Newsletter – June 2023
Hello everyone, welcome back once again to our monthly newsletter. Thank you all for joining us. If you missed it, our last case of the week update looked into a Tribunal mistake that cost the claimant several years worth of delay! Our May newsletter looked into COVID whistleblowing, bullying in Government, and some exciting internal news.
PJH Law News – New Recruit
Please join us in welcoming Sarah Schroeter to PJH Law LLP. An introduction, in her own words:
“I am a HR Generalist with many years of experience in human resources management covering the full employee lifecycle to include – recruitment and talent acquisition, employee relations and development, and change management. I believe that I have a strong understanding of HR best practices and a passion for fostering fair and positive work environments to deliver a good employee experience. My energy has been dedicated to driving employee engagement, enhancing organizational effectiveness, and supporting the growth and success of both individuals and the company as a whole.”
If you would like to know more about Sarah, you can find her page on our website here.
RAF Guilty of Discrimination
Findings from an official enquiry have found that the RAF has unlawfully discriminated against white men in a boost to increase diversity. Following resignations of senior staff who refused to implement the decisions, Air Chief Marshal Sir Richard Knighton has apologised to those affected. In the apology, while it was acknowledged that ‘some men were discriminated against’ no sanctions would be placed on those involved.
It was found that a total of 161 ethnic minority and female recruits were pulled forward ahead of their white male counterparts. This was done in a bid to meet unrealistic diversity targets that were not based off the data being forecast.
Citing faulty legal advice, it was found that a push for recruits in 2020 and 2021 had fast-tracked ethnic minority and female recruits into training positions. It was believed that this was positive action, a legal way to improve diversity when recruiting, when instead it proved to be positive discrimination.
Ensuring that your HR and recruitment team are aware of the difference and the importance of diversity and discrimination in the workplace is crucial. If you or your team require assistance in this process, please contact a member of our team who will be able to assist you.
The Educator Strikes Back
Another day, another strike action. This time schools are facing another wave of strikes from the National Educators Union over pay and conditions at the start of July.
Despite a pay deal offered of 5% for 2022-2023, this has been rejected by the union for representing a real term pay cut under inflation of 1.9% and being against the School Teachers’ Review Body’s recommendation of a 6.5% increase. Concerns have been raised as to where the additional money will come from. Increases in salary that come out of an already stretched budget has done little to stem the tide of educators from the profession. Current teacher retention loses 12.8% of the workforce within the first year, with only two thirds (68.7%) of teachers remaining after 5 years, and a little over half (58.7%) making it to a full ten years.
With the head of the NEU, Daniel Kebede, making announcements this month that call for unified action by all four of the national unions for September, it does not look promising for families already struggling with the costs of living crisis.
We hope that an agreement can be reached before large-scale industrial action goes any further.
Sexual Harassment in the House of Commons
Well, we finally found the stance that can truly unite both parties in Parliament – sexually harassing female colleagues.
A further six members of Westminster staff have come forward describing their experience with being sexually harassed by MPs and senior colleagues. One woman complained that she was asked to sit on a male MP’s knee, with him being so insistent that she complied simply to ‘get him off my case’. Further describing how male MPs would be ‘all over staffers; in their physical space, buying them drinks and actually behaving in a pretty disgusting state – touching bums and putting their hands all over their lower backs’.
The employment system in place has not helped how the issues have been dealt with. With each MP being classed as an individual employer, they have been given free rein to manage their staff as they please. Their staff are not afforded the usual HR structure that would protect them in these scenarios, instead having to rely on public scrutiny.
In 2018, Parliament set up the Independant Complaints and Grievance Scheme to investigate complaints of inappropriate behaviour. While the committee was heralded as being the first of its kind in the world, the response times remain a point of frustration for the victims. The average response time for a complaint is 262 days. Since 2018 union membership amongst those working in Westminster, especially younger workers, has risen drastically.
As a bonus, the BBC Panorama documentary looking into the handling of these allegations has been quietly dropped without explanation.
If you or a colleague have experienced sexual harassment in the workplace or are in HR and are dealing with any of the behaviours described above, please contact a member of our team who will be able to assist you.
Lighter Side of the News
This month an ASDA worker has won a sex discrimination case after a colleague kneed him in the bum!
Choon Seng Goh argued that he felt humiliated after an unprovoked kneeing, the second in the assaults he had suffered. Having waved off the first incident of being kicked in the same area as being slightly more than friendly banter, he reported it to his manager.
Several months go by without an investigation, before finally determining that there was no case to answer. Unhappy with this result, a claim was brought in the Employment Tribunal. The argument was that had a man been accused of this conduct by a woman, the investigation would have been taken far more seriously and the colleague would have been dismissed. The tribunal, in awarding compensation, seemed to agree. Ruling that ASDA’s investigation was ‘mismanaged’, the tribunal stated that Mr Goh was ‘entitled to feel that his welfare and safety were not being accorded any significance by his employer’.
Despite a very flimsy accusation by the female colleague of sexual harassment, which was dismissed as being untrue, she also tried to downplay the incidents as something that regularly occurred between them.
The next time someone suggests kicking someone up the backside, maybe don’t take it too literally? Or is it me that’s out of touch with modern banter?..
