Problems at Accounting for Small Business - Coursework Example

Case Study: Problems at Accounting for Small Business Introduction Employment contract refers to an agreement in which one person performs work for another person and gets wages in exchange for the labour.1 The employment act defines worker as someone works for another person in return for a wage according the stipulated terms. The employment act requires the employer and the employee to form an employment contract in which they specify the terms of their relationship. The terms may things such as the duration of the employment agreement, the pay entitled to the worker or employee, the rights of the employees, the duties of each party to the other and the procedure for dismissal of the employees.2 A contract between employer and the employee has an “Inequality of bargaining power” since the employer holds more power to influence the position of the contract.3 The "inequality of bargaining power between the employer and the employee" necessitates the need for an employment contract to impose the terms of employment and where necessary use it in court to enforce the employment terms. This paper examines legal issues between employees and the employers in the case study of Accounting for Small Business (AFSB) Company. Raj Raj had worked for the AFSB for three years and had an excellent work record during that period. He came into conflict with Sarah for attending his work late by twenty minutes. Just in the previous day Sarah had expressed her concern for employees’ lateness and issued warning against anyone who would be late for work. She had informed the workers that anyone would be late for the work would be given an extra task to perform even though she did not specify the nature of the task that would be given for lateness. When Raj arrived late one morning he apologized for lateness and explained his cause for lateness to Sarah but she was not ready to listen to any excuse. She informed Raj that he was to clean all the office desks that evening after his daily job. However, Raj objected strongly using “offensive language” and asked Sarah to get the other cleaners to do the cleaning. He informed her that he could not take orders from her since she did not have authority over him. The conflict between Raj and Sarah led the managing director to convene a disciplinary meeting with Raj in which he informed Raj of his express dismissal for disobeying the lawful instructions and gross misconducts to the standard procedure. The employment act allows employers to vary the culture of the business in accordance to the changes in market requirement as long as the changes initiated does not contravene the employment contract with the employees.4 However, even in the circumstances where such changes may result to severe changes in the contract the employer can still initiate the changes in consultation with the workers. In the case of Dryden v Greater Glasgow Health Board, the court held that it was appropriate for the employers and employees to consult each other when making changes to the terms of employment.5 Therefore, the changes introduced by Sarah did not contravene the initial agreement because employees have a responsibility to observe punctuality at their places of work. Raj can launch a legal claim against unfair dismissal against the firm or against managing director. According to section 86 of the United Kingdom employment act of 1996, employees have right to sufficient notice before the employer can dismiss them from their work.6 The employees are entitled to various rights and privileges such as fair treatment by the employers; right to enjoy paid leaves, right to safe working conditions, payment for their completed work and protection against unfair dismissal. The employment act recognizes implied terms of “good faith, and mutual trust and confidence” between employees and the employers.7 The duration of notice depends on the duration the employee has worked in the company, Raj had worked for three years hence he deserved a three weeks before his dismissal. Employers can initiate a fair dismissal of the employees after issuing a reasonable notice of dismissal. Under section 94 of the employment act of 1996, the employer can dismiss an employee fairly for particular causes such as the employees conduct.8 However, in the case study Raj was not given any notice since the managing director claimed that he had enough evidence against misconducts of Raj and dismissed him immediately. It was unfair termination based on the fact that notice of termination was missing in this situation.9 Raj can raise a claim of unfair discrimination against Sarah for picking on him all the time and giving him odd jobs. Raj was not a cleaner and Sarah had no right to give her punishment for carryout tasks outside his normal routine. Sarah was demeaning Raj by giving him a duty outside his contractual assignment. Workers have an obligation to follow the instructions of their employers and supervisors in such as manner that will create peace and avoid the atmosphere of tension within the work environment.10 However, it is against the employment act for any employer to issue instructions that contravene the employment agreement to their workers. The employer can take disciplinary action against an employee who disobeys the instructions that are in line with their employment agreement.11 Raj can initiate a legal claim against the managing director for dismissing him without establishing the cause of the claim raised by against him by the office manager. The managing director dismissed Raj based on the claim raised by Sarah without investigating the fairness of Sarah’s claim. This may have been caused by personal conflicts since Raj had worked for three good years without any conflict and had established a good work record. The emerging issues may have been raised unfairly against the employees by Sarah who had just worked as an office manager for six months. Raj’s success in the claim of unfair dismissal will depend on how efficiently he can prove the unfairness in his dismissal. The changes introduced about time employees should report to their work are only an enforcement of the existing terms of the agreement was fair. However, Raj should be able to prove that he was not given enough warning or any notice of dismissal and, therefore, the managing director acted unfairly. In addition, Raj should be able to prove that his conduct towards the office manager did not amount to gross misconduct. Finally, if Raj could prove that the conflict between him and Sarah was personal and had no relationship with his work performance he may succeed in his suit against the firm for unfair dismissal. Dennis The problem between Dennis and Sarah (the office manager) in the case study depicts