Employment Law Case Studies: Analysis and Application of UK Labor Laws

This report covers three case studies on the applicability of different labor legislations in the UK. It discusses the issues, rules, and application of laws in each case, including unfair dismissal, zero-hour contracts, and notice periods. The report also highlights the importance of employment laws in protecting the rights of employees and employers.

EMPLOYMENT LAW

Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................................................3
MAIN BODY...................................................................................................................................3
Case study 1 ...............................................................................................................................3
Issues- .........................................................................................................................................3
Rule- ...........................................................................................................................................4
Apply- ........................................................................................................................................5
Concluded- .................................................................................................................................6
Case study 2 ...............................................................................................................................6
Issue- ..........................................................................................................................................6
Rule- ...........................................................................................................................................6
Apply- .......................................................................................................................................7
Conclude- ...................................................................................................................................8
Case study 3 ....................................................................................................................................8
Issue- ..........................................................................................................................................8
Rule- ...........................................................................................................................................8
Apply- ........................................................................................................................................9
Conclude- ...................................................................................................................................9
CONCLUSION..............................................................................................................................10
REFERENCES:.............................................................................................................................11

INTRODUCTION
In current scenario UK has in an average more than 4 million companies which employs
approximately 21 million employees. The country has designed its employment laws in such a
way as to ensure that both the employers and employees are equally protected under the ambit of
law. In order to continue running and growing their day to day business, it is very significant for
employers to get a hold with major employment legislations of UK(Adams and Prassl, 2018) . The
very basic aim of such laws is to ascertain the responsibilities of both employer as well as
employee towards each other and to the business as well as this helps in continuing the
relationship fair to both the parties. It can be analysed that in order to ensure the protection and
safety of employees various labour legislations are required based on different criteria and
situations for instance, National Minimum Wage Act of 1998, protect employees for fair
remuneration and hiring practices based on his age and employees who are above the age of 23
are also entitled to the national living wage. Further Equality Act of 2010, protects employees
from the discrimination on the basis of race, gender, disability, hierarchy, etc. against and among
candidates. Also the employee are entitled to get protection under Health and Safety at work
Act 1974 from the moment as soon as he enters the premises in order to ensure a safe working
environment. This report is going to cover the three case studies where applicability of different
labour legislations will be discussed based on the scenarios given.
MAIN BODY
Case study 1
Issues-
 Does Faith have any legal remedy as per the provisions of employment law to sue the
employer for unfair dismissal.
 Subject to the agreement of zero hour basis does Faith have any Remedy for the same.

Rule-
In general sense dismissal means when the employee gets fired or dismissed by the
employer(Aktar, 2021). Similarly when any employee is asked to move out of the employment by
the employer for any unreasonable and unjust reason then the employee is said to be subject to
unfair dismissal. Some of the grounds for unfair dismissal of employees are-
 request for flexible working hours,
 maternity or pregnancy leave by expectant or new mothers,
 asking to be paid for minimum wages or national minimum wage.
 Employee being a face or member or trade union,
 employee raising voices over the health and safety issues within the
organization,
 he being involved in whistle-blowing, and similarly many more.
But there are many scenarios where the employees can be dismissed in fair manner based on
certain grounds. Majorly there are five reasons where an employee can be dismissed by fair
means, which are as follows-
 In case of redundancy when the services by the employee are no longer
required or the case where the employee can no longer afford them,
 In case where the conduct of the employee is not up to the mark or the case
where he has done something which is not acceptable and appropriate,
 case where employee does not posses the required qualifications for the
given job,
 Dismissal on the ground of long term sick leave is also admissible until all
the required steps have been taken by the employer and
 if an employee is dismissed by giving prior appropriate notice or if the
employment contract have come to an end.
Further with respect to the second issue, zero hour basis is a contract between the
employer and employee done prior to the commencement of the employment on the terms that
the employer will not be obliged to employee to provide any fix number of working hours or can
be called for working as required.

