Employment Law Report: Analysis of Case Studies in Employment Law

This comprehensive employment law report analyzes two case scenarios involving Kitchen Furniture Company Ltd. The first scenario focuses on unfair dismissal, exploring issues such as lack of warning, decisions made without HR guidance, and outdated HR policies. It examines the strengths a...Read More

qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwerty
uiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasd
fghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzx
cvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmq
wertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyui
opasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfg
hjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxc
vbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmq
wertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyui
opasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfg
hjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxc
vbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmq
wertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyui
EMPLOYMENT LAW ASSIGNMENT

TABLE OF CONTENTS
SCENARIO 1.............................................................................................................................3
Introduction............................................................................................................................3
Findings..................................................................................................................................3
Conclusion..............................................................................................................................4
Strength and weakness of company’s case............................................................................5
Recommendation....................................................................................................................6
SCENARIO 2.............................................................................................................................7
Introduction............................................................................................................................7
Analysis and Findings of the case..........................................................................................7
Conclusion..............................................................................................................................9
Recommendations..................................................................................................................9
REFERENCES.........................................................................................................................11

SCENARIO 1
Introduction
Unfair dismissal can be referred to a situation in which appropriate opportunity is not
provided to claimant for proving his innocence. In present scenario same situation has been
presented along with the manner of dealing and taking out appropriate solution. In order to
conclude with corrective measure, the situation has been assessed in detail along with the
available legal provision as well as decision made in previous case laws. Lastly
recommendations have been provided in order to deal with the similar situation in future.
Findings
Unfair dismissal and wrong dismissal claims
Every individual has a right to get a second chance but in present scenario Jack has not given
her a warning which is not right. Thus, the legal issue evolved is unfair dismissal as second
chance was not provided to Lucy, even though she has accepted the mistake but Jack has not
listened to her and starts shouting at her.
Major decision has been taken by line executives with no clear guidance
It has been seen in the present scenario that the important decision of the company are taken
by executives with no clear guidance. The same implies that decisions are taken without
having conversation with Pete who is the HR executive. It can be assessed that the decision
of dismissal of Lucy was taken without having discussion with other senior executives.
Further, it is very important for the company to take decisions with legal guidance as one
wrong decision can have negative impact on company. Along with this it has been assessed
that there are only some policies which are up to date and procedures for administration of
human resources and remaining are obsolete policies.
Outdated formal disciplinary and formal grievance procedure
Another legal issue is implementation of obsoleteformal disciplinary and formal grievance
process from the website of government without any alterations. The company should adopt
latest procedure as it will assist company in taking appropriate decisions relating to
organisation.

No formal training to deal with difficult issues
It is stated by Kavanagh and McRae(2017), employees of the organisation should be provided
appropriate training related to addressing of difficult issues. If employees are not provided
with the appropriate training than they will get panic in difficult situations like in present
case. Lucy has no idea that the microwave is for display purpose only due to which she has
tried to warm coffee in it which leads to fire in showroom and due to no training she was not
able to handle the situation in appropriate manner.Hence, if training relating to usage of
appliance was provided than the incident which had occurs could have been avoided.
Conclusion
According to Howe, Berg and Farbenblum(2018), wrongful dismissal can be defined as the
dismissal of violation of agreement. In case, if someone is dismissed unethically he/she can
proclaim reimbursement for all financial as well as other benefits that would have been
obtained had they been dismissed in obedience with agreement. The same implies that he/she
had they remained employed till the end of their time period of notice or till the finish of
agreement’s specified term. Further, few contracts might define fixed amount which will be
compensated at the end of contract officially, either as a substitute to giving notice or as the
way of termination.On the other hand, there are some agreements which specifya fixed
amount which is to be compensated when there is dismissal in violation of contract.
In order to refute the claims of Unfair and wrongful claims in case they reach the Tribunal,
the company requires proving the negligence or irresponsible behaviour of the
employee(Millington, 2015). As in present case Lucy did not informed HR manager or any
other executive after happening of the accident. Moreover, one cannot prove the innocence
only on the basis that he or she was panic due to accident. With accordance to Mohamedand
Ali(2014), a responsible employee requirestaking decision with patience as well as requires
informing seniors in case he or she is not able to manage the situation. In present case
company might attempt to resolve the case outside the Tribunal, through providing a second
chance to Lucy. Further, company could end up the employment contract through providing
predetermined or reasonable amount of Lucy in order to withdraw the case from Tribunal.

