Tag Archives: shared parental leave

Small Earthquake in Chile: Not Many Dead

Posted on by • Posted in HR Thoughts, Work Related Posts • Tagged , , , , , , • Leave a comment

So, finally, after much speculation, press leaks, anguished cries from business and reports of government in-fighting, we finally have the new government’s Employment Rights Bill.

And, to be honest, it’s a bit of an anti-climax. There are lots of minor tinkering with existing rules, many of which have little uptake, or extending existing rights to people who don’t currently qualify. Some of the key proposals are:

  • The right to claim unfair dismissal, although it will become formally a day-one right, will in practical terms be reduced from requiring 2 years’ service to 9 months’ service.
  • The right to statutory sick pay will be available to all employees from day one regardless of their earnings. Currently it’s not payable until day 4 of sickness and only for those who earn more than £123 a week  (for context that means anyone who does more than 11 hours per week at adult minimum wage already qualifies)
  • Rights to parental leave. paternity leave and bereavement leave from day 1 of employment rather than requiring a minimum qualifying period. As parental leave in particular is unpaid, hardly anyone uses it currently so extending it is unlikely to see a massive increase in time off.
  • Strengthening and extending existing  unfair dismissal protections for women on maternity for up to 6 months after they return.
  • Flexible working requests must be accepted unless the Employer has a valid business reason to say no. Currently employers must justify saying no with a valid business reason so in practice it’s unlikely to make much of a difference.
  • Rules on zero hours will be changed so that workers  have the right to a contract based on the average number of hours over the preceding 12 weeks (but can choose to stay on zero hours if they prefer). Those of you who’ve read my recent employment law update (sign up here if you don’t already get it) will know that this had already brought into law by the previous Conservative government but not actually implemented.
  • Abolishing some of the previous Government’s restrictive rules on trade unions and strike action – which were rarely used by employers and were not particularly relevant to small business.
  • There will be a lot of consultation on various other aspects of employment law, including
    • The ‘Right to Switch off’  – which it appears may now just be a code of practice rather than a legal requirement.
    • Clarifying the law around employment status – an area which appears very nerdy but is key to businesses that use sub-contractors, casual workers and ‘gig economy’ working practices
    • Considering how equal pay legislation can be extended to cover race as well as sex

Most importantly, the changes themselves are unlikely to be implemented until at least 2026 – which means that businesses will have plenty of time to prepare for them.

After all the hype, it appears we are left with simply a continuation of the approach to employment law of the last 14 years – minor tinkering with particular rules that give some additional benefits to employees but at minimal discomfort to business.

(As an aside, if you’re wondering about the post title you’ll find the origin here)

Shared Parental Leave – Don’t Make a Drama out of a Non-Crisis

Posted on by • Posted in HR Thoughts, Work Related Posts • Tagged , , , , • 1 Comment

It seems that everyone in the HR and Employment Law world in the UK is getting into a bit of a tizz about Shared Parental Leave, which comes into force after Easter. “Does anyone understand Shared Parental Leave?” asked a CIPD blog recently, while employment lawyers are busy falling over themselves to offer seminars on the subject, so that employers can avoid “the baby trap” as one described it. Anyone would think that the entire structure of British industry was about to collapse because some fathers may want to take some time off with their newborns.

The concept of Shared Parental Leave is so simple that Employment Minister Jo Swinson could describe it in a tweet “It’s maternity leave shared between two people”. It is also true to say that the regulations themselves are complicated, partially because they use introduce clumsy new phrases like “continuous leave” and “discontinuous leave” and partially because they attempt to cover every single possible scenario. If followed to the letter, they also introduce some overly formal and bureaucratic procedures.

Confusing and bureaucratic regulations are nothing new in HR and employment law. We work within them all the time – and many organisations, especially smaller ones, bypass the letter of the law to get to solutions that work for both the employer and the individual employee (a fact the government recognised when it got rid of most of the bureaucratic rules around Flexible Working requests).

So why the fuss about this one? Setting aside the cynical view that employment lawyers make money from running seminars on new legislation, the resistance comes from the fact that too many people (including a lot in HR) don’t want to change or recognise the fact that the world of work is changing. Many employers are perfectly happy to take the benefits to them of flexibility (zero hour contracts, contracting services to the self-employed, a tacit acceptance of the fact that employees will work late unpaid and continue to respond to emails in the evening) but aren’t willing to accept the same when staff would like it. Couple this with the “HR says No” attitude still too prevalent among many in the profession and the thought of Shared Parental Leave becomes a doomsday scenario.

I’m not naïve, and I’m sure there will be some teething problems with Shared Parental Leave. But – as with every HR problem – constructive dialogue between the parties will usually sort out the situation, while a blind adherence to procedures and process won’t. It also seems likely that demand for Shared Parental Leave will be small at first, giving people a chance to get used to the new system.

One final thought. Around 20 years ago, the Disability Discrimination Act came into force. Then there was much wailing and gnashing of teeth about all the changes that companies would “have” to make and how it would force them to take disabled people they didn’t want to really employ. The high heavens didn’t fall then, and I don’t expect they will do now.