The ‘protected period’ concept does not apply to claims of discrimination on grounds of having taken maternity leave (as opposed to discrimination on grounds or pregnancy or pregnancy-related illness), so such a claim could be pursued, in principle. Under section 18(4) of the Equality Act 2010 (EqA 2010), a person (A) discriminates against a woman if A treats her unfavourably because she is exercising or seeking to exercise, or has exercised or sought to exercise, the right to ordinary or additional maternity leave (maternity discrimination). Under EqA 2010, s 18(2), A discriminates against a woman if, in the protected period (emphasis added) in relation to a pregnancy of hers, A treats her

For further information about an employee’s entitlement to Statutory Sick Pay (SSP) under the Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992 and the Statutory Sick Pay (General) Regulations 1982, SI 1982/894, see, generally, Practice Note: Sick pay. In the event of a dispute over an employee’s entitlement to SSP, the employee can apply to HMRC for a determination. Only HMRC can determine such a dispute, subject to appeal. The employment tribunal will have no jurisdiction over the dispute. Assuming, however, the employee’s entitlement to SSP is not disputed by the employer, and the claim is purely about the employer withholding all or part of the SSP due to the employee as an unlawful deduction from wages, the employment tribunal is likely to

When it comes to the question of who is liable in tort for the fraudulent/dishonest acts of an employee (and assuming that, aside from any potential criminal liability, the employee has been guilty of a tort towards the person injured), the employee as tortfeasor will be liable, and the employer may also be liable if it can be established that the employee, in committing the tort, acted within the scope of their authority or employment. Where a tort has been committed—employee liability As a general rule, an employee who commits a tort is liable in damages to the person injured, and his liability is not affected by the existence of a contract of employment or, where he commits the tort in the course of his employment and within the scope of his authority, by the existence of

An apprentice qualifies for the lower apprentice rate of the national minimum wage (NMW) (currently £3.50 per hour) if he is a worker who is: • either employed under: ◦ a contract of apprenticeship ◦ an apprenticeship agreement (within the meaning of section 32 of Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Act 2009 (ASCLA 2009) (now repealed, subject to transitional and saving provisions)), or ◦ an approved English apprenticeship agreement (within the meaning of ASCLA 2009, s A1(3)) • or treated as employed under a contract of apprenticeship, ie engaged in one of the following government arrangements: ◦ in England, Apprenticeships, Advanced Apprenticeships, Intermediate Level Apprenticeships, Advanced Level Apprenticeships or Trailblazer Apprenticeships ◦ in Scotland, Modern Apprenticeships ◦ in Northern Ireland, Apprenticeships NI ◦ in

By operation of law in the UK, most sorts of intellectual property (IP) rights created by employees in the course of their duties belong to the employer. This is reversed in relation to moral rights in artistic works, such as books, music or art, which belong to the employee unless the contract states otherwise. This means that the employee will have the right to be identified as the creator of the work and to object to it being distorted, but will not have any economic rights. This position arises pursuant to the relevant statutes governing that particular area of IP. For example, the general rule under section 11(1) of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA 1988) is that the author of a work is the first owner of any copyright

UPDATE: Since this Q&A was first published on 6 April, the HMRC guidance for employers: Claim for your employees’ wages through the coronavirus job retention scheme and guidance for employees: Check if your employer can use the coronavirus job retention scheme (first published on 26 March, and revised on 4 April) have been further revised on 9 April and 15 April 2020. The government also published a Treasury Direction on 15 April. For information on the revisions to the HMRC guidance made on 4 April, 9 April and 15 April 2020, and the Treasury Direction, see the following News Analyses: • HMRC publishes updated employer and employee guidance on Coronavirus (COVID-19) job retention scheme • HMRC publishes second update to employer and employee guidance on Coronavirus (COVID-19) Job Retention Scheme, and • Treasury gives legal effect to Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme and updates guidance a third time For information on the

Parental leave (being the unpaid parental leave, not to be confused with Shared Parental Leave) is governed by the Maternity and Parental Leave etc Regulations 1999 (MAPLE Regs 1999), SI 1999/3312. The default position under the MAPLE Regs 1999, SI 1999/3312, Sch 2, requires: • employees to give notice of their intention to take parental leave, specifying the dates that the leave will start and end, and • to give at least 21 days’ notice of the date on which the parental leave is to begin The MAPLE Regs 1999, SI 1999/3312, Sch 2, further goes on to set out the minimum period of leave that can be taken at any time (being a week), and that leave must be taken in blocks of weeks, not individual days (assuming that the child in question is not disabled). When it comes to postponing parental leave, MAPLE Regs

Whether the employer can treat the employee as having given one week’s notice only will depend on the wording of the employee’s employment contract. In most cases, the notice provision in the employment contract will require the employee to give a minimum period of notice, eg: • clause 13.2 of Precedent: Employment contract basic version, provides ‘You may terminate your employment at any time on giving to the Employer at least [one month’s] prior written notice’ • the various options within clause 3 of Precedent: Employment contract basic version, provides that the employment may be terminated ‘by either party giving to the other

If an employee has a baby before 6 April 2024 and returns from maternity leave after 6 April 2024, will she have enhanced redundancy protection during the period of her maternity leave and for 18 months after her baby was born? It is automatically unfair for an employer to dismiss an employee by reason of redundancy during pregnancy or maternity leave without complying with the special rules that provide the employee with enhanced protection from redundancy, set out in the Maternity and Parental Leave etc Regulations 1999 (MAPLE 1999), SI 1999/3312, reg 10. The period during which the employee has enhanced statutory protection from redundancy depends on: • when the employer was informed of her pregnancy, and • when the employee’s statutory maternity leave period ended An employee has enhanced redundancy protection during the protected period of pregnancy (as defined), under MAPLE 1999, SI 1999/3312, reg 10(1)(a), 10(1A),

An employee who is pregnant and has made an appointment to receive antenatal care (on the advice of a registered medical practitioner, registered midwife or registered nurse), has the right to be permitted to take time off during her working hours in order to enable her to keep that appointment (provided, after the second appointment, she produces the relevant evidence), and to be paid for that absence at the appropriate hourly rate. The employee can bring an employment tribunal claim if the employer unreasonably refuses to permit her to take that time off, or

Is the employee protected from pregnancy and maternity discrimination? Under section 18 of the Equality Act 2010 (EqA 2010), a person discriminates against a woman if, in the protected period in relation to a pregnancy of hers, the person treats her unfavourably: • because of the pregnancy, or • because of illness suffered by her as a result of it The ‘protected period’ begins when the woman’s pregnancy begins. The end of the protected period will depend on whether the woman has the right to ordinary and additional maternity leave: • if the woman has the right to ordinary and additional maternity leave, it ends at the end of the additional maternity leave period, or when she returns to work after the pregnancy (if earlier) • if the woman does not have the right to ordinary and additional maternity leave, it ends two weeks after the

The Fixed-term Employees (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2002 (FTE Regulations 2002), SI 2002/2034 provide that, unless the employer can objectively justify the continued use of fixed term contracts, where a fixed term employee has been continuously employed either under a single fixed term contract or a series of fixed term contracts for four years or more and is then re-engaged on a further fixed term contract without continuity of employment being broken, the new contract will have effect as a permanent contract. For information about fixed-term employees, generally, see Practice Note: Fixed-term employees. The FTE Regulations 2002 contain a