,” employers should take care when reconsidering decisions, particularly if circumstances change (e.g. another candidate withdraws).
• Selection criteria (such as communication style) may indirectly disadvantage candidates with certain conditions and should be applied carefully.
• The case highlights the importance of reassessing candidates in light of disclosed disabilities rather than relying solely on initial interview performance.
• The government has announced a “zero tolerance” approach to waste crime, targeting large-scale and organised fly-tipping operations.
• New powers for the Environment Agency will allow earlier intervention and greater ability to investigate and prosecute offenders.
• Enforcement will include the use of financial investigation powers to disrupt organised criminal activity behind illegal waste operations.
• The reforms aim to tackle industrial-scale environmental offences, not just small-scale fly-tipping incidents.

Seminars & Events:

https://www.chadwicklawrence.co.uk/seminars/business-services-seminars/

Contact Us:

BoxHR@chadlaw.co.uk

SamPawson@chadlaw.co.uk

NilsODonoghue@chadlaw.co.uk

LinkedIn: ⁠⁠⁠www.linkedin.com/company/employment-law-chadwick-lawrence-llp/

Chapters:

(⁠⁠00:00⁠⁠) Introduction

(⁠⁠01:10) What's in Your Inbox?

(⁠⁠01:19) Equality Act Case: Protections for Job Applicants

(⁠⁠08:39) Environmental Law Update: ‘Zero Tolerance’ Approach to Waste Crime

(12:48) Out the Office!

This week, Sam & Nils cover a practical issue affecting motorists in Bradford and a recent pregnancy discrimination case highlighting the risks employers face when managing sickness absence and flexible working requests during pregnancy.

Key Takeaways:

• Bradford’s Clean Air Zone requires certain vehicles to pay a £9 daily charge if they enter the zone and do not meet emissions standards.
• Failure to pay the charge can result in a £120 penalty (reduced to £60 if paid within 14 days), in addition to the original charge.
• Anyone wishing to challenge a penalty must make representations to the council within 28 days. If rejected, the decision can be appealed to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.
• The registered keeper of the vehicle remains legally responsible for charges and penalties.
• Failing to correctly update DVLA records when selling or scrapping a vehicle can lead to significant liability if the vehicle continues to enter the zone.
• Minor administrative oversights, such as not transferring the logbook properly, can quickly lead to multiple fines.
• A claimant was awarded approximately £73,000 for pregnancy discrimination after being dismissed following disclosure of her pregnancy and requests to work from home due to severe morning sickness.
• Tribunals may infer discrimination where pregnancy is referenced alongside performance concerns in internal communications.
• Emails between management, HR, and third-party consultants were disclosable and played a key role in the tribunal’s findings.
• Organisations should be cautious about how internal discussions are documented when seeking advice from non-legal advisers.
• Employers must carefully separate genuine performance concerns from issues connected to pregnancy-related illness or adjustments.

Seminars & Events:

https://www.chadwicklawrence.co.uk/seminars/business-services-seminars/

Contact Us:

BoxHR@chadlaw.co.uk

SamPawson@chadlaw.co.uk

NilsODonoghue@chadlaw.co.uk

LinkedIn: ⁠⁠⁠www.linkedin.com/company/employment-law-chadwick-lawrence-llp/

Chapters:

(⁠⁠00:00⁠⁠) Introduction

(⁠⁠00:33) What's in Your Inbox?

(⁠⁠00:49) Clean Air Zone Charges & Fines

(⁠⁠04:10) Pregnancy Discrimination Case: The Issue of Disclosure

(13:54) Out the Office!

In this episode, Nils provides a criminal law update on the recently introduced Courts and Tribunals Bill, discussing its potential impact on Crown Court caseloads, jury trials and magistrates’ sentencing powers. Sam then covers a disability discrimination and reasonable adjustments case against Sainsbury’s, highlighting key lessons for employers managing workplace adjustments.