Strength and weakness of company’s case
The strengths of present case are:
Irresponsible behaviour of Lucy:- When she saw that the fire was extinguishing, she got
panic and without seeing what is in the bucket, Lucy has thrown it on fire due to which the
fire has spread all over the showroom. It can be understood that proper training is not
provided because of which she has used the oven but it is the responsibility of her that seeing
the thing at least once before throwing on fire. Thus, if Lucy has seen that there was cleaner
fluid in the bucket and not the water the incident could be avoided.
Weaknesses of the case are:
Unavailability of training to workers
One of the main weaknesses in the present case scenario is the lack of training to employees
regarding utilisation of equipments as well as how to react in difficult situation. Since no
training has been provided to the employees due to which accident occurs. As per study of
Rawling(2015) it is extremely significant that all the workers should be provided training
related to the area in which they are appointed along with training relating to general training
for usage of appliance. Further, as training is not given in the current case due to which Lucy
does not knows that the oven was only for display purpose and not for use which leads to fire
in entire showroom and dismissed of job by Jack. Further, if accidents like this happens again
and again than the company will not be able to survive for long time as they have to rebuild
its buildings or showrooms.
Main decisions are taken without clear guidance
Other weakness relating to company in the current case is main decisions of the company are
taken by line executives without any clear guidance or following the procedure. The same
implies that line executives of Kitchen Furniture Ltd take key decisions without involving
manger or senior executive of the department that is decisions of human resource department
are taken by line mangers without considering Pete, HR manager. One decision can impact
the overall functioning of the company so it is very important to take the major decisions by
communicating departmental manger (Steingold, 2017).
Few up to date policies

It is seen that the organisation has only few policies up to date as per latest trends. It is stated
by Taylor and Emir(2015), that, in order to operate in efficient manner it is vital to implement
updated policies as obsolete policies can be an obstacle in achieving the organisational goal.
Further, it is stated by Painter and Holmes(2015) that, if the company is operating with
policies which are not modified it will not be able to compete with its competitors and can
also decrease its revenue.
Recommendation
In order to prevent cases from going to Tribunal Company should attempt for fair dismissal
instead of unfair and wrong dismissal(Howe, 2016). A reasonable dismissal should be based
on one of the five grounds. These are: person’s conduct, their ability or skills for the job,
redundancy, a legislative duty or restriction segregation the employment being continued or
due to the substantial reason which defends the dismissal. Along with the requirement of
likely reasonable reason as a baseline, managers should also make sure that the dismissal
procedure followed by them is appropriate. The same implies that disciplinary policy and
ACAS Code of Practice should be followed by employers. As per study of Freyens and
Gong(2017), if ACAS code is not followed it can leads to 25% enhancement to any damages
rewarded to a wrongly dismissed individual.
The instance along with variants of likely fair grounds relating to dismissal of a worker
is discussed below:
 Conduct: The behaviour of personnel is acutely undesirable, for instance, constant
lateness or drinking at work.
 Ability: Workers do not have the precise aptitude to do the job or is often absent
because of illness.
 Redundancy: Where there is inadequate work or personnel is eradicating completely.
 Other defendable reason: This is known as catch-all grounds but it must be utilised in
a careful manner, since the manager has to illustrate that the reason for dismissal is
right, for instance, reformation of main organisation.
 Legitimacy: In order to evade breaching of rules, such as where the loss of their
driving licence implying that the taxi driver is not entitle to drive officially.
Elsbach (2014),specifies that, the ACAS code of exercise on disciplinary as well as
grievances process can be practised where a manger is dismissing a worker for misbehaviour
or poor recital.However the implementation of the ACAS code is not so apparent where the

