Weekly Issue 430

Labour & European Law Review 29 July 2015

Widespread pregnancy discrimination

The government and the Equality and Human Rights Commission last week published a report showing that one in nine new mothers lose their job every year as a result of their pregnancy. This is despite the fact that most employers said that it was in their interests to support pregnant women and those on maternity leave. They also agreed that statutory rights relating to pregnancy and maternity are reasonable and easy to implement.

Factual client

Under the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (TUPE), there is a service provision change when activities which used to be carried out by one person (the client) are carried out by someone else (the contractor) on their behalf. In Jinks v London Borough of Havering, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) held that when a service is sub-contracted out, there can be more than one client.

Implying misconduct

It is established law that employees can owe a duty to their employers to disclose their own misconduct in certain circumstances. However, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has clarified in The Basildon Academies v Amadi that, in the absence of an express contractual term, tribunals cannot imply a duty to disclose an allegation of impropriety, however ill-founded.