It has been an eventful period for employment law, and several significant developments have emerged in recent days which you will need to keep on your radar. Unfair dismissal After much political manoeuvring, the proposal to bring in Day One unfair dismissal rights has been abandoned in favour of a much shorter qualifying period. The government now appears to be settled on reducing the qualifying period for unfair dismissal claims from the current two years to six months. Th

The Employment Appeal Tribunal has confirmed that it was not just and equitable to extend time for a discrimination claim brought almost four years after the alleged acts occurred. The decision serves as a reminder of the strict approach tribunals may take to time limits, particularly where there has been significant delay. In Ahmed v Capital Arches , Mr Ahmed brought claims alleging religious discrimination arising from events said to have taken place before October 2018. He

The Employment Appeal Tribunal has provided useful guidance on the limits of whistleblowing protection in Argence-Lafon v Ark Syndicate Management , particularly where an employee’s conduct following a disclosure gives rise to separate concerns. Mr Argence-Lafon made whistleblowing disclosures relating to what he believed to be a potentially fraudulent loss claim. His employer investigated the allegations in full and concluded that there was no fraud. Despite this, Mr Argence

The Supreme Court has rejected an appeal from the Court of Appeal decision in De Bank Haycocks v ADP RPO UK Ltd , addressing the adequacy of consultation in redundancy exercises. Mr De Bank Haycocks was placed at risk of redundancy and provisionally scored against selection criteria before consultation began. He argued that the consultation process was a sham, as the scoring had effectively determined the outcome by the time discussions took place. The Employment Appeal Trib

The Employment Appeal Tribunal has provided important guidance on the scope of the “without prejudice” rule in employment disputes in Garrod v Riverstone Management Ltd . The claimant had been invited to what was described as an informal meeting to discuss her future with the business. During that meeting, concerns about performance were raised and the possibility of termination was discussed. The employer later sought to rely on aspects of that conversation in defending an u

The Supreme Court handed down its decision in Mercer v Alternative Future Group Ltd , providing important clarification on the scope of protection available to workers taking part in industrial action. Ms Mercer was a support worker and trade union representative who organised and participated in lawful strike action. Following the strike, she was suspended by her employer, allegedly due to concerns about her conduct during the action. She brought claims under section 146 of

Looking ahead to 2025 and beyond, major statutory reform is on the horizon. The Government’s Employment Rights Bill  (expected to receive Royal Assent in late 2025 ) promises to reshape unfair dismissal rights. Among the headline reforms under discussion at the end of 2024 are: Reduction of the qualifying period for ordinary unfair dismissal claims from two years’ continuous service to a reduced period. Earlier versions of the Bill proposed a day-one right, but political nego

This month’s key case emphasises the continuing importance of procedural fairness in dismissal situations. In Charalambous v National Bank of Greece [2023] EAT 75, the Employment Appeal Tribunal considered whether a dismissal could still be fair where the manager who ultimately decided to dismiss the employee had not personally conducted the disciplinary hearing. Ms Charalambous worked as a relationship manager at the National Bank of Greece’s London office. She was suspende

The Employment Rights Bill  has been introduced, promising the biggest overhaul of UK employee protections in generations. The Bill covers reforms to unfair dismissal qualifying periods, zero-hours contracts, flexible working, statutory sick pay, and family-friendly rights. For employers, the practical message is to begin horizon-scanning. Although most new provisions will not be implemented immediately, the Bill’s broad scope means organisations should review policies now to

On 18 July 2024, the long-anticipated Code of Practice on Dismissal and Re-engagement was brought into force across England, Wales and Scotland, giving statutory backing to guidance that employers should use dismissal and re-engagement only as a last resort. The regulations set out clear “musts” and “shoulds” for employers contemplating such changes, including meaningful consultation obligations for affected employees. From a practical perspective, HR teams should ensure thei