grounds for the activities reduce within some other reasonable reason(Davidov and Eshet,
2015). For instance, what if a worker is dismissed due to breakdown in working association?
The decision was taken is case law of Phoenix House Ltd v Stockman and another (EAT)that
employers are not required to follow ACAS code in case a substantial reason is available for
dismissal. In stockman, the EAT embraces that managers does not have to consider the
ACAS code when there is other reasonable grounds for dismissal. The decision is divisive
since it emerges to conflict with the EAT decision in Lund v St Edmund’s School
Canterbury. Further, this conflict implies that it is only subject matter of time prior to be
observed another case on the application of the ACAS code where there has been breakdown
in faith and confidence.
SCENARIO 2
Introduction
Gender transformation is accountable as one of the most critical issues faced by an
organization. The reason behind same is that a manager has to take decision from employee
perspective as well as organization perspective prior to conclude any final decision. Present
case study is relating to same issue. Further, a detail discussion regarding handling similar
issue has been presented in order to provide justice of employee as well as to organization by
assisting in taking appropriate decision.
Analysis and Findings of the case
Davidson (2016) asserts that gender transformation is very unusual case, as one has to think
twice before reacting to this decision. As per study of Ahmed, Monem, Delaney and
Ng(2017), it is not easy to accept these kinds of changes by colleagues. It is possible that
other employee might assist the management to suspend him as they do not feel comfortable
in continuing their job. Further, if he desires that colleagues accept him it is necessary to
make equal effort by Ross. For example, he is very rigid in nature that is he does not like to
have communication with other colleagues in the department. He should change this nature
and make attempt to communicate with everyone and make familiar relationship with them.
Moreover, he can also organise a meeting to tell everyone about his gender transforming.
Thus, if he wants that he is been accepted by their colleagues in after the transformation of
his gender he has to make good relationships. Further, in order to modify the reaction of
colleagues or to determine whether they will accept him or not, an informal meeting should

be conducted and discussion could be made among other employees relating to situation and
solution relating to same can also be discussed. It is also necessary to assess the condition of
Ross prior to taking any financial decision, as if the organization in which he works cannot
accept this change, how can one assume that other will accept this significant change
(Drydakis,(2017).
Manner in which line manager should deal with the issue
As per study of Jones (2016), transgender workers look mainly to HR to help them in
navigating the modifications which are predictable during the transformation procedure as
well as to assist with concerns that co-workers might express.Further, the level of success in a
transformation is affected by an individual’s capability to retaina stable job and income in the
phase of the procedure and by the level of assistance in the work atmosphere.
The HR of company should support Ross as well as legally protect the firm through
complying the provision of anti-discrimination law and through observing the developing
case law along with future legislation.In addition to this, HR must make sure that those
protections are integrated into the strategies, practices, training and communication
inventiveness.
Metroline West Ltd v Ajaj; Ajaj v Metroline West Ltd (EAT),
This case gives a helpful recap for personnel that deduce a worker is bogus sickness. In case
of Metroline West Ltd v Ajaj; Ajaj v Metroline West Ltd (EAT), the EAT confirmed that a
staff who makes up or overstates the effects of, an injury or sickness to take fakeill violating
the implied term of faith and confidence, can be dismissed or delinquency. The same will
reiterates for workers that pulling a sickie is misbehaviour, rather than an ability problem.
Moreover, the same implies that a dismissal for fake illness should be based on justified
reasons with justified research.
In present case there is no such fake or bogus sickness, thus the employee can claim on the
company in case it dismiss the employee on an unfair basis. Thus, the line manager is
responsible for providing information related to the company’s policies and guidelines for
administrating a gender transformation must be broadly available for workers, supervisors
and executives along with HR experts (Supanti, Butcher and Fredline, 2015). Even meeting
should be organized and request relating to same should be made to higher authority in order

to support the decision of the employee and to make attempt to relieve him from distress and
debility due to gender change.
In Australia, a national and state law involves equal employment opportunity and anti-
discrimination in the workplace. Mitchell(2017) asserts that, it is necessary to build up a
workplace free from inequity as well as from harassment. Further, employer should
understand its rights and duties under human rights and anti-discrimination law. Through
applying effectual anti discrimination along with anti-harassment process in the company the
productivity and efficiency can be enhanced(Nicolson, 2015).
Conclusion
It can be concluded from above discussion that it is not possible that to accept the person
immediately after transforming by every client. The reason behind same is that they might
feel weird or uncomfortable to communicate or to work with same person. Even it today’s
independent scenario; people are bounded or fixed with old thoughts, thus probability exist
that client do not accept Ross after changing his gender. If clients have any problem to having
deal with Ross the company can change the sales representative for specific clients.
Moreover, he can be sent to have a deal with new clients. In addition, in case he is not
comfortable than he will be asked to do the inner work of the company. If Ross is not
satisfied with the same or if company is facing any difficulty in doing so than he should be
asked to leave the job.
Recommendations
The following changes are recommended:
Amendment in dress policy: It is important to change the dress code policy for employee
changing gender as they will be uncomfortable in the dress of opposite gender(Lessem and
Schieffer 2016). In the present case as Ross is changing his gender so company has to change
the dress code policy for him for example stating that men should wear dress jeans and
women have to wear trousers or sari as per her wish. Organisation can also consider that
employees can wear dress according to their full-time gender appearance(Waddell 2016).
Other Changes:According to Powers and Ellis(2014), the Company should make sure that
employees who have experienced gender transition are also included in the firm’s affinity
groups, local outreach efforts, interior programming and concerned training. Thus, the

