The Law in 4: Employment and Immigration news 09/11/2022

Every other week we give you the run-down on 4 updates from the world of employment and HR.?Whether it be a tribunal case, government decision or anything else for that matter – we’ve got it covered. The news this week brought waiving claims into question, a potential new protected characteristic on the horizon, a Tribunal claim caused by social media management, and a study on accent bias at work. Check it out!

1. How powerful is a waiver of claims?

How effective is a waiver of future claims in a settlement agreement? A question which has sparked debate for a long time has been thrown back into question after an Employment Appeal Tribunal’s judgement casted a shadow of doubt over what we thought we knew…

In Bathgate v Technip UK Ltd and Others the claimant, who is over the age of 61, was offered a settlement as part of a voluntary redundancy package. The package originally included an additional payment by reference to a collective agreement which related to pension. The company then decided that the additional payment was not required for employees over the age of 61 due to the terms of the conditions of the collective agreement. At the time that the claimant signed the agreement, he was not sure whether he would be entitled to the payment or not. Once he was told that that he would not be entitled to the payment,?he raised a claim of age discrimination. The tribunal dismissed his claim as the settlement agreement included a waiver of “all claims…of whatever nature (whether past, present or future)”, which it found to be sufficient.

At appeal, the question to be answered was whether the agreement was a ‘qualifying settlement agreement’. For this to be the case, it needed to be shown that the waiver in the settlement agreement clearly and specifically included the claim at hand. Lord Summers Judgement concluded that the agreement was not able to settle the claim of age discrimination, as the waiver in the agreement was not specific enough to include the complaint. The claim was ultimately waived due to jurisdiction issues, as the claimant lives in Scotland, but the judgement shows that employers should be wary of the limitations of a settlement agreement’s power to waive future claims.

2. Ever heard of Povertyism?

UN Rapporteur?Oliver De Shutter has called for ‘Povertyism’ to be included in anti-discrimination law alongside racism and sexism. In his report, De Shutter defined povertyism as the negative stereotyping of the poor that can discourage them from applying for jobs and benefits. An example he gave of how povertyism can insert itself in the recruitment process was the potential for hiring managers to pass judgment on a candidate based on the applicant’s address. Studies have shown that povertyism is an issue in counties like the UK which have a strong belief in meritocracy?(power is held by people selected according to merit), which favours those presented with the most opportunities. De Shutter argues that this attitude will not change by itself, and?governments should include socio-economic disadvantage as a protected characteristic to counter act it.?

3.?A Social Media Slip up: managing behaviours online

We’ve all heard the phrase ‘the internet is forever’ by now. Your digital footprint is almost impossible to scrub away, so sharing gossip or criticism about your employer on social media is always going to be gross misconduct, right? The evidence is right there, so what’s the need to investigate? Well, an employment tribunal may not share the same view…

In a case that made it to tribunal, an employee of a Lincolnshire pub had shared a post made by her boyfriend that called her boss ‘creepy’ and accused him of acting inappropriately with female customers. An hour after the employee had shared it, she deleted the post. However, the pub’s management had already been made aware of the post and as a result she was sacked for gross misconduct. She claimed unfair dismissal and took her case to tribunal, where she was awarded ￡3,000. The Tribunal concluded that ‘she took the Facebook post down very quickly and apologised for it. She did not write the post and was not acting vindictively or deliberately to damage the bars interests.’

Employee’s social media presence is a growing area of concern for HR, as more employees are active online the risk for reputational damage increases. Surprisingly, a study conducted by Vero found that less than two-thirds of employers have a specific social media or online behaviour policy. If this case should teach employers anything, it is the importance of a clear procedure for incidents that occur online, with a transparent investigation process.

4.?Study Shows Nearly half of UK workers have been singled out for their accent

A study conducted by the Sutton Trust, which aims to improve social mobility, has found that a quarter of UK workers have experienced jokes at work about their accent. 23% feel self-conscious about their accent at work, and 19% feel it could negatively affect their ability to progress.

Mocking an accent could be a micro-aggression, creating a work environment that does not feel inclusive. Furthermore, it may create tension between colleagues that lead to grievances and fall-out. The report recommends employers take action to include accent bias in diversity training across all teams of their business. Accent bias training for recruiters is also encouraged, as drawing attention to the presence of unconscious bias and training recruiters how to be aware of it will create a more diverse workforce, where a range of accents is standard.

Want to hear more from us??Our Employment 101 webinars are back by popular demand; to see what we have in store check-out our?website?for updates on the series and more!