Action HR Services’ Post

A new report from Employment Hero highlights that fully remote workers are happier and more productive compared to those working in the office or hybrid settings. The State of Wellbeing at Work study sheds light on the benefits of remote work, showcasing higher productivity and improved work-life balance for remote employees. Learn more: https://lnkd.in/eDjeUpQH If you are an employer, contact me for advice and support for all employment law/HR issues. #HR #EmploymentLaw #humanresources

Blanket bans on remote working and why it could be problematic for employers. Staff at Manchester United have been told to return to the office or seek alternative employment. This news was delivered during a wider staff meeting where they were informed that homeworking reduced productivity. One of the reasons cited for the change was the lower level of email traffic when staff were working from home. Why is a blanket ban on flexible working potentially problematic? 👉 Employees have a statutory right to request flexible working. Any such request should be handled in a reasonable manner. For instance, the employer should have a discussion with the employee about their request before reaching an outcome. 👉 Employers should avoid refusing a flexible working request unless there is a genuine business reason for their decision. 👉 A decision to refuse flexible working could be discriminatory if the employee has a disability as defined in the Equality Act 2010. Employers have a duty to make reasonable adjustments with a view to reducing or eliminating the disadvantages faced by that employee. 👉 Employers should deal with any statutory applications for flexible working in accordance with the ACAS guidelines. ‼️ A blanket ban on flexible working coupled with a refusal to handle individual statutory requests could leave employers at risk of Tribunal claims. #FlexibleWorking #EmploymentLaw #HR #LegalInsights #HcrBrum

The rise in remote working-related tribunal cases over the next few years will represent the “tip of the iceberg” of conflicts sparked by remote work requests. The consultancy, Hamilton Nash, published figures in late 2023 that showed the number of remote-working tribunals jumped by 56% between 2021 and 2022, from 27 cases to 42; in the first six months of 2023 alone, there were 25 cases, putting the year on course for a record high. Earlier this week, The Guardian reported that many others across the employment law sector expect to see an increase in cases, not least as high-profile cases grab newspaper headlines. The low number of cases that make it to tribunal is just “the tip of the iceberg” said Jim Moore, the firm’s employee relations expert. He told HR magazine: “This is really a measure of conflict. What triggered us to do the research was an increase in anecdotal reports across the HR profession that there were tensions and queries in this area. Tribunals are the last resort of escalation, so we’re not seeing all the grievances and disciplinaries behind the scenes. “We’re still working on refining the statistics for an update [on the number of remote working cases that have reached tribunal] but that trend appears to be continuing; it’s certainly not declining.” In one recent case, a senior employee at the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) had a request to work permanently from home justifiably rejected by her employer. This has been seen as a landmark case for return-to-office policies by some employers, according to Richard Fox, partner at Keystone Law, who told The Guardian: “The FCA case was not binding but employers have felt it is an important case to consider,” he said. “The issue is becoming a battleground and we advise employers to play it very carefully.” Moore added that the FCA had actually been quite accommodating, having already embraced hybrid working with two days worked remotely each week; it had offered the manager an extra day of remote work before the manager filed her claim. “They had tried to meet her in the middle to give that extra flexibility, but it was the employee who was intransigent. In that case, the employer could show they had a legitimate aim and proportional means of getting there,” he said. “It shouldn’t embolden employers to say: ‘Right, now it’s open season’ and push back on flexible working or hybrid requests. As always, each case should be considered on its own merits.” This rings particularly true for employees that might be disadvantaged should their request be dismissed unfairly: Moore picked out, for example, that many more women than men have caring responsibilities, and thus may be more likely to request hybrid or flexible working practices. He said: “We’re seeing signs of a potential emerging trend there. There’s prior case law that has established that women, sociologically, are more likely to carry the burden of looking after children, for example.”

