MER: Managing Employee Relations Practical Assignment - Role Play

This assignment presents a role-play scenario focused on managing employee relations within International Organic Foods (IOF). The scenario involves a pregnant employee, Chloe, who is seeking maternity leave but faces resistance from her supervisor, Bruno Caron, due to the absence of maternity leave details in her contract. The role-play involves a discussion between Chloe and Nick, a trade union representative, who explains the legal aspects of maternity leave, the Equality Act 2010, and related case laws, such as British Airways vs. Starmer and Visa International Service Association vs. Paul. Nick advises Chloe on her rights and the company's obligations under employment legislation, emphasizing that she is entitled to maternity leave regardless of contract details. The role-play highlights issues of discrimination and the importance of adhering to employment laws, providing Chloe with the knowledge to address her situation effectively. The assignment is a practical application of understanding employment law in a workplace scenario.

Managing Employee
Relation

Table of Contents
Role Play................................................................................................................................2

Role Play
Nick: Hello!!
Chloe: Hey!!
Nick: All well?
Chloe: No, I am not satisfied with the working environment and policy of International
Organic Foods.
Nick: Why so? If you are facing any problem then let me know, maybe I solve the query, if
you want.
Chloe: Sure sir!
Chloe: I am pregnant and want to take Maternity leave. But earlier I am not aware of such
leaves and that is why it is not mentioned in my contract. But when I discuss the things with
Bruno Caron, he threatened me and told me that I am not entitled to take any maternity leave
and instead of this I have to take annual leave.
Nick: Okay.. but as per the contract it is true and your boss is correct but on the other side, as
per the employment legislation it is necessary to offer the Maternity leave to every lady. If
you don’t have any problem may I talk with your boss?
Chloe: No… there is no need to talk with Bruno because he keeps changing the employees
and delegate different roles and responsibilities for which an employee is not preparing. Also,
I want to know that company focusing on employee retention strategies but there is no
positive working environment that promotes me to work here.
Nick: don’t be so harsh and overthink Chloe. I know you spent a good time in this company
but there are some rules and regulations which abide by employees as well as employers. In
the same way, Bruno is just complying the same. I know it is not good to threaten the
employees because it is against the law and any employee may file a case against him. So
take care of these things. Apart from the behavior of Bruno, I am also aware of your
employment issue which needs to be resolved.
Chloe: Yeah...Definitely!! I know you are the trade union representative of UNITE and only
you provide the solution to my problem.

Nick: Of course!! I am here to solve the problem and want to know the working environment.
I also ensure that the companies are adhering to employment law and other legislation or not.
Here I found that employers are mistreated with employees which are not true. That is why
there is a need to take action.
Chloe: yes sir! I am expecting a fair solution from you. As it is written in-laws that if you are
working in a company for more than 1 year, then a candidate is eligible to take advantage of
laws which is true. The same I am expecting from the company but due to no records in the
contract, I fail to take any action against the firm.
Nick: I completely agree with you, Chloe. If the company is at fault then you are equally
liable for the same.
Chloe: How?
Nick: You should completely aware of the laws and legislation especially employment
legislation which includes equal pay, fair treatment, remuneration, and extra benefits, etc. If
you are aware of such things then you included your maternity benefits in the contract and
now the company has to pay the leaves instead of forcing you to take annual leaves. On the
other side, the company is at fault because laws are equally made for every company. If the
firm complies with laws then it has to adhere to all the laws including equal pay, fair
treatment, maternity and paternity leaves, etc.
Chloe: Okay. I understand the issue now. But please if you can to solve this employee issue/
Nick: As per the law prescribe under Employment legislation for Statutory Maternity Leave,
all employed pregnant women are entitled to 52 weeks of maternity leave and there is no
matter how long they have worked for their employer. On the other side, an employee also
takes at least 2 weeks after the birth of a child. So, as per the law, it is mandatory to provide
maternity leave to their employee so you are liable for the same. Instead of taking any annual
leaves. Even the government also offered leave to those employees who recently join a job
and eligible for Ordinary Maternity Leave which is last for 26 weeks. Hence, it reflected that
even though there is nothing mention in the contract but you are eligible for the leaves and
the company has to pay the same.
Chloe: Thank you so much!!! I think I should discuss all the things with Bruno so that he will
also understand the things in a better manner and offer a solution as well.

