ESG and sustainability: employment issues

This Overview provides a summary of the content in the subtopic, ESG and sustainability: employment issues. Environmental, social and governance (ESG) considerations, along with sustainability, are broad concepts and in the business context generally include the impact an entity is having on the environment and society. This content aims to help practitioners advising businesses by providing an overview of the many pervasive ESG issues in the employment context and also signposts other relevant materials. The Overview considers terminology such as ‘corporate responsibility’ (CR) and ‘corporate social responsibility’ (CSR), as well as considering a wide variety of established areas of employment law and practice that can be relevant in this context, such as gender and other pay gaps, diversity and inclusion, human rights, modern slavery and human trafficking, corporate governance, health and wellbeing, data protection and pay. It also sets out details of the various employment-related sustainability clauses produced by The Chancery Lane Project (TCLP), which are reproduced with permission.

Understanding the terminology

The terminology used in this area is extensive. Terms such as ‘sustainable business’, ‘responsible business’, ‘corporate responsibility’ (CR) or ‘corporate social responsibility’

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest Employment News

Employment weekly highlights—19 February 2026

This edition of Employment weekly highlights includes: (1) analysis by Elizabeth Ovey of Radcliffe Chambers of a recent EAT decision confirming that part-time army reservists may qualify as ‘workers’ for the purposes of the Part-time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000, (2) a Court of Appeal decision confirming when policy documents are deemed to be incorporated into employment contracts, (3) an EAT decision on the requirement to analyse the difference between treatment because of a protected belief and treatment because of the effects of the manifestation of that belief, (4) a High Court judicial review decision dismissing challenges to the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) interim guidance on single-sex facilities, (5) a tribunal decision on whether the exclusion of trustees from whistleblowing protections breaches the ECHR, (6) an EAT unfair dismissal decision due to serious defects in the internal appeal process despite the dismissal decision falling within the range of reasonable responses, (7) updates to various Practice Notes to reflect ERA 2025 changes from 18 February 2026, (8) dates for your diary, and (9) other news, trackers and resources of interest to employment practitioners.

DBT extends effective period of picketing and industrial action ballots codes of practice

The Department for Business and Trade (DBT) has extended the effective period of the statutory Codes of Practice on Picketing and Industrial action ballots and notice to employers. The DBT published draft revised Codes of Practice on 9 January 2026 which were set to come into force on 18 February 2026. However, both draft codes are still in the process of being revised, and therefore the existing Codes of Practice will remain effective ‘until such time as any revisions come into force’.

Part-time army reservists as ‘workers’—whether less favourable treatment (Advocate-General for Scotland v Milroy)

Pensions analysis: The claimant, a part-time reservist, brought a complaint under the Part-time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000 alleging he had been treated less favourably than a full-time regular soldier as respects (a) for pension purposes, his service prior to 1 April 2015 and (b) his daily rate of pay. The Employment Tribunal found in the claimant’s favour. The Advocate-General for Scotland appealed, contending that the claimant was not a ‘worker’ within the Regulations, his daily rate of pay did not constitute less favourable treatment and his treatment as respects pay and prior service was not on the ground that he was a part-time worker. The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) dismissed the appeal, holding that the tribunal below had not erred in law. The case applies the recognised principles for determining whether a person without an employment contract is a ‘worker’ to the new context of the armed forces. It is potentially relevant to all armed forces reservists. Written by Elizabeth Ovey, barrister at Radcliffe Chambers.

CJC launches consultation on AI use in court document preparation

The Civil Justice Council (CJC) has launched a consultation on the use of artificial intelligence (AI) by legal representatives in the preparation of court documents. The consultation, conducted by the CJC's 'Use of AI in Preparing Court Documents' Working Group, considers whether rules are required to regulate the use of AI in drafting pleadings, witness statements and expert reports. The working group was established at the CJC's annual strategy meeting in January 2025 and is chaired by the Deputy Head of Civil Justice, Lord Justice Birss. Its members include High Court judges, CJC members and representatives from the Bar Council and the Law Society. The consultation closes on 14 April 2026. Following the consultation, the CJC will publish a final report.