The rise in remote working-related tribunal cases over the next few years will represent the “tip of the iceberg” of conflicts sparked by remote work requests and return-to-office mandates, according to an HR consultancy that analyses tribunal figures. The consultancy, Hamilton Nash, published figures in late 2023 that showed the number of remote-working tribunals jumped by 56% between 2021 and 2022, from 27 cases to 42; in the first six months of 2023 alone, there were 25 cases, putting the year on course for a record high. The Guardian recently reported that many others across the employment law sector expect to see an increase in cases, not least as high-profile cases grab newspaper headlines. The low number of cases that make it to tribunal is just “the tip of the iceberg” said Jim Moore, the firm’s employee relations expert. He told HR magazine: “This is really a measure of conflict. What triggered us to do the research was an increase in anecdotal reports across the HR profession that there were tensions and queries in this area. Tribunals are the last resort of escalation, so we’re not seeing all the grievances and disciplinaries behind the scenes. In one recent case, a senior employee at the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) had a request to work permanently from home justifiably rejected by her employer. This has been seen as a landmark case for return-to-office policies by some employers, according to Richard Fox, partner at Keystone Law, who told The Guardian: “The FCA case was not binding but employers have felt it is an important case to consider,” he said. “The issue is becoming a battleground and we advise employers to play it very carefully.” Moore added that the FCA had actually been quite accommodating, having already embraced hybrid working with two days worked remotely each week; it had offered the manager an extra day of remote work before the manager filed her claim. “They had tried to meet her in the middle to give that extra flexibility, but it was the employee who was intransigent. In that case, the employer could show they had a legitimate aim and proportional means of getting there,” he said. “It shouldn’t embolden employers to say: ‘Right, now it’s open season’ and push back on flexible working or hybrid requests. As always, each case should be considered on its own merits.” This rings particularly true for employees that might be disadvantaged should their request be dismissed unfairly: Moore picked out, for example, that many more women than men have caring responsibilities, and thus may be more likely to request hybrid or flexible working practices. He said: “We’re seeing signs of a potential emerging trend there. There’s prior case law that has established that women, sociologically, are more likely to carry the burden of looking after children, for example.” [HR News] #employment #hybridworking #hr

The rise in remote working-related tribunal cases over the next few years will represent the “tip of the iceberg” of conflicts sparked by remote work requests and return-to-office mandates, according to an HR consultancy that analyses tribunal figures. The consultancy, Hamilton Nash, published figures in late 2023 that showed the number of remote-working tribunals jumped by 56% between 2021 and 2022, from 27 cases to 42; in the first six months of 2023 alone, there were 25 cases, putting the year on course for a record high. The Guardian recently reported that many others across the employment law sector expect to see an increase in cases, not least as high-profile cases grab newspaper headlines. The low number of cases that make it to tribunal is just “the tip of the iceberg” said Jim Moore, the firm’s employee relations expert. He told HR magazine: “This is really a measure of conflict. What triggered us to do the research was an increase in anecdotal reports across the HR profession that there were tensions and queries in this area. Tribunals are the last resort of escalation, so we’re not seeing all the grievances and disciplinaries behind the scenes. In one recent case, a senior employee at the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) had a request to work permanently from home justifiably rejected by her employer. This has been seen as a landmark case for return-to-office policies by some employers, according to Richard Fox, partner at Keystone Law, who told The Guardian: “The FCA case was not binding but employers have felt it is an important case to consider,” he said. “The issue is becoming a battleground and we advise employers to play it very carefully.” Moore added that the FCA had actually been quite accommodating, having already embraced hybrid working with two days worked remotely each week; it had offered the manager an extra day of remote work before the manager filed her claim. “They had tried to meet her in the middle to give that extra flexibility, but it was the employee who was intransigent. In that case, the employer could show they had a legitimate aim and proportional means of getting there,” he said. “It shouldn’t embolden employers to say: ‘Right, now it’s open season’ and push back on flexible working or hybrid requests. As always, each case should be considered on its own merits.” This rings particularly true for employees that might be disadvantaged should their request be dismissed unfairly: Moore picked out, for example, that many more women than men have caring responsibilities, and thus may be more likely to request hybrid or flexible working practices. He said: “We’re seeing signs of a potential emerging trend there. There’s prior case law that has established that women, sociologically, are more likely to carry the burden of looking after children, for example.” [HR News] #employment #hybridworking #hr

