UK employment law - Essay Example

?Running head: LAW Law ID Number) (Unit (Unit Submitted) Introduction According to UK employment law, it isthe right of the employer to pick and hire the candidate they feel has met the organizations requirements and job description. However, the law allows the candidate or employer to file a case if they are denied a chance or sacked on grounds of; marital status, gender, race, religion, disability, political opinion, nationality, and union membership (Chandler 2003, P 5). The new employment law in UK suggests that incase an employer violate the employment rights there will be a financial penalty. On the employment area, individuals would involve themselves in any action so that they can preserve a chance for their employment. It would take individuals who are looking for work so much of making lies to their bosses so that they can obtain chance in a working place. They would pretend to be the best individuals before the employer. These individuals may hide much about their health and character for the purpose of obtaining the chance in an organization. Employees may hide their weaknesses of health so that they are not fired from work. This may bring a dangerous outcome when everything reveals itself and it is no longer a secret. The essay is about is about an employee who misbehaved after drinking alcohol in company party. He sat on the copier naked and begun making copies. During this incident, the copier glass broke due to his heavy weight. The managing director dismissed him immediately without investigations. The director could have launched an investigation to know the cause of his misconduct. I believe John had reason or cause behind his actions. If he was to face any disciplinary action that would be replacing the copier glass ne broke. Schizophrenic This mental illness affects one during either adulthood or adolescence. The symptoms of the disease are as follows; disorganized speech, delusions, negative personality, hallucinations and bizarre behavior. People suffering from schizophrenic have a low level of functioning and are unable to withstand working pressure in an organization. Every person with the illness is different and each individual behaves in a different way (French 2006, p 20). The cause of john’s misconduct was under influence of alcohol hence this case or condition cannot be handled as an illness. Rights of employee If john was suffering from this disease Schizophrenic, he should not have been dismissed. His condition could have been caused by too much pressure, which he was unable to handle. There are laws that protect employee who are sick or suffering from a chronic illness or disability. No employer is allowed to dismiss, sack or discipline employees because of ill health. There two acts under Health and Safety at Work (HSWA) that protects employees. The two acts are; 1. Employment Rights Act 1996 which deals with ensuring fair procedures in case there is an issue of employee dismissal reason being absent at work because of an illness. 2. Employment 202(Dispute regulation) 2004 this act was adopted to decrease employee dismissal, and govern grievances and disciplinary procedures (Health and safety Executive 2012). John’s behavior on grounds of the mental illness is protected by the UK employment act. The dismissal attracts fine penalties and John should receive his salary and job reinstatement (Lewis & Malcolm, 2004). The disciplinary action should be charging John or ask him to replace the broken photocopier glass and the papers he wasted. The managing director did not bother to know his cause of misconduct but dismissed him without investigating. Employees may suffer from schizophrenia and fail to reveal this to their employers for the fear of shame or they could be fired or denied the job. Schizophrenia becomes a no more secret when the employee behaves in a funny way after certain duration of working in an organization ( A.D.A.M. , 2012). An alcoholic as a consequence of taking prescription drugs There is an act that protects alcoholic employees; Alcoholism and the Disability Discrimination Act that is usually classified under DDA. If a person has been prescribed to take nicotine, alcohol or any other drug substance as a medication is protected by the act. However, if the employee is addicted to drugs without a medical prescription the act does not cover such a situation but it considers a person who disable due to alcohol intake such as liver cirrhosis is covered under Disability Discrimination Act. Some employers might not take a disciplinary if the alcoholic employee agrees to follow a recovery program (Lewis and Thornbory 2012). If John was an alcoholic, he should not have been fired but asked to join a recovery program. In case he does not change then the managing director was in a position to dismiss him (Brown & Rice, 2007). It would be no good when an employee hides to communicate his/her disabilities for the fear of being sacked. It is within the employment law that, equity within a company or any other working area is ensured to make sure that all people have equal rights and chances and cannot be banned for no good reasons. If an employee has a feeling that the employer is showing aggressiveness, is misbehaving or has a rude attitude, the employment law should therefore. An employer is subject to a fine if he/ she fail to