Latest news with #unfairDismissal
Times
4 days ago
- Business
- Times
Plea to Starmer over ‘devastating' cost of employment rights bill
Businesses keeping Britain's hospitals, train stations, airports, offices, warehouses and factories clean, maintained and secure have warned the prime minister of the 'devastating impact' of the government's employment rights bill. In an open letter to Sir Keir Starmer, his deputy Angela Rayner and the business secretary Jonathan Reynolds, the 128 companies — including the sector leaders OCS Group, Churchill Group and Mitie — urged the government to rethink its plans. The letter highlighted what its authors believe will be the 'serious unintended consequences' from the large-scale changes to employment law proposed by the legislation, which is passing through parliament. The reforms include making protection from unfair dismissal a right from the first day of employment, increased union representation and more generous sick pay, which has to be paid for by businesses. • Workers' bill 'won't work unless tribunal backlog is cleared' 'We are deeply concerned that some of the bill's provisions … could harm both good employers and the very employees that the bill seeks to protect,' the authors of the letter say. The additional costs or risks of hiring the wrong person for a role would 'force some employers to reduce staff headcount or reduce their hours, turn down new contracts, or even exit the market altogether,' they added. Dominic Ponniah, chief executive of the office and commercial cleaning company Cleanology and a co-author of the letter, said concerns had been building about the negative impact of the legislation for some months, but they had come to a head once facilities management firms had seen the impact on their operating costs of April's rise in employers' national insurance to 15 per cent. 'Suddenly people are feeling that on their bottom lines and we need to make our voice heard,' he said. The 128 signatories of the letter also include Josie Marshall-Deane, regional director of OCS Group, whose services include passenger screening, surveillance and emergency response at airports, and Charlotte Parr, executive director of Churchill Group, which is majority-owned by 10,000 of its employees and works to maintain social housing for housing associations, among other services. The facilities management industry overall employs 1.4 million people and generates £60 billion for the economy, making it many times more important for economic growth than other more favoured industries such as fashion and farming, the authors note. It is dominated by thousands of small and medium-sized companies, typically operating on tight profit margins. They said the changes to employment law 'risk penalising the good companies while doing little to deter the bad players'. The companies make clear their support for the government's efforts to tackle exploitative labour practices and establish fair treatment of agency workers. The government is phasing in the introduction of the new rights, which it has calculated could add £5 billion in costs to the economy each year. Smaller companies will be hit disproportionately, it acknowledges. It has said most of the new rules would not take effect until next year. A Government spokesperson said: 'Insecurity and poor health at work aren't just bad for workers, they also impact productivity and drive down competitiveness in businesses and the wider economy. 'That's why through our transformative plan for change, this government is delivering the biggest upgrade to workers' rights in a generation, and our measures already have strong support amongst business and the public. 'We've consulted extensively with business on our proposals, and we will engage on the implementation of legislation to ensure it works for employers and puts money back into the pockets of working people.'