Key Takeaways:

• Defendant’s right to elect Crown Court trial for triable-either-way offences removed; court decides jurisdiction.
• Defendant consent no longer required to send cases back to magistrates.
• Appeals from magistrates to Crown Court now require permission stage instead of automatic rehearing.
• Audio recording introduced in magistrates’ courts to support appeals.
• Magistrates’ sentencing powers extended to 18-24 months for triable-either-way offences.
• Crown Court bench division introduced for judge-only hearings of certain cases ≤ 3 years custodial sentence.
• Judge-only trials allowed for complex or lengthy fraud and financial cases.
• Reforms aim to reduce Crown Court backlog, but raise questions about defendant rights and jury trials.
• Employees with disabilities must be provided reasonable adjustments; small changes can be legally significant.
• Absences related to disability should not be counted for disciplinary purposes.
• Employers must balance medical evidence and business considerations when assessing adjustments.
• Failure to properly consider reasonable adjustments can result in disability discrimination claims.
• Large organisations should avoid superficial consideration; adjustments should be genuinely accommodated where reasonable.

Seminars & Events:

https://www.chadwicklawrence.co.uk/seminars/business-services-seminars/

Contact Us:

BoxHR@chadlaw.co.uk

SamPawson@chadlaw.co.uk

NilsODonoghue@chadlaw.co.uk

LinkedIn: ⁠⁠⁠www.linkedin.com/company/employment-law-chadwick-lawrence-llp/

Chapters:

(⁠⁠00:00⁠⁠) Introduction

(⁠⁠00:33) What's in Your Inbox?

(⁠⁠00:40) Propose Changes to the Criminal Justice System

(⁠⁠08:10) Disabled Sainsbury’s Manager Wins Discrimination Claim

(15:18) Out the Office!

On The Legal Alternative this week, Sam provides an update on recent trade union reforms introduced under the Employment Rights Act changes, including amendments that reduce notice periods for industrial action and extend ballot mandates. Nils then discusses practical and legal considerations when terminating the employment of migrant workers, providing guidance on managing visa expiry dates appropriately and avoiding discrimination risks.

Key Takeaways:

• Industrial Action Notice Period: This has been cut from 14 days to 10 giving companies less time to prepare.
• Ballot mandate: Increases mandate period from 6 to 12 months but this however is only applicable to ballots opened after 18th Feb.
• Dismissal protection: The ERA removes the 12 week cap for the automatic protection employees gain from unfair dismissal for taking part in industrial action and now applies irrespective of the industrial action.
• Notice of industrial action ballot: ERA reduces the amount of information that unions must include in the notice of an industrial action ballot that they send to an employer.
• Political funds 10-year ballot requirement: Removes the requirement for unions to ballot their members every 10 years on the maintenance of a political fund.
• Migrant workers must be treated the same as other employees in dismissal processes.
• Poor performance must be addressed properly - a visa expiry cannot be used as a shortcut.
• Immigration status should not influence redundancy selection.
• Employers should monitor visa expiry dates proactively, ensure contracts allow for payment in lieu of notice (PILON), and notify the Home Office when employment ends.
• Failure to follow fair process can result in race discrimination claims.

Seminars & Events:

https://www.chadwicklawrence.co.uk/seminars/business-services-seminars/

Contact Us:

BoxHR@chadlaw.co.uk

SamPawson@chadlaw.co.uk

NilsODonoghue@chadlaw.co.uk

LinkedIn: ⁠⁠⁠www.linkedin.com/company/employment-law-chadwick-lawrence-llp/

Chapters:

(⁠⁠00:00⁠⁠) Introduction

(⁠⁠00:33) What's in Your Inbox?

(⁠⁠01:37) Trade Union Changes Under the Employment Rights Act

(⁠⁠05:01) Post Termination for Migrant Workers

(10:47) Out the Office!

This week, Sam provides an overview of the Employment Rights Act, including the Government’s recent changes to the proposed timeline. From updates coming into effect this April through to January 2027, we break down what’s changing and when - so you know exactly what to expect and how to prepare.

Key Changes:

6th April 2026

• Statutory Sick Pay (SSP) -Removal of Lower Earning Limit and the 3 unpaid ‘waiting days’, SSP paid from day one.
• Paternity & Parental Leave - Paternity leave and unpaid parental leave becomes a day one right.
• Collective Redundancies - Maximum protective award increasing from 90 to 180 days’ pay per affected employee.
• Bereaved Partners’ Paternity Leave - (non-MWP measure) will enable bereaved fathers and partners to take up to 52 weeks of paternity leave if the mother or primary adopter dies within the first year of the child’s life.

October 2026

• Preventing Sexual Harassment - Employers must take all reasonable steps to prevent harassment (not just ‘reasonable’).
• Third-Party Harassment - Employers will be liable for harassment by third parties unless they can show they took reasonable steps to prevent it.
• Tribunal Time Limits - The time limit for bringing Employment Tribunal claims will double from 3 months to 6 months.