Apply-
Here based on the case study of Faith, the two major provisions of Employment laws
which apply here are the Employment protection Act of 1975 and the Organisation of Working
Time Act of 1997 . Also the Act of Employment Miscellaneous Provisions of 2018 gives the
provisions regarding the general working conditions of the employees
According to Employment Protection Act of 1975, the employees having being in service
for more than two years are entitled to have a claim for unfair dismissal, so similarly Faith can be
legally protected under this provision as she has been working with the employer from past four
and half years(Aylott, 2018). Under the Act the provisions which specially talks about the
remedies of unfair dismissal are from section 71 to 80 where the available remedies are basic
award, compensatory award, reinstatement or re- engagement. The motive behind granting award
is to compensate the employee for the loss of his income which he has occurred as the result of
unfair dismissal. The tribunal on finding the dismissal by unfair mean can grant award as he
thinks just and equitable seeing the circumstances and the loss occurred to the employee by the
employer. Whereas in case of reinstatement employee is given his job back subject to the same
terms and conditions as prior. Also as Faith was not given the prior and proper notice of
dismissal before 2 months, this act of employer also leads to her unfair dismissal. Therefore with
respect to the first issue of unfair dismissal Faith can fetch legal remedy by suing his employer
under the provisions of Employment Protection Act of 1975.
With respect to the second issue the Act of Organisation of working Time gives
protection to the employees on zero hours basis contracts. Therefore as there exists a zero hour
basis contract between the Faith and his employer , she comes under the ambit of this Act and
hence and ask for legal remedy under the same. This Act empowers several employment rights
including the complete prohibition of zero working hour contracts in most of the cases. But on
the contrary the work done under some required and emergency situations are not protected
under the protection criteria of zero hour contracts.
This Act also sets some minimum payment bench marks criteria for the employees who
are employed on the basis of zero hour basis contracts. An employee employed under the zero
hour contract, his pay should be calculated as either three times of the national minimum wage or
if applicable three times the minimum hourly rate as given in the Employment Regulation order.
Also if there is case when the employee has been called for the work by the employer and and

has been sent home back without any work done then in such cases employee is entitled to get
paid for the twenty five percent of the possible hours or for fifteen hours whichever is less. But at
the same time short term reliefs in cases of exceptional situations and in cases of emergency can
be considered as exception to it (Ball and et. al., 2017) .
Concluded-
After analysing the above mentioned provisions with respect to the case study it can be
concluded that Faith can sue the employer on the basis of unfair dismissal and fetch a legal
remedy against him on the ground firstly, that she was not given the prior notice of dismissal
before two months. And second is that the hour contract does not completely finishes the right of
an employer and hence she is protected under the Act of organisation of working time Act of
1997 for the same.
Case study 2
Issue-
 Is Theo wrongfully dismissed by the employer?
 Is providing a notice necessary for dismissing an employee?
 Is providing written contract of employment to the employee necessary for all the
dismissal procedures to be followed by the employer? Can an employee appeal to the Employment Tribunal without a Contract of employment?
Rule-
According to the Employment laws of UK, having a written contract of employment is
not a legal requirement. Even if there is no written description of the conditions and terms of
employment still the rules of employment of the Employment Relations act 1996 are applicable
to the employees(Le Thu, 2021).
The rules of employment are needed to be checked whenever a dispute arises between the
parties which are Employer- employee and just like the full time workers, part time workers are
also entitled to the benefits of employment which any other worker enjoys in accordance with
the regulations. Written copy of the Contract of employment is not a lawful requirement and
necessity as per the work legislations. They include that if the employee is unlawfully treated by

the employer then that person has the right to appeal to the Employment Tribunal on the grounds
of unfair or wrongful dismissal and failure to give notice to the employee by the employer and
breach of the oral agreement terms also amounts to wrongful dismissal(Bena, Ortiz-Molina and
Simintzi, 2021) .
Apply-
All the above mentioned rules apply to this case of Theo, where he worked as a part time
worker and was thus entitled to get the benefits of employment laws which are applicable to
employment relations. Although no specific legislation is devoted to Wrongful dismissal but the
judgements in the court of law which are known as Common law have clearly explained this
from time to time. The other acts like Employment Relations Act 1996 indicate and lay down
procedures which specifically say that :
 Part time workers should get the same treatment like the full time workers for pay rates
including the other types of pay like sick pay and paternal leave pay, the holidays,
pension benefits and promotions which are also the rights of a part time employee.
 If they are unfairly treated they have a right to get the reasons and explanations for that
from their employer.
 Even without the written statement of facts related to the terms and conditions of
contract of employment, the employee must be treated just like any other employee
having a written document of contract because there is a clause of no legal requirement of
written contract which applies in employment legislations (Ravalier and et. al., 2019) .
 Without this the terms of verbal agreement which happens between the parties applies to
the case.
 The law of UK clearly states that the employee is entitled to get employment rights,
minimum notice periods, minimum holidays, minimum wages, etc.
 Breach of the oral terms of an employment contract occurred when Theo was wrongfully
dismissed by the employer at the University.
 He raised the grievance which he had faced relating to the contract at the employment
tribunal which was accurate as he could address his problems of workplace conditions
there.