company should try their best to make feel comfortable in the company but if Ross is not
satisfied he can leave the job. Since it is only the last option.
Making employees aware about their obligations regarding sick leave:With accordance to
Castles, Ozkul and Cubas(2015), the employees who are not able of attending the job due to
the illness should telephone into their department and tell their line executive by before 10.00
am on the first morning of sickness. In case the sickness is serious and will last for one week
then he/she has to give medical certificate to the company about their illness. Moreover,
Rudin, et.al(2016), specifies that, if the employee is not able of speaking personally on
telephone than in that case he should ask his relative or wife to tell the department about it. In
present case, Ross Bert not informs about his illness or being absent on the work earlier, it
should be considered as unofficialnonattendance under the disciplinary process.
Further, it is to be considered as Ross Bert is desired to have his gender change due to which
he has to go for regular sessions and have to take leave from the company. For the same, he
can take special leave that is the company provides an opportunity to have a leave in case
anyone is having personal problem by having conversation with manager.


REFERENCES
Ahmed, A., Monem, R.M., Delaney, D. and Ng, C., 2017. Gender diversity in corporate
boards and continuous disclosure: Evidence from Australia. Journal of Contemporary
Accounting & Economics, 13(2), pp.89-107.
Castles, S., Ozkul, D. and Cubas, M. eds., 2015. Social transformation and migration:
National and local experiences in South Korea, Turkey, Mexico and Australia. Springer.
Davidov, G. and Eshet, E., 2015. Intermediate approaches to unfair dismissal
protection. Industrial Law Journal, 44(2), pp.167-193.
Davidson, M.J., 2016. Gender and communication at work. Routledge
Drydakis, N., 2017. Trans employees, transitioning, and job satisfaction. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 98, pp.1-16.
Elsbach, K.D., 2014. Organizational perception management. Psychology Press.
Freyens, B.P. and Gong, X., 2017. Judicial decision making under changing legal standards:
The case of dismissal arbitration. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 133,
pp.108-126.
Howe, J., 2016. Rethinking Job Security: A Comparative Analysis of Unfair Dismissal Law in
the UK, Australia and the USA. Routledge.
Howe, J., Berg, L. and Farbenblum, B., 2018. Unfair Dismissal Law and Temporary Migrant
Labour in Australia. Fed. L. Rev., 46, p.19.
Jones, T., 2016. Female-to-Male (FtM) Transgender Employees in Australia. In Sexual
Orientation and Transgender Issues in Organizations (pp. 101-116). Springer, Cham.
Kavanagh, M. and McRae, E., 2017. Employment law: Protecting vulnerable workers
amendment to fair work act. Governance Directions, 69(4), p.241.
Lessem, R. and Schieffer, A., 2016. Transformation management: Towards the integral
enterprise. Routledge.
Millington, P., 2015. Employment Law 2015. Oxford University Press, USA.
Mitchell, R., 2017. The Evolution of the Idea of a Labour Law Subject in Australian Legal
Scholarship:(And What Was Regulating'Labour'or'Work'Before Labour Law as We Know
it)?. Sage.
Mohamed, A. and Ali, A., 2014. Dismissal from employment and remedies (pp. 1-791).
LexisNexis Malaysia Sdn Bhd.
Nicolson, P., 2015. Gender, Power and Organization: A psychological perspective on life at
work. Routledge.
Painter, R. and Holmes, A., 2015. Cases and materials on employment law. Oxford
University Press, USA.

Powers, B. and Ellis, A., 2014. A manager's guide to sexual orientation in the workplace.
Routledge.
Rawling, M., 2015. Regulating precarious work in Australia. Alternative LJ, 40, p.252.
Rudin, J., Yang, Y., Ruane, S., Ross, L., Farro, A. and Billing, T., 2016. Transforming
attitudes about transgender employee rights. Journal of Management Education, 40(1),
pp.30-46.
Steingold, F.S., 2017. The employer's legal handbook: Manage your employees & workplace
effectively. Nolo.
Supanti, D., Butcher, K. and Fredline, L., 2015. Enhancing the employer-employee
relationship through corporate social responsibility (CSR) engagement. International Journal
of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 27(7), pp.1479-1498.
Taylor, S. and Emir, A., 2015. Employment law: an introduction. Oxford University Press,
USA.
Waddell, D., Creed, A., Cummings, T. and Worley, C., 2016. Organisational change:
Development and transformation. Cengage AU.