Key employment and business immigration developments for employers.
Follow the Employment team on LinkedIn.
Key employment and business immigration developments for employers.
Follow the Employment team on LinkedIn.
The UK Government has announced far-reaching changes to the UK's immigration system as part of a five-point plan to reduce net migration. The changes follow the release of the migration figures at the end of November 2023, which showed net migration levels at an all-time high.
The following changes were originally announced to take effect from Spring 2024 but the Government has now said they will be implemented according to the following timeline:
The new measures are likely to cause difficulties for employers who are struggling to recruit skilled and specialist talent. For more information, please see our briefing on the changes.
The rules for business visitors are being amended with effect from 31 January 2024. The amended rules will confirm that a business visitor may undertake some remote working while in the UK in connection with their overseas employment, provided this is incidental to the purpose of their trip. The rules will also expand the scope of work that a business visitor can undertake for a UK branch or related entity. Currently business visitors can undertake a range of internal activities when visiting a UK branch or related entity such as providing training, troubleshooting or consulting. From 31 January 2024, a visitor from an overseas related entity will also be allowed to undertake these activities directly with a client where this is required for the delivery of a project or services by the UK entity and the work is incidental to the visitor's employment abroad. The amended rules will also expand the scope of activities which can be undertaken by an overseas lawyer as a business visitor.
As previously reported in Employment Update, the fines for employing illegal workers are being tripled. From 24 January 2024, employers found to be employing illegal workers will face a civil penalty of up to £45,000 for a first-time offence or up to £60,000 for a repeat offence. Ahead of the changes, employers may wish to review their right to work compliance processes to ensure they are as robust as possible. We regularly provide training on right to work checks and conduct audits of our clients' processes to ensure compliance with the right to work requirements.
As previously reported in Employment Update, the Immigration Health Surcharge (or IHS) will increase from £624 to £1,035 per person per year. The planned increase has now been pushed back and should now take effect on 31 January 2024 at the earliest. The IHS is payable upfront as part of most work visa applications and contributes towards the costs of running the NHS. This IHS increase represents a significant additional cost for visa applicants.
A recent case suggests employers should have some form of "workforce consultation" in a redundancy situation, regardless of the number of redundancies proposed.
The employee in this case worked for a recruitment consultancy. He was part of a team of 16 people employed to recruit exclusively for one client, an investment bank. During the pandemic, the bank's recruitment requirements halved, and the employer decided to reduce its workforce. Before putting anyone at risk, the employer scored the 16 employees against selection criteria which had been provided by its US parent. It was then decided that the company needed to lose two of the 16 roles. As the employee scored the lowest, he was put at risk and ultimately made redundant after a couple of individual consultation meetings. During consultation, the employee had not been given his scores. He appealed his redundancy and was given his scores during the appeal process, but the appeal was ultimately unsuccessful. He then brought an unfair dismissal claim.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) ruled that the redundancy was unfair. The employer had failed to consult meaningfully at an early stage when employees could have proposed a different approach to the redundancy process or proposed ways to avoid the redundancies altogether. As a matter of good industrial relations, there should have been some form of "general workforce consultation" such as a meeting of all those affected to discuss these points before the scoring exercise. This was particularly the case where the selection criteria, which were entirely subjective, had come from the US parent and may not have been appropriate for a UK redundancy exercise. While an appeal could correct errors such as the failure to provide the employee with his scores, it could not repair the gap in consultation at the formative stage.
This case is a reminder that, on a redundancy exercise, the employer should consult with employees about the rationale for making redundancies as well as the proposed selection process at an early stage. Consultation must begin when proposals are still formative and employees can influence the outcome. The case also suggests that consultation on these points should take place with all affected employees, not just those who score the lowest.
Where 20 or more redundancies are proposed, the employer has a duty to consult with trade union or elected employee representatives about the redundancy process and ways to avoid redundancies. Where fewer than 20 redundancies are involved, employers should still consult staff on these points. Where possible, the employer should meet with all employees affected and discuss the proposed selection criteria and process with them before conducting any scoring exercise. However, that may not always be possible or desirable in practice. Announcing proposals and putting all affected employees at risk may unsettle staff, including those who will not be made redundant, and may cause some to be demotivated or even look for another job. For these reasons, employers sometimes take a commercial approach by selecting first and consulting later. Employers who do so should weigh the risks involved and document their reasons – in this case, the EAT commented that there was no time pressure or other reason which justified skipping the initial step of having some form of workforce consultation.