The government has brought the right to request remote working into operation. Work Life Balance Act which was enacted in April 2023 bill proposes a number of legislative changes which are designed to allow for a better work life balance for parents and carers, to encourage more equal sharing of parental leave between men and women and ultimately to try and improve the representation of women in the labour market. The main proposals in the Bill include: Right to Request Remote Working Leave for Medical Care Purposes Amendments to the Maternity Protection Act 1994 (Breastfeeding) Domestic Violence Leave Under the integrated Bill, remote working will be defined as one type of flexible working. All employees will have a right to request remote working. The right to request any other type of flexible working, such as reduced working hours or adjusted working patterns, will remain limited to Parents and Carers, as defined in the Bill. It is important to understand that this legislation does not provide the right to remote work but the right to request remote work. Under the bill, there is an obligation on the employer to consider both their needs and the needs of employees when considering a request for remote working. Employers will also be required to have regard to a Code of Practice to be developed by the WRC.  Under the integrated bill, a complaint can be taken to the WRC where an employer hasn’t complied with the Code of Practice or the other requirements of the bill. This represents an enhanced right to complain.

"UK firms push back on remote working" reports the Guardian today, predicting a consequent increase in related ET disputes. There is no doubt that home/flexible working is an area of contention in the workplace. As reported in this article, KPMG recently surveyed CEO's, 63% of whom predicted a full return to in-office working by 2026, and the "Homes Under the Hammer fallacy - that everyone who is working from home is watching TV - is still strong in some organisations" leading also to increasing productivity surveillance. 'UK Plc' is apparently emboldened by an ET decision in January 2024, brought against the Financial Conduct Authority by Miss Wilson, where the Judge endorsed the FCA's refusal of her request to work fully remotely. However, it is worth noting that Miss Wilson claimed that the decision to refuse her request to work exclusively from home was a breach of the Flexible Working rules, both in terms of the delay to the decision and that the refusal was based on incorrect facts. She succeeded in the first claim but not the second. Employers should be wary of taking too much comfort from the decision, as these sorts of disputes are more likely to be based on a claim that a rolling back of flexible working arrangements is a breach of contract and/or indirectly discriminates against the claimant (usually on the grounds of disability, sex or age). If the decision also prompts a resignation, a claimant is likely to throw a constructive unfair dismissal claim into the mix. These claims may well be harder, more complex and costly to defend than Miss Wilson's was. Michael Kerrigan Eleanor Parkes Debenhams Ottaway #HR #flexibleworking #hybridworking #employmentlaw

I recently had a chance to speak to @Inc Magazine about the best ways to make remote work a success. In today's environment, engaging employees, both remote and in-office, is critical. For remote workers, intentionality is key! Read the full article here. #GartnerHR #RemoteWork #HR https://lnkd.in/eKdWct9m 

HR friends & fellow remote workers, check out this informative article with practical tips from my colleague Jennifer Priem 👇

🚨 Navigating Workplace Changes: What Happens When a Verbal Agreement Meets a New Hybrid Policy? 🚨 In today's dynamic work environment, verbal agreements about remote work can be tricky, especially when new hybrid policies come into play. 🏢💼 If you've been relying on a verbal agreement for a fully remote role, this article dives into whether that promise will hold up as companies increasingly shift to hybrid models. Don't miss out on understanding your rights and what steps to take if you find yourself in this situation. 🔗 Read the full article here 👉 https://lnkd.in/g9A9RYJh #RemoteWork #HybridWork #WorkplacePolicy #HR #EmploymentRights