 The rules of wrongful dismissal apply due to the fact that he was not given a notice to
which he was entitled to get from the employer before dismissal stating the facts and
reasons to dismiss him.
Conclude-
Thus, from the case that Theo had all the rights of employment as a part time worker at
the University which any other worker gets. He was eligible to appeal to the employment
tribunal for the problems that he faced at the organisation by the employer. Even when he was
not bound by a written contract he should have a got a notice explaining the reasons for his
dismissal from the employment because he was bounded by an oral agreement. But it can also be
considered that Theo should have discussed about the problems which he was facing and about
his grievances with the employer before going to the employment tribunal(Bezzina, 2020) (Burke
and Boccia, 2020). Same was the mistake of the recruiter that he did not discuss the resentment
faced by Theo in the working conditions of the organisation. A discussion between them could
have led to dispute and conflict resolution. Employment laws are thus essential as they govern
the working environment and try to look into the fact that nobody is denied their basic rights.
Case study 3
Issue-
 Is Scarlett unfairly dismissed by his employer?
 Is she liable to get a notice for dismissal explaining the reasons for it? Is she entitled to get compensation and money?
Rule-
Employment legislations of UK protect the employees, employers and the business
through various acts. They guide them towards proper conduct at the workplace.
The rules of Employment Rights Act 1996 thus apply to the case of Scarlett who worked
behind the bar in the University's Social club as an employee due to which she was unfairly
dismissed from employment because notice period was not served to her. Being an employee
she was entitled to get a notice period according to the regulations and procedures. If due

procedure is followed she is also eligible to get money and compensation for the improper
dismissal by the employer (Hall and Geissler, 2017) .
Apply-
All the above rules apply to Scarlet's case. These rules apply in relation to the
Employment Rights act 1996:
 She should have got at least a weeks notice before her termination by the employer
because the employee has the right to get a period of notice.
 She is liable to get the statement of facts with full information stating the reasons for the
unfair dismissal.
 She can thus go and complaint about it to the Employment tribunal on the grounds that
the employer intentionally failed to provide a notice to the employee or if the reasons
given are untrue. Scarlett can also get compensation if the tribunal thinks it is fit to provide her with it
according to the situation and she might be awarded a sum equal to the amount of two
weeks pay(Smedley and Rayment, 2019.
Conclude-
We can conclude from the above report that Scarlett being an employee has all the rights
of an employment which any other worker gets. Unfair dismissal of an employee is a part of UK
employment legislations. Without fair and reasonable dismissal the employee's job is terminated
every now and then and to protect the employees from this unfair treatment, this is regulated by
the Employment Rights Act of 1996. It lays down that the employees should get a fair reason
before they are dismissed from employment. Scarlett was unethically dismissed and no period of
notice was served to her which violated her rights as an employee under the Employment law.
Thus there are employment tribunals which hear grievances of such employees like Scarlett and
provide relief in the form of compensations and other awards(Hodder, 2020). They look into the
fact that the working environment is legally governed and the rights of the employees are
protected.

CONCLUSION
From the above report it has been concluded that management of the company must have
to ensure the proper and continuous running of any organisation which helps them in keeping
the pace between employer and the employees. So in situation of any conflict between them
regarding their rights or liabilities here comes the role of Employment law. Similarly through the
above mentioned three case studies it can be observed that the said stated laws plays a major role
for the rights of the suffering party. Here it has been concluded that the Faith, Theo and Scarlett,
all three who worked at the University of south east in different capacities have the right to sue
the employer on the ground of fair dismissal and can have and are entitled for the a legal remedy
with the help of the different environment law provisions.

REFERENCES:
Adams, A. and Prassl, J., 2018. Zero-hours work in the United Kingdom. Conditions of Work
and Employment Series, 101.
Aktar, Z., 2021. Caste Discrimination in Employment and Enhancing Protections available under
the Equality Act. E-Journal of International and Comparative Labour Studies.
Aylott, E., 2018. Employment Law: A Practical Introduction. Kogan Page Publishers.
Ball, M., and et. al., 2017. Agency workers and zero hours: the story of hidden
exploitation. Derbyshire Unemployed Workers Centres.
Bena, J., Ortiz-Molina, H. and Simintzi, E., 2021. Shielding firm value: Employment protection
and process innovation. Journal of Financial Economics.
Bezzina, C., 2020. A comparative analysis of the concept of redundancy in employment and
kindred consequences between Maltese law and UK law (Bachelor's thesis, University
of Malta).
Burke, L.M. and Boccia, R., 2020. A Bright IDEA: Modernizing the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act to Meet Student Needs and Support Integrated Employment.
Backgrounder. No. 3520. Heritage Foundation.
Hall, M. and Geissler, A., 2017. Different balancing methods for Net Zero Energy Buildings-
Impact of time steps, grid interaction and weighting factors. Energy Procedia. 122.
pp.379-384.
Hodder, A., 2020. New Technology, Work and Employment in the era of COVID‐19: reflecting
on legacies of research. New technology, work and employment. 35(3). pp.262-275.
Le Thu, N., 2021. Legal Considerations for Determination of Employment Relation and
Employment Contract. VNU Journal of Science: Legal Studies. 37(2).
Ravalier, J and et. al., 2019. Zero‐hour contracts and stress in UK domiciliary care
workers. Health & social care in the community. 27(2). pp.348-355.
Smedley, D. and Rayment, A., 2019. Changes in employment law: mitigating the gig
economy. Nursing And Residential Care. 21(6). pp.345-348.