Times
16-05-2025
- Politics
- Times
Ex-Arsenal kit man to sue club after ‘sacking for pro-Palestine comments'
A long-serving kit man at Arsenal FC is suing the Premier League club over claims that he was sacked for having made pro-Palestine comments on social media. Mark Bonnick, 61, had been with the north London club for 22 years until he was 'fired abruptly' on Christmas Eve over what he has claimed were false allegations of antisemitism. On Friday representatives of the European Legal Support Center said that Bonnick had filed a claim against Arsenal for unfair dismissal. To bring the claim the centre has instructed a barrister, Franck Magennis, of Garden Court chambers in London. It emerged last month that Magennis was one of three lawyers who were representing Hamas in its appeal against the UK government's decision to designate it as a
Irish Times
09-05-2025
- Irish Times
Hotel manager fired for bullying gay colleague wins compensation for lack of appeal
A hotel night manager sacked for bullying a gay colleague has won €3,000 for unfair dismissal because his employer missed an email from him attempting to appeal his firing. The Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) has found the hotel operator, Cantarini Limited 'acted reasonably' by sacking the worker, Omar Mohammed Osman – but breached the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977 when it missed his email asking to exercise his right of appeal, and failed to respond. Mr Osman, who was a night manager at the City Quay aparthotel in Dublin city Centre, was sacked on foot of findings that he was bullying a gay colleague, Mr D, because of his sexuality. However, Mr Osman argued that he was accused of homophobia in a 'thinly veiled attempt to penalise him' for raising concerns about how he was being treated by managers. READ MORE Mr D had complained that Mr Osman called him 'a big homosexual' and 'princess', the WRC noted. Mr D further alleged that Mr Osman called him by a nickname that 'sounded like he was being referred to as an animal' – as well as whistling at him and mocking his accent. Mr Osman's evidence to the WRC was that he has 'no issue with homosexuals' and is 'not homophobic', the adjudicator hearing the case noted. He stated that he couldn't have whistled at his former colleague, because he did not 'know how to whistle'. He also told the tribunal that when he used the word 'princess', he had been referring to a female colleague, the decision recorded. His position was that none of the allegations made against him by Mr D were true. The tribunal was told that before Mr D's complaint, Mr Osman had received a written warning by his manager for 'letting the team down' by leaving work around 30 minutes into a shift in December 2023. However, Mr Osman complained to the company that his line manager and other staff had been 'in the back office when they should have been working' and that the manager was 'shouting and cursing' at him, the tribunal heard. The tribunal heard that Mr Osman emailed the company's HR manager complaining of 'bullying' from a night duty team leader, Mr L, on March 14th, 2024, two days before he was interviewed for the first time in connection with the harassment complaint against him. He formalised the grievance later in the month, before being interviewed again in connection with the dignity at work investigation. Five days later, the disciplinary process concluded with findings that Mr Osman had been 'bullying and harassing a colleague in relation to their sexual orientation and race', and he was dismissed. After the matter was heard by the WRC in January, Mr Osman's legal team furnished the WRC with an email he had sent asking to appeal the dismissal. The respondent's head of human resources, Victoria Scrase, told the WRC there was no response because the person Mr Osman had written to had themselves left the company four days after Mr Osman's sacking. Mr Osman's position was that it was 'unfair to investigate a complaint made about him when he had been complaining for six months about how he was treated and nothing had been done'. His barrister, Joseph Bradley BL, instructed by Melissa Wynne of Ormonde Solicitors, submitted that his client had been subjected to 'aggressive and violent outbursts at work' and had been met with a 'dismissive' stance when he first complained in October 2023. 'He was accused of homophobia, in a thinly veiled attempt to penalise him for raising concerns about how he was treated by managers,' Mr Bradley submitted. Adjudicator Catherine Byrne wrote in her decision that even at the hearing before the WRC, Mr Osman seemed to be 'unaffected by the possibility that he offended his colleague'. She did not accept his explanation for his use of the word 'princess', she wrote. Will DoorDash takeover of Deliveroo mean better pay and conditions for gig economy workers? Listen | 28:33 'A simple acknowledgment of the effect that his behaviour had on his colleague may have made a difference and could have avoided his dismissal,' Ms Byrne added. She said she could see no alternative except to find the company was 'reasonable' to dismiss Mr Osman, a worker she wrote was 'unable to see the effect of his behaviour… and apologise for the distress he had caused'. 'It is very regrettable that he didn't seek some wise counsel before he engaged in the disciplinary procedure that ended with his dismissal,' she added. However, she concluded that because the company did not respond to an email from Mr Osman seeking to exercise his right of appeal, the dismissal was unfair because of this 'procedural failure'. Ms Byrne rejected further claims of penalisation in breach of the Protected Disclosures Act 2014 and the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005 by Mr Osman. Mr Osman's position was that he was only accused of homophobia and subjected to disciplinary action as a reaction to complaining about Mr L. Ms Byrne concluded that that Mr Osman had played a part in the conflict among staff and that his grievances were addressed by management. He 'was attempting to distract attention' from Mr D's complaint against him when he raised his grievances in March 2024, she added.