adhere to the employment law. The main objective of the establishment of the employment law is to ensure a safe working environment for employee. Any employee should feel free when he or she communicates his or her problems to the employer without the fear of being dismissed. Such problems would be the employee’s disability in one way or the other; the employee could be under some special medication or under certain prescription that may require his abstinence from certain meals or tasks. In the described example, John could have had problems associated with schizophrenia. Managers have the responsibility of understanding employees’ problems as well as finding the best methods to accommodate them. John had problems of schizophrenia in which the problem could arise after a long period. After a long period of working in the same place, John confessed to have been experiencing the problem every time he was drunk. He had never communicated the problem to the manager. As a manager, one is expected to hold his responsibilities, which would include fair treatment of employees. The employee has the right to express his grievances or problems which in-turn should be listened to and the necessary action towards their improvement taken (Cabrelli, pg 35, 2010). When certain unusual behaviors are observed with an employee in the workplace, suspending the employee does not solve the problem. As a responsible employer, one should at the first site engage the employee into a discussion. Through this discussion, the employer or the manger would therefore be able to realize the intensions of the employee. If the employee has some certain special disorders, the manager therefore would be in a position to understand the reason of the deviant behavior. It is only through dialogue that a conclusion can be arrived at. The employee has the right to be listened to. A manager would be violating the employment law if he or she does not give chance to the employee to express his or her views with response to the observed behavior. Others inaugurate certain issues. It could have been out of a genuine reason that John could demonstrate such behaviors in the office. It would be a relational to aggressiveness if the manager does not give time for the examination of the employee’s cognition be a legal action is taken. The employment law fosters for free airing of grievances for employees when a necessary issue has to be addressed within the organization. The employee would therefore perform the right thing at all times unless he is convicted with some mental retardedness. Unfair Dismissal Retaining an issue that is unbeknownst to the employer is not right and is said to be a violation to the responsibilities of the employee as directed within the employment law. As an employee, john had made the wrong choice of refusing to speak out his problems so that necessary measures could be taken. It would have been a good idea if john had confessed to Rupert that he had some illness and that he required a leave so that he could attend to his illness. The employment law provides for the provision of a sick leave for any employee who requests for one. An employee is entitled for a sick leave if his or her problem is noticed. The employee can only make the realization of an employee’s problem by the employer through the confession. Once the employee has communicated his or her problem to the employer, the manager holds no choice rather than issuing a permit for the attendance for a medical check-up. As a responsible employee, John would have felt free to communicate his problems to the manager. Many employees can fail to confess their unhealthy conditions for the fear that the employer would ask to look at the employee’s genetic information. In this case, the employer may suspend the employee on realization that the employee’s illness was not an ending one, but an issue of genetics and inheritance. This should not be the case. According to the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA), employers are prohibited from using genetic information of the employee as the bases for decisions of whether he should be employed or not (Kidner, pg 67, 2011). The employers are therefore required to keep the confidentiality of the genetic information. GINA forbids employers from asking or requiring genetic information from employees. The law also prohibits the employer from making follow-ups to investigate the sick leave of the employee (Jeeg, 2012). He should not require knowing any information about the employee’s family with regard to the employee’s unhealthy condition. John as an employee to Rupert should have confessed his unhealthy conditions that would have been understandable to Rupert. Having made such a mistake that included lose of the company’s property, John did not deserve to be dismissed from the company in that way. John should have been issue with a dismissal letter to notify him and also given time to defend himself (Roydens, 2005). The managing director did not in the first place carry out any investigation to find out the reasons behind John’s behavior. As a managing director of the company, it would always be a nice idea to carry out some detailed investigation before you arrive to a conclusion. Certain crucial reasons could have backed John’s reactions. A detailed investigation that would have involved John himself, other