Nick: I also want to share that as per the Equality Act, 2010 discrimination law is set out in
which no organization will discriminate against people on any basis whether it is related to
disability, gender, race, or religion. So, Chloe you should be aware of your rights and
responsibilities, like as per the Equality Act, laws related to pregnancy and maternity
discrimination are governed under this. Hence, it protects women against direct
discrimination so, Chloe has also used this legislation for protection against it.
Chloe: Okay, I understand that whatever Bruno performs with me is not appropriate. It is
wrong in the eyes of law. So it will be better to understand the things and try to solve them by
the law.
Nick: Yes, for the same I would like to let you know about the similar cases along with the
judgment.
Chloe: it’s a pleasure! As I am not having enough knowledge of such cases so I would be
grateful to understand things minutely.
Nick: (smiles)…! Have you listened to the name of British Airways?
Chloe: Yes, top airways in the UK.
Nick: right! So your case is quite relatable to the pilot of British Airways which was
happened in 2005. It was direct discrimination where the employer also refuses to allow an
employee to work for 50% of a full-time contract. But on the other side, there was a contract
where it is mention to offer leaves under maternity leaves.
Chloe: Will you please provide complete detail of this case?
Nick: yes. I am about to tell you.
Chloe: okay.
Nick: Mrs. Starmer was a co-pilot for British Airways and she was applied to work 50% of
full time as she had child care responsibilities. This is also mentioned in their contract and
that is why she applied for the same. But the company refused and allow her to work for 75%
because of the extra burden and the firm is unable to recruit the extra employees. That is why
50% of work is converted by 75%. Also, British Airways introduces the evidence at the
employment tribunal where the decision was also justified on safety grounds after refusing
the request of the co-pilot. So, Mrs. Starmer also files a case against the company and by
Employment Appeal Tribunal, it is proved that the requirement of the firm is discriminatory.

As a result, Tribunal took into account statistics produced and took the position in which it is
stated that women generally have primary child care responsibility. Thus, Employment
Tribunal considers that firm could not justify the discrimination and that is why British
Airways should grant 50% of full time to Mrs. Starmer. Lastly, the company offers the same
as per the legislation.
Chloe: It's perfectly fine!! If it is written in the contract to take a leave as maternity then how
a firm can change its decision.
Nick: you are right. But as an employer, they have to think about the company’s success as
well and that is why took a decision. I have another case which will solve your doubts. May
I?
Chloe: Yeah sure. I am also eager to know the facts related to such cases.
Nick: That’s nice. The case is related to Visa International Service Association vs Paul in
which an employee (Paul) was dismissed because of not notify their employer about
maternity leaves. Thus, the company hires a new employee in place of Paul while she was on
maternity leave and also considers herself well qualified than Paul. Thus this case is related to
dismissal during pregnancy and that is why it falls under direct discrimination. As a result,
the decision comes from the Employment Tribunal in which it is mentioned that no company
is liable to take such a decision and it is against the law. As a result, the company has to pay
all the amount and vacant the post which belongs to Paul. So, it is reflected that in the eyes of
law, everyone is equal and the company does not have a right to dismiss their employee
without any appropriate facts.
Chloe: This is correct and I am also thinking that as per the Equality Act, 2010 I am also
eligible for taking leaves as per maternity because 26 weeks leaves are allotted by the
government. That is why International Organic Foods did not refuse me to take leaves.
Nick: Yes. I also think the same but it is not mentioned in the contract but still, I try my
best to discuss it with the employer.
Chloe: Thanks Sir. It was really a nice to meet you.
Nick: Same here.