This equipment was donated by Thompsons solicitors Employment Law Update: Protecting Vulnerable Workers; Promoting Equality at Work Wednesday 4 th October 2006

Dismissal and Disciplinary Procedures Case Study 2 Corinna Ferguson Old Square Chambers Institute of Employment Rights Employment Law Update 4 th October 2006

Identifying the claims Unfair dismissal Less favourable treatment on grounds of part-time status: Part-time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000 Indirect sex discrimination Institute of Employment Rights Employment Law Update 4 th October 2006

Time limits: Unfair dismissal 1 Reg 15 extends the time limit by 3 months only if DT had reasonable grounds for believing, when the normal time limit expired, that a disciplinary procedure was being followed The extension does not apply here because DT on 19 September 2006, DT knew that the internal procedure was concluded The claim is out of time Institute of Employment Rights Employment Law Update 4 th October 2006

The Tribunal has a discretion to extend the time limit if it was not reasonably practicable for DT to present her claim in time It may be relevant for the Tribunal to consider whether DT’s appeal was lodged in time: DT should check whether the internal procedures specify a time limit for lodging an appeal Time limits: Unfair dismissal 2 Institute of Employment Rights Employment Law Update 4 th October 2006

Time Limits: Part-time Workers Regs Institute of Employment Rights Employment Law Update 4 th October 2006 The statutory dispute resolution procedures do not apply The detriment relied upon occurred on the date of dismissal at the latest The claim is out of time DT could argue that it would be just and equitable to extend the time limit

Time Limits: Sex discrimination 1 Institute of Employment Rights Employment Law Update 4 th October 2006 The GPs apply DT needs to raise a grievance within three months of the act complained of in order to benefit from an extension of time The appeal letter could constitute a grievance, in which case the claim is in time

Time Limits: Sex discrimination 2 WH may argue that the grievance did not raise a complaint of indirect sex discrimination If no valid grievance has been raised, DT will have to submit a fresh grievance and claim form arguing that it is just and equitable to extend the time limit Institute of Employment Rights Employment Law Update 4 th October 2006

Compliance with the DDPs 1 Step 1: The letter should be sent after the assessment process has taken place (Alexander v Bridgen) Step 2: –The information provided is probably sufficient for the purpose of the DDPs –WH possibly should have informed DT of the reasons for her scores in advance of the meeting Institute of Employment Rights Employment Law Update 4 th October 2006

Compliance with the DDPs 2 Were the DDPs retriggered? If the unauthorised absence was a reason for the dismissal, WH should have sent a fresh Step 1 letter about it (see Silman v ICTS) Institute of Employment Rights Employment Law Update 4 th October 2006

Section 98A If WH’s failure to comply with the DDPs made no difference to the decision to dismiss: –The dismissal will be automatically unfair –DT’s compensation may still be reduced to nil (although there is a minimum award of four weeks’ pay under s. 120(1A)) Institute of Employment Rights Employment Law Update 4 th October 2006