January 2027

• Unfair Dismissal Rights - Amendment of the qualifying period from 2 years to 6 months and the compensation cap will be removed.
• Fire & Rehire - Dismissal automatically unfair where linked to restricted variations (e.g. pay/hours/pensions).
• Action Plans of Gender Equality.
• Enhanced dismissal protection for pregnant workers.
• Further regulation of umbrella companies.
• Collective redundancy change in the collective consultation threshold.
• Further guidance on flexible working.
• Right to guaranteed hours.

Seminars & Events:

https://www.chadwicklawrence.co.uk/seminars/business-services-seminars/

Contact Us:

BoxHR@chadlaw.co.uk

SamPawson@chadlaw.co.uk

NilsODonoghue@chadlaw.co.uk

LinkedIn: ⁠⁠⁠www.linkedin.com/company/employment-law-chadwick-lawrence-llp/

Chapters:

(⁠⁠00:00⁠⁠) Introduction

(⁠⁠01:17) April 2026 Changes

(⁠⁠02:07) October 2026 Changes

(⁠⁠03:10) January 2027 Changes

In this episode, Nils explains the role of the defence case statement in criminal litigation, outlining its key purpose and why precision in drafting is so important. Sam explores a recent Employment Tribunal decision involving direct discrimination against male police officers, and discusses how organisations can promote inclusion through positive action without creating legal risk.

Key Takeaways:

• The defence case statement in criminal litigation outlines the defendant's strategy and requests for evidence.
• A well-measured defence is more effective than a broad one.
• Recent ET case found male officers were unlawfully discriminated against when removed to rebalance gender representation.
• Good intentions around diversity do not justify decisions based on protected characteristics.
• Risk that employers may retreat from EDI due to fear of claims, as employee rights awareness increases.
• EDI policies remain important and can evidence reasonable steps to prevent discrimination.
• Employers should avoid positive discrimination, carry out impact assessments, and document objective, consistent decision-making.

Seminars & Events:

https://www.chadwicklawrence.co.uk/seminars/business-services-seminars/

Contact Us:

BoxHR@chadlaw.co.uk

SamPawson@chadlaw.co.uk

NilsODonoghue@chadlaw.co.uk

LinkedIn: ⁠⁠⁠www.linkedin.com/company/employment-law-chadwick-lawrence-llp/

Chapters:

(⁠⁠00:00⁠⁠) Introduction

(⁠⁠01:07) What's in Your Inbox?

(⁠⁠01:18) The Defence Case Statement in Criminal Litigation

(⁠⁠06:52) EDI in Practice: Promoting Inclusion Without Creating Legal Risk

(13:40) Out the Office!

Welcome back to the first episode of The Legal Alternative in 2026! Sam & Nils debate the government's decision to drop the mandatory digital ID scheme to work in the UK. They also discuss a case involving misgendering and disability discrimination, highlighting the challenges of competing characteristics.

Key Takeaways:

• The government has dropped the mandatory digital ID scheme to work in the UK.
• Digital ID was seen as a tool to deter illegal working.
• The tribunal found in favour of the claimant in the misgendering case.
• While this case does not diminish the need to protect transgender employees from harassment, it highlights the importance of employers taking a balanced, evidence-based approach to ensure their responses are both reasonable and proportionate.
• If a disability is raised as a possible explanation, it should be genuinely investigated, documented and reflected in the outcome, with appropriate use of occupational health or other external resources where appropriate.
• Less discriminatory alternatives (e.g. mediation or reasonable adjustments) should be considered before disciplinary action.

Seminars & Events:

https://www.chadwicklawrence.co.uk/seminars/business-services-seminars/

Contact Us:

BoxHR@chadlaw.co.uk

SamPawson@chadlaw.co.uk

NilsODonoghue@chadlaw.co.uk

LinkedIn: ⁠⁠⁠www.linkedin.com/company/employment-law-chadwick-lawrence-llp/

Chapters:

(⁠⁠00:00⁠⁠) Introduction

(⁠⁠00:42) What's in Your Inbox?

(⁠⁠01:10) Government Drops Plans for Mandatory Digital ID to Work in UK

(⁠⁠03:55) Employee Who Misgendered Transgender Colleague Wins Disability Claim

(12:27) Out the Office!