Blog
From garage to unicorn – Employment law lessons for scaling tech teams
Catherine Bourne
13 July 2011
Modern workplaces and red tape
Yesterday I attended a fascinating debate at the TUC. It was chaired by Louisa Peacock at the Daily/Sunday Telegraph and the two principle speakers were David Frost, Director General of the British Chambers of Commerce, and Brendan Barber, the TUC General Secretary, alongside Jo Lloyd, non-executive director of a small to medium size marketing company (Z Cards), and Siobhan Endean of the Union Unite.
8 July 2011
Should Employers prioritise unemployed Britons in their recruitment processes over foreign workers?
Ian Duncan-Smith, the Work and Pensions Secretary, stoked the coals of controversy recently by urging employers in the UK to “give our young people a chance, and not fall back on labour from abroad”. The issue is still a hot potato four years after Gordon Brown’s ill-fated campaign in 2007 to create “British jobs for British workers”.
1 July 2011
Lies, damned lies and statistics? – what the Employment Tribunal statistics and trends tell us
Statistics relating to the Employment Tribunals have recently been released for the year 2010 to 2011 (click here for the details).
30 June 2011
Employers should act now as bribery act comes into force
The Bribery Act 2010 finally comes into force this Friday, the 1st July 2011. The Act completely rewrites the law in this area, and will have far-reaching implications for employers, directors, partners, and senior personnel.
21 June 2011
Dress codes and hairstyles – could your policy be discriminatory?
In a well publicised decision relevant to all employers with dress codes, the High Court has ruled in the case of SG v St Gregory's Catholic Science College, that a blanket, unwavering, policy of not allowing a “cornrows” hairstyle on male pupils, with no exceptions, could be considered indirect race discrimination, which could be justified if the ban were a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim, but was not on the facts of the case. However, it was not considered sex discrimination.