PJH Employment Law Solicitors Employment Law Solicitors  

Archive for the ‘Information and Consultation’ Category

Policies and procedures

By Olivia - Tuesday, September 1st, 2009

It has been reported in the press today that Portsmouth City Council have decided to amend their internet policy and block access to the social networking site Facebook.  This followed revelations that staff spent an average 400 hours on the site every month.

We have advised many employers in relation to amending their policies and procedures to this effect.  A couple of years ago the main issue was overuse of e-mail during working hours.  However, the constant changes to the internet environment have thrown up misuse of social networking sites such as Facebook as a new problem. 

Any employer wishing to amend their policies and procedures need to give careful thought to what they want their policy to say.  For example, is contributing to Linked-in acceptable during work hours?  Are employees allowed to access internet banking during work time?  We recommend being very clear about what is and is not acceptable.  As Portsmouth City Council have discovered, there are also packages available that either monitor or prohibit access to specified sites.  These are proving popular with larger employers.

Employers should take advice on any changes to policies and procedures as consultation with employees may also be required.

AddThis Social Bookmark ButtonAddThis Feed Button

Similar Posts:

Failing to Inform and Consult

By Sarah - Monday, July 30th, 2007

The EAT ruled on Friday on an application by Amicus under Regulation 22 that a penalty notice be issued following a declaration by the Central Arbitration Committee (CAC).  The employer admitted a breach of Regulation 19(1) of the Information and Consultation of Employee Regulations 2004.

The EAT ruled that the breach was serious and fixed the penalty at a whopping £55,000! The maximum penalty was £75,000.  Suprisingly, the employer Macmillan Publishers Ltd chose not to be represented at the hearing  and may now be wishing it did.  You can read the decision here, which sets out in full the reason for such a high penalty.  The penalty is paid to the Secretary of State, which no doubt will help fill the public coffers.

AddThis Social Bookmark ButtonAddThis Feed Button

Similar Posts:

Information and Consultation of Employees Regulations 2004

By Liam - Wednesday, May 30th, 2007

 The Information and Consultation of Employees Regulations first came in to force in April 2005 in respect of organisations with 150 or more employees. Since April 2007, the Regulations have applied to employers with 100 or more employees. From April next year the Regulations will apply to employers with 50 or more employees.

In Amicus v Macmillan Publishers Ltd, the Central Arbitration Committee has upheld a complaint that the employers breached the Regulations by not balloting employees following an employee request. The employer argued that it had a pre-existing agreement in place. However, the Agreement did not cover all employees in the undertaking. Those readers of this blog who, like me, were sufficiently boring to read the regulations in full when they first came out, will know that a pre-existing agreement only gets you out of negotiating an Agreement under the ICE Regulations if the pre-existing agreement covers all employees in the undertaking. Macmillan had several sites, but their pre-existing arrangements only covered one site.

Macmillan could now be up for a penalty of up to £75,000.00 for breach of the Regulations.

AddThis Social Bookmark ButtonAddThis Feed Button

Similar Posts:



Employment Law | Employment Law Training | Employment e-Learning
Dignity at Work | Employment Law Solutions | Employment Laws
Employment Law Services