personal conflicts rather than the issue of unfair dismissal. Although Dennis has worked for AFSB for a period of twelve years, the appointment of Sarah as the office Sarah as the office manager has created an atmosphere of tension between Dennis and Sarah. Sarah disregards Dennis for having unprofessional attitude towards his work while Dennis perceives Sarah as being authoritarian and demeaning other workers in the office. When Dennis took his complaint to the managing director, the managing director claimed that Sarah had the final word in everything that goes on in that office. He even sent email messages to all the employees informing them that whoever was not comfortable with the work environment may quit the work if they wished to do so. Dennis decided to quit his job after reading the message of the managing director. The problem regarding the Dennis decision to quit a job was initiated by the change of business conditions and unfair treatment of the employees in AFSB firm. Dennis decided to quit his job out of his own will so he cannot sue the firm for unfair dismissal. However, after working for the firm for twelve years, Dennis did not deserve to be treated harshly as the way it happened. Sometimes the nature of the market and the business conditions may require the employer to vary the terms of employments as a coping mechanism to ensure the survival of the business.12 Such changes may include relocating the work to another area, or reassigning the employees’ different duties. The employment act allows the employer to vary those conditions as they deem necessary, but they should do so in consultation with their employees to avoid contravening the agreement.13 The employers can make the necessary adjustment to ensure the survival of the business including discharging some employees of their duties under the claim of redundancy. However, employers can do so by issuing adequate notice to the employees or otherwise the employees may sue the employer under unfair dismissal.14 Employment contract is based on good faith and mutual trust in which both parties agree to perform their duties for each honestly or sincerely. It the employers' responsibility to ensure the environment in which the workers are subjected to is conducive and safe from any physical or psychological injuries.15 Dennis had a feeling that the environment had changed since Sarah was employed as an office manager. The "implied terms of good faith and mutual trust" prohibit employers against acting authoritatively, abusing the workers by insulting them or calling then unpleasant names, discriminating employees when allocating them duties or engage in any form of work malpractices that may demean the workers.16 Even though Sarah feels that Dennis is concerned more about the work environment than the work itself, it is the workers’ right to have better working environment. Therefore, Dennis has the right to question the condition of the work environment if he feels that it not as good as it is supposed to be.17 Dennis could sue the managing director of the company for his arrogance and the message he circulated to all workers demanding them to quit the job if they were not contented with the business environment. The terms of the agreement between the workers and the employees stipulates the conditions of employment and employees have the right to share their feelings about the business.18 Glen did not even want to listen to the problems that were affecting the workers, but instead he decided to stick to what Sarah said. Also, Dennis can sue office manager for discriminating against some workers. Dennis had complained about the low morale for work at the office since Sarah became the office manager. He also complained that Sarah was used to picking on particular workers to complete special tasks in the office. Therefore, it may be true that the manager was discriminating some employees such as Dennis and Raj. The employment act prohibits any employer from discriminating the workers irrespective of the background, gender, profession or any other cause.19 If Sarah felt that some workers were incompetent at their work then she should have called them and shared with them about it before taking any action against them. It may appear senseless for Sarah who has just worked for six months to raise a complaint against Dennis who has worked for twelve years with clean work records. If Dennis decides to sue the firm can do so on the grounds of unfair discrimination and poor business conditions. He has to prove that Sarah discriminated him by giving him tasks outside his ordinary duty.20 Dennis should also prove the failure of managing director to improve the work environment and how this killed the work morale not only for him, but also for other workers. If Dennis succeeds in his claim he has right to be reinstated at the same position he held before he left his work. The managers will be required to improve the work environment and stop discriminating and harassing their workers. Conclusion The employment contract stipulates terms of employment that each party should adhere to. Employers should treat their workers with respect without discrimination and should ensure serene work environment. Employees should carry out their duties in accordance to the agreement and respect their employers. However, if employees are offended by their employers, they can sue them in the court for redress. References Arup Christopher, Labour Law and Labour Market Regulation (Federation Press, 2006) 752 Barnett Daniel and Scrope Henry, Employment Law Handbook (Henry Scrope, 2008) 460 Chilumpha Cassim, Unfair Dismissal: Underlying Principles and Remedies (Commercial Law Centre, 2007) 102 Department for the Business Innovation and Skills, Dealing With Dismissal and ‘Compensated No Fault Dismissal’ For Micro Businesses (2012) Retrieved From Dryden v Greater Glasgow Health Board [1992] IRLR 469 Duncan Nigel, Employment Law in Practice (Oxford University Press, 2012) 342 Hardy Stephen and Butler Mark, European Employment Laws: A Comparative Guide (Spiramus Press Ltd, 2011) 294 Hardy Stephen and Hardy Stephen, Labour Law in Great Britain (Kluwer Law International, 2011) 336 Holland James and Burnett Stuart, Employment Law 2012 (Oxford University Press, 2012) 456 Howe Joanna, The Evolution and Development of Unfair Dismissal Law in Britain and Australia (University of Adelaide, 2013). 17 Leat Mike, Exploring Employee Relations (Routledge, 2012) 449 Martin David, Discrimination Law and Employment Issues (Thorogood Publishing, 2006) 114 Parissis Constantinos, Enforcing EU Employment Law in the UK (Constantinos Parissis, 2000). Sargeant Malcolm and Lewis David, Employment Law (Pearson/Longman, 2006) 480. Wright John, Unfair Dismissal (WWW.E-Authorsdirect.com, 2010) 226 Read More