0370 270 6000

already registered?

Please sign in with your existing account details.

need to register?

Register to access exclusive content, sign up to receive our updates and personalise your experience on brownejacobson.com.

Privacy statement - Terms and conditions

Clegg backs protected conversations

28 October 2011

From leaked documents discussing scrapping unfair dismissal rules to announcements that the qualifying period for a claim is going to be upped to 2 years, it is clear that issues around dismissing staff are high on the Government’s agenda.

This theme has continued this week with an announcement from Nick Clegg that he plans for employers to be able to have ‘protected conversations’ with employees.  These are intended to be a way of allowing potentially uncomfortable discussions about performance management and retirement to happen without fear of being taken to an employment tribunal.

Many employers would agree that at times, the ‘cards on the table’ discussion could be a sensible way of managing a particular circumstance. However, what if such discussions contain discriminatory comments? Is it the Government’s intention that the employee would then be prohibited from referring to the discrimination in a tribunal?  Whether this idea will ever be workable in practice remains to be seen.

related opinions

World Menopause Day

To mark this, ACAS has produced new guidance for managing the menopause at work, providing advice on the symptoms and potential impact of the menopause and the types of support that can be offered.

View blog

Sexual Harassment in the workplace – consequences of getting it wrong

A partner at a Magic Circle law firm has this week been ordered to pay £235,000 in fines and costs by a disciplinary tribunal, having been found guilty of breaching his professional obligations.

View blog

High Court finds against WASPI women

The High Court has rejected the judicial review claim brought by the campaign group BackTo60 against the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP).

View blog

When does misconduct by a professional amount to professional misconduct?

The Court of Appeal has considered what amounts to professional conduct for the purposes of the MHPS in the case of Idu –v- The East Suffolk & North Essex NHS Foundation Trust.
The allegations raised against the Appellant surgeon included, amongst others, refusals to follow management instructions and inappropriate (rude, uncivil, and, on occasions, aggressive) verbal and written communications.

View blog

mailing list sign up



Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.

Sign up