Employers facing down coronavirus redundancies

8 Jul 2020
by Sharma Solicitors
coronavirus redundancy

The BBC reported  on 1 July 2020 that  employers had announced over 12,000 coronavirus redundancies.  Redundancies driven by a coronavirus downturn in business are fraught with legal danger.

Recently, the Equality and Human Rights Commission published advice for employers about coronavirus redundancies resulting from the withdrawal of the government’s salary subsidy scheme.

Government’s  coronavirus advice

Government employment law advice states that a redundancy happens when there is no need for an organisation to retain  a particular job. This can happen because a business: changes what it does, does things differently, or  changes location or closes down a workplace. Yet, redundancy done incorrectly turns into an  unlawful unfair dismissal. Employers have to demonstrate that the job will no longer exist.  Employment lawyers  advise that employee rights include: redundancy pay, time off to look for jobs or training, and not to be unfairly selected for redundancy.

The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) wants redundancies that do not breach the Equality Act and decisions based on business need rather than prejudice. EHRC warns against prejudice based on ‘protected characteristics’, which are: age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation.

The EHRC also warns employers of  decisions that  appear to be common sense but are actually discriminatory. Direct discrimination happens,  for example, if an employer  decides male employees can work from home but women cannot because they could be distracted by their children. It would also be discriminatory if an employer decides not to recruit black people or people over 60 because they are more vulnerable than others to coronavirus.

Coronavirus and individual needs

EHRC recommends that employers should take into account individual needs when making decisions about coronavirus redundancies. This would include decisions about:

• setting up home working stations

• risk assessments for groups particularly affected by  coronavirus such as racial minorities, and pregnant women

• expanding flexible working to accommodate employees with childcare responsibilities.

Employers need to be aware of employment law when applying a rule to address coronavirus that also disproportionately affects people with protected characteristics. This could be indirect discrimination under the Equality Act, for example older or ethnic minority workers.

So, if an employer requires all employees to work on the frontline with customers or carry out key worker roles, this may impact on groups that need self-isolation because they are vulnerable.

Another problem may be deciding to make redundant those people with the lowest sales figures over the past two years may be unfair to women who have been on maternity leave. Employers should consider when taking over rooms to enable social distancing whether those rooms are used for religious observance. Such rooms should only be requisitioned  if there is no other option.

EHRC also recommends preserving detailed records of decisions such as who has been made redundant, who is on furlough, and who has been asked to return to the workplace.

Photo credit:  FolsomNatural

Tagged

coronavirus COVID-19 discrimination employers employment law equality

Related News Stories

Executive faced a ruined career after botched sacking

Executive faced a ruined career after botched sacking

An advanced mental health practitioner was recently awarded over £60,000 after he was sacked without a fair process. An employment…

Read more
CBI scandal: what if your employee is accused of a serious crime?

CBI scandal: what if your employee is accused of a serious crime?

The CBI has been rocked by accusations of rape and sexual misconduct. With its reputation in tatters, members leaving by…

Read more
F-words at work – OK, but saying ‘baldie’ – not

F-words at work – OK, but saying ‘baldie’ – not

Swearing at work was ruled acceptable by one employment tribunal judge, while another gave out £71,000 in compensation when a…

Read more
Employer punished for unfair sex assault dismissal

Employer punished for unfair sex assault dismissal

Government agency bosses used a flawed procedure when firing a top foreign envoy for a sexual harassment accusation. The British…

Read more
Employers face legal traps over home working

Employers face legal traps over home working

Employers risk making poor and costly decisions in response to employees asking to work from their homes. Two cases have…

Read more
Employers are punished for sacking bad workers

Employers are punished for sacking bad workers

A judge slapped down an employer who failed to follow a fair procedure when sacking a nurse for being racist.…

Read more
Managers’ confused performance assessment leads to big payout

Managers’ confused performance assessment leads to big payout

A well-known clothes store's flawed promotion and assessment process landed them with a £96,208 judgement at an employment tribunal. Bristol…

Read more
Frustrated manager’s decision leads to unfair dismissal

Frustrated manager’s decision leads to unfair dismissal

An employer lost an unfair dismissal case after summarily sacking an employee rather than go through a fair procedure. London…

Read more
Protected conversations expedite dismissals

Protected conversations expedite dismissals

The government has increased the scope for employers to sack employees without the threat of court cases. The new law…

Read more
Tesco gets burned by its fire and rehire tactics

Tesco gets burned by its fire and rehire tactics

A high street giant’s attempt to cut their staff bill was slapped down recently due to employment law. The High…

Read more
Tribunal defends  cross-dressing engineer

Tribunal defends cross-dressing engineer

A landmark court ruling has boosted employment lawyers’ chances of protecting ‘sex change’ workers from harassment and unfair dismissal. Birmingham…

Read more
Government demands employees return to work  – but not just yet

Government demands employees return to work – but not just yet

Government have changed their advice on telling employees to return to the workplace due to a spike in virus infections.…

Read more
Job redundancy or unfair dismissal

Job redundancy or unfair dismissal

The looming end to the government’s job subsidies in November will lead to some cynical bosses using redundancy to victimise…

Read more
Sickness sacking is valid without medical expertise

Sickness sacking is valid without medical expertise

A rail company did not need extensive medical evidence to sack an employee for being too sick to work. Employment…

Read more
Court upholds sacking over a Christmas overtime row

Court upholds sacking over a Christmas overtime row

An employment tribunal in November 2016 decided that a company fairly dismissed a worker when her refusal to do overtime…

Read more
Good employer loses appeal in migrant right to work case

Good employer loses appeal in migrant right to work case

Foreign workers have a right to appeal if they face dismissal over doubts about their UK residency status, appeal judges…

Read more
Jaw-jaw before war-war

Jaw-jaw before war-war

New legislation compels people in a workplace dispute to talk before going into legal battle in a court. Whether they…

Read more

    Sharma Solicitors is Regulated by Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA Number: 403199)