employees, friends and family members would have derived an indisputable reason following the action. After the realization of the associated problem, relevant conclusions on how the matter could be dealt with should have therefore been formulated (Kidner, pg 67, 2011). According to the statement, John had been an employee in the company for twenty years. This implies that he had acquired much experience on the work. If a company unfairly dismisses an employee, who have worked for more than 1 year is allowed to claim for payment (Landau, 2009). Suspending John would also be a disadvantage to the company. A well-experienced employee can be a significant tool within the company’s productivity. Experience alters profit generation within an organization. The relevance of such depiction is that the managing director will have to make much investment on training sessions for another employee who would handle things perfectly and efficiently. In such a situation, the company’s productivity would be put into a stagnant operation due to their lack of an experienced person. The employment of dialogue would provide the best go-aheads, which would slightly lower the company’s productivity and profit generation. As the managing director and the employer, you should understand that when the employment of a person is terminated, the employer must issue to the employee a termination notice, termination pay or both. This is according to the Employment Standards Act (ESA), which provides protection for the termination notice or pay for all employees employed for more than three months. The employee is therefore entitled to a termination pay, which includes overtime pay, public holiday pay and vocational pay (Reynolds, 2002). The employer is on the same case prohibited from reducing the employee’s pay due to the period of the notice. Full payments should be made before the employee is dismissed. Firing John without making any payments to him would cause the managing director some more problems. John has the right to sue him under the ESA law. This would cause great expenses to the company that can even lead to the termination of the company’s existence (Bell, pg 45, 2006). Pay Employment Relations Acts 1998 strengthened the employee’s rights in case of unfair dismissal especially for workers employed more than a year. The compensation maximum rate is ?58,400 if unfairly dismissed. In addition, the government has assured whistle blowers job security or compensation in case they are dismissed if they raise issue on injustice at work and danger to health (Hardy and Hardy 2011). Conclusion It would be a wise decision if the managing director withdraws the dismissal and engage to dialogue with the employee. John therefore does not deserve the dismissal but he should rather be interviewed to find out the reason following is behavior. It is the responsibility of every employer to carry out matters within the workplace in accordance to the employment law. Employees should in the other side play their role for the sustainability of justice and the elimination of all forms of discrimination within a working area. John should be reinstated and in both cases asked to cater for photocopier expenses. John’s behavior on grounds of the mental illness is protected by the UK employment act. The dismissal attracts fine penalties and John should receive his salary and job reinstatement. . As a responsible employee, John would have felt free to communicate his problems to the manager. If a company unfairly dismisses an employee, who have worked for more than 1 year is allowed to claim for payment References Bell, C.. London,. Employment law: textbook series. Sweet & Maxwell, 2006. Cabrelli, D. Employment law. Harlow, England: Pearson Longman, 2010. Chandler, Peter. An A-Z of Employment Law. Pentoville: Kogan Page Publisher, 2003. French, Douglas P. Schizophrenic Psychology: New Research. New York: Nova Publishers, 2006. Hardy, Stephen, and Stephen T. Hardy. Labour Law in Great Britain. ah alphen aan den rijn: Kluwer Law Internationa, 2011. Health and safety Executive. Guidance on legal issues. 2012. http://www.hse.gov.uk/sicknessabsence/legalguidance.htm (accessed 11 24, 2012). Kidner R., 2011. Blackstone's Statutes on Employment Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011. Lewis, Joan, and Greta Thornbory. Employment Law and Occupational Health: A Practical Handbook. chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 2012. A.D.A.M. . (2012, february 13). Pub Med Health. Retrieved November 25, 2012, from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0001925/ Brown, G. D., & Rice, S. (2007). Professional English in Use Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Jeeg. (2012, February 22). Genetic watchdog. Retrieved November 25, 2012, from http://www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/blog/?tag=/genetic+information+nondiscrimination+act Landau, P. (2009, April 22). A cautionary note. Retrieved November 25, 2012, from http://careers.guardian.co.uk/changing-jobs-employment-protection Lewis, D. L., & M. S. (2004). Essentials Of Employment 8/E. London: CIPD Publishing. Reynolds, D. B. (2002). Taking the High Road: Communities Organize for Economic Change. New York: M.E. Sharpe. Roydens. (2005). Employment Law Procedures . Retrieved November 25, 2012, from http://www.roydens.co.uk/content32.htm Read More