DE BANK HAYCOCKS V ADP RPO UK LTD
A recent case has considered what happens when an employee resigns in the "heat of the moment".
The employee was a supervisor at a Citizens Advice Bureau. During a heated exchange with his manager over holiday, he said that he had had enough and would be off. His manager later asked him to put his resignation in writing which he agreed to do. However, a few days later he sought to retract the resignation. When the employer refused to allow him to withdraw it, he brought claims for wrongful and unfair dismissal.
An Employment Tribunal initially ruled that the resignation should stand but the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) disagreed. According to the EAT, the key question was whether the employee "really intended" to resign. If he did, then the resignation would stand but if not, it was not an effective resignation to begin with. The EAT decided the case had to be reheard by a fresh Tribunal to decide this question.
Employees do not generally have a right to change their mind about a resignation. Where a resignation is clear and unambiguous, it cannot be retracted without the employer's agreement. However, as this case shows, a resignation will not be effective if, viewed objectively, the employee did not "genuinely intend" to resign. This might be the case where the employee resigns in the heat of the moment (e.g. during an argument) or uses language which is equivocal or suggests a future intention to resign. If there is any doubt, the employer should seek to clarify the position with the employee and/or give them an opportunity to retract their words after they have calmed down.
OMAR V EPPING FOREST DISTRICT CITIZENS ADVICE
On 6 April 2024, a new right to carer's leave will come into force. Under the new law, employees will be able to take up to one week of unpaid leave per year to provide or arrange care for a dependant with long-term care needs. New regulations have been made which clarify how the right will work in practice:
Employers should update their policies and handbooks to reflect the new right.
On 6 April 2024, the right to request flexible working will become a "day one" right, meaning employees will not need any service to make a request. Currently, employees need at least 26 weeks' service to qualify for the right to request. At the same time, the following changes will come into force:
Acas plans to publish a revised statutory code of practice on handling flexible working requests in 2024 which incorporates these changes. Employers should review their flexible working policies ahead of April 2024 to ensure the changes are reflected.
Employees who are made redundant during maternity, adoption or shared parental leave must be offered a suitable alternative vacancy if there is one. On 6 April 2024, this protection will be extended so that:
Employers will need to have systems in place to record these periods, in the event of a redundancy exercise involving employees who have taken maternity, adoption or shared parental leave.
As first announced in June 2023, the Government plans to make a number of changes to the way statutory paternity leave is exercised. Draft regulations have now been laid which will introduce the following changes where the expected birth or placement for adoption is on or after 6 April 2024:
On 1 April 2024, the annual increase in the hourly rates of the National Living Wage (NLW) and National Minimum Wage (NMW) will take effect. In addition, the age at which the NLW is payable will reduce from 23 to 21 years.
The hourly rates applicable from 1 April 2024 will be:
The Government recently ran a consultation on a proposed change to the law that would allow agency workers to cover the work of staff who are on strike. Currently it is a criminal offence for an agency to supply agency workers to cover the work of employees who are on strike (or the work of employees who are themselves covering the work of employees on strike). The Government previously made this change to the law in July 2022 but the change was reversed following a High Court ruling in July 2023. The High Court ruled that there had been insufficient public consultation prior to the change being made. The consultation closed on 16 January 2024 and the Government's response is awaited.
In 2023, the Government ran a consultation on a draft statutory Code of Practice on the use of "fire and rehire" to change terms of employment. "Fire and rehire" refers to the practice of terminating employment contracts and offering employees new contracts on revised terms as a way of introducing changes where the employer is unable to get employees' agreement. A Government spokesperson has indicated that the final version of the new Code of Practice will be published in Spring 2024. Once in force, employers will need to follow the Code when changing terms and conditions, as a failure to do so could result in an uplift in compensation of up to 25 percent in any relevant claim.
Since the last Employment Update, our work has included: