Legal Issues for Management

This article discusses legal issues related to contracts of employment, work-life balance, discrimination, and unfair dismissal. It also provides legal advice for consumer protection law in the case of Sally's Shoes. The article covers various provisions of UK employment law and consumer protection law. It also highlights the legal rights of employees and consumers in different situations. The article is relevant for students studying management, law, and related courses.

Legal Issues for Management

TABLE OF CONTENT
QUESTION 1...................................................................................................................................3
Provision related to contracts of employment:............................................................................3
Provision relating to work life balance:.......................................................................................3
Provision relating to discrimination:............................................................................................4
Provision relating to unfair dismissal:.........................................................................................5
QUESTION 2: Sally’s Shoes...........................................................................................................5
(a) Advising Kathy of her legal rights in relation of consumer protection law in this scenario:.5
(b) Explaining to the shop manager that each of comment in relation of refusal of refund may
fail in law.....................................................................................................................................7

QUESTION 1
Provision related to contracts of employment:
Contract of employment is one of the most important thing in every organization where
employer perform agreement with employee and allow them to work fairly and legally. It is very
clear that contract of employment keep both, employer as well as employee safe from any kind
of illegal activity. Every employer must stick to the contract and its key element until and unless
employee decided to leave and employee have responsibility to provide notice before leaving to
maintain legal process between both parties. Under Employment Contract law UK, employer can
not delay agreement after binding an agreement with employee. In the case of Albert, lack of
employment contract have risked his legal rights, here Albert can not file lawsuit against DIY
shop or salesperson because contract have not completed.
There is no legal requirement to form an contract of employment, it is completely choice
of employee to work under employer without legal contract. Under Employment Act, it is highly
recommended for both employer and employee to form legal contract for long term safety.
Albert do not carry any right because employment contract is not available with him, although he
secure other basic right which can help him to stand against shop or salesperson. The
Employment Contract law cover every important provision related to employment process
including legal right of employee and unfair dismissal of employee.
Provision relating to work life balance:
Under Work Life Balance Policy, every employee have right to manage their work and
person time. Work life balance means employer need to create a life balance policy that allow
employee to manage their personal time as well, there are many cases where employee work
more than working hour which means working odd hours disturb life balance of employee
especially when they are parent.
Under Employment Right Act 1996, Government of the UK have provided cretin roles
and responsibility to employer to balance workload with employee, even in private sector,
employer can stop employee to leave after finishing their working hour. In the case of Albert,
there are many employees who were working beyond their working hours which means
employer have violated Work Life Balance Policy of the UK. However, if employer is providing
benefit for working extra then it is choice of employee to work beyond their working hour. In

Albert case, shop or salesperson have violated certain policy of Work Life Balance Policy, these
are;
 Parental leave: parental leave is been provided to those employees who is a parent and
work for child's welfare, under Work Life Balance Policy, they secure right to paid leave.
Employer can not force them to work extra hours and employee can create a balance
between work and their life.
 Exceptional leave: Exceptional leave employee have right to take leave in the case of
emergency which means employer can not stop them to leave even during working hours
if there is any emergency. Exceptional leaves are only for emergency situation, employee
can not take this leave until there is emergency.
Provision relating to discrimination:
Discrimination is serious issue in the workplace, if employee face any kind of
discrimination then employer will fall under great legal issue. Discrimination often happen
because of age, status, culture and belief, while in employment process, employee may face any
kind of discrimination which lead to demotivation and impact their performance. In the case of
Albert, shop owner or salesperson ask him to leave because he is not capable to perform job
despite with his age. It is clear discrimination happened with Albert that impact their
employment contract, Under Equality Act 2010, Albert have right to file case against shop or
salesperson. There are certain basic right of Albert which keep him safe during the process of
employment, every employee secure basic employment right in which standing against
discrimination is one of their right.
 Failure to comply: as Albert have faced discrimination in the workplace regarding their
age, then he can file lawsuit against salesperson, but he has to compile with policy and
procedure of Equality Act 2010. False claim against employer may lead to breaching and
misuse of employee right and equality act.
 Ageism in the workplace: The Equality Act 2010 includes provision for age
discrimination where ageism is considered as serious discrimination act in the workplace
that can impact morale and motivation of employee. Albert need examine his right when
is faced ageism in the workplace and asked to leave.

Provision relating to unfair dismissal:
Unfair dismissal means employer removed employee without any notice or without
concern of employee, under Employment Right Act 1996, employer unfairly dismissal any
employee or delay their payment. In the case of Albert, violation of Employment Right Act 1996
can be seen where employee have breached right of employee two times, these are:
Unfair dismissal: Under Employment Right Act 1996, employer can not remove employee
which means shop or salesperson can not remove Albert until notice is been provided or Albert
have performed something that push employer to terminate employee. It is very clear that, Albert
was asked to leave because he was not suitable for the job title which means he can not work
effectively because of age. Here salesperson have violated legal right of Albert which allow him
to file lawsuit against shop or salesperson.
Delay in payment: Under Employment Right Act 1996, employer can not delay or cancel
payment of employee which means they can not delay salary and wages until there is solid proof
against delay in payment. In the case of Albert, shop or salesperson have delayed his payment
with 7 days which means Albert can file lawsuit against shop or salesperson. It is very clear that
in the process of employment, Albert have faced violation of certain rights, from age
discrimination to unfair dismissal, employee will going to face serious issue that will impact
their business.
QUESTION 2: Sally’s Shoes
(a) Advising Kathy of her legal rights in relation of consumer protection law in this scenario:
Consumer protection Act 1987 of UK is aligned with assuring the protection to the
customers from the damage that has been created to them. Consumers face the damage in
relation of getting poor quality products and often faces unfair practices at the time of purchasing
the products. Therefore, consumer protection act assures protection to the customer within
ensuring them certain rights that can be used by them in order to bear the loss and getting justice.
In similar manner, Kathy can get justice. Here are the legal rights that can be used by Kathy in
against of Sally's shoes:
The right to be informed- This legal right of the consumer protection act is entitled with
informing the pros and cons of the products to the customer. Shopkeepers sales their products
without informing customers about the negative elements of the products. In such case, the
consumer did not become aware about the product and the loss has been faced by the consumer.

Same has been happened in Kathy's case. She did not aware about the damage in the heels. She
bought that heels and afterwards she got to know that, the heels are damaged. The shopkeeper
must inform about this parameter to Kathy so, on the basis of that, Kathy takes the decision in
relation of making purchase. However, the heels began to work loose after dancing this is stating
that, the product was not of good quality. Thus, with the help of this right. Kathy is able to make
the complaint in the consumer court as no information has been assured to her while buying of
shoes.
The right to re-dress- This right is one of the most important right that can be used by Kathy in
terms of getting the compensation. This right is concerned about providing compensation to the
consumer if the consumer has faced the damage or experience unsatisfied service. In such
situation, the shopkeeper are aligned to bear that loss that has been faced by the customers. In
similar manner, it is important for the shopkeeper of sally's shoes to refund the payment of
Kathy. As this right clearly suggest this and with the help of this right Kathy can make appeal in
consumer court. In court the hearing will be take place and the final discussion end up at the
making repayment to Kathy in the against of damage product. Otherwise, whole shop has to face
the penalties.
Right to consumer education- The products and services that has been given to the consumes.
For that particular product and service the consumer must be educated so, in specific way the
product or service can be used. As many times, due to not having proper knowledge of using
products the damage has been created. Therefore, it is the duty of the shopkeepers that, they must
guide consumer in relation of this. If the shopkeeper does not perform this then it creates damage
for customers and threat for shopkeeper. Same has been happened in Kathy's case, May-be she
was not aware about using heels and might there be a possibility that the shoes that has been
purchased by Kathy cannot be used while dancing. This, information regarding the product needs
to be give to Kathy so, she can do further activities accordingly. In the case study, no information
has been highlighted in this context. This is clearly stating that, No consumer education in
context of shoes has been given to Kathy and along with this, no further information has been
assured to her. Thus, in accordance with the consumer protection act Kathy have this right of
receiving consumer education and this right has been exploited here. Therefore, Kathy can make
appeal in court and get the refund in relation of that damaged product.

(b) Explaining to the shop manager that each of comment in relation of refusal of refund may fail
in law
In accordance with the Consumer right act 2015 of UK all the refusal parameters by the
managers are deniable and the refund need to be given to customers. Here is the description of
the CRA 2015
Consumer right act 2015 provides the complete opportunity to the customers in order to
reject such goods that are faulty, damaged and not offering quality services to the customer.
Furthermore, this right enable consumer to get refund over the goods and services and if
shopkeeper refuse to refund then, strict action has been taken by the consumer court. Often this
right enable consumer to take the appeal from the different stages. If the consumer is not
satisfied with the response of district court then the appeal can be made to high court.
Furthermore, if consumer is not satisfied with the response of high court then, the appeal can be
made in supreme court. Thus, in this manner consumer gets the right to make appeal again and
again till the satisfaction and justice has not been received. Therefore, the refusal of managers
are failed here. The major reason behind this is that, there product was damaged. Often, no
information has been given to Kathy in relation of this. Furthermore, no education in relation of
using the shoes has been given to Kathy. Therefore, in accordance with this law the refund needs
to be done.
The another major aspect related to consumer right act 2015 in UK says that the
consumer does not get the refund in case:
 When consumer knows that the product is faulty and still makes purchase.
 Instead of complaining to the shopkeeper or manager, consumer repair goods by themselves
and creates more damage.
 The consumer is no longer interested in the product and wants different size and colour
according to their preference.
The above points are the major reason when refund can be refused. However, in Kathy's case
these situations has not arrived. Therefore, the refusal of manager does not work here & he needs
to make refund.