JobJustice

Friday, 20 January 2012

How to deal with job insecurity

In the present economic downturn, job insecurity has become more prevalent. An employee may feel insecure in their present job because they fear their company will reduce the workforce through redundancies or closures. Or, if an employee has already lost their job, they fear not being able to find similar employment in future because employers tend to offer less full-time positions in periods of financial uncertainty.

Some redundant employees may have to accept part-time, temporary or short-term contracts instead. Although part-time working may be a suitable alternative for some, particularly those with families, temporary or short-term contracts are traditionally less secure forms of employment. In some families, it may be helpful to share more traditional roles, depending on which partner has a full-time job. However, a wider diversity of jobs should be available, as a result of more flexible working practices, and this may benefit job-seekers in the short-tem.

For those worried about redundancy, remember that your employer will have to be objective when selecting candidates for dismissal and that you are entitled to the statutory minimum amount of redundancy pay, if you have given two years’ continuous service. However, you could enquire about redeployment opportunities within the same firm, or ask if your company provides free training to prepare you for job-hunting.

Moreover, you can start looking for work while you are still employed. Potential employers may be willing to schedule interviews in the evenings or at week-ends for a variety of applicants, as they are obliged be non-discriminatory. If you are under notice of redundancy, you may be allowed a reasonable amount of paid time-off work to attend interviews or arrange re-training, if you have been continuously employed for two years by the end of your notice. If you work fewer than 16 hours per week and you are over 18, you may still claim Jobseeker’s Allowance while actively looking for work.

Also, take the opportunity to update your CV. Noting that you are currently employed can actually strengthen your profile. This is because you can indicate that you desire further opportunities, rather than specifying that your fear of losing your present job is your reason for moving on. Finally, it will help to review your finances, and cut down in advance on unnecessary expenditure, thereby ensuring you are well-prepared for any (hopefully temporary) periods of unemployment.

Cameron sees looks at how the financial crisis can produce positive results

David Cameron, the Prime Minister, has in a speech envisioned how the financial crisis can work as a platform for market improvement. Cameron said that a free market is the way forth to achieve success and that we should “use this crisis of capitalism to improve markets, not undermine them...

“We won't build a better economy by turning our back on the free market. We'll do it by making sure that the market is fair as well as free.”

The Prime Minister said that he had a proactive view on the market in that he realised ways to improve the financial sector, even when it is in a poor state. “So where others see problems with markets as a chance to weaken them, I see problems with markets as an opportunity to improve them.”

However, Cameron recognised that the business sector had not taken responsibility for its actions and that accountability was crucial. ”I want these difficult economic times to achieve more than just paying down the deficit and encouraging growth

“I want them to lead to a socially responsible and genuinely popular capitalism. One in which the power of the market and the obligations of responsibility come together. One in which we improve the market by making it fair as well as free, and in which many more people get a stake in the economy and share in the rewards of success.”

The leader of the opposition, Ed Miliband, has previously called for a more responsible financial market. Miliband questioned the sincerity of Cameron’s announced intentions, “Let's judge you on your deeds and not your words”.

The Prime Minister said that significant business achievements must be met by financial rewards but that bonuses and high salaries could not be awarded if a business was finally struggling. “There should be a proper, functioning market for talent at the top of business, and that will inevitably mean some people will earn great rewards.

“But that is a world away from what we've seen in recent years, where the bonus culture - particularly in the City - has got out of control. Where the link between risk, hard work, success and reward has been broken.”

Cameron wants to support entrepreneurs so that more new businesses get started. If the Government acts on its policies and they are successful then more jobs are likely to follow. However, in a straining financial climate many are struggling financially with setting up a new business as they will have to give up the security of their monthly wage.

Wednesday, 18 January 2012

As an employee, how will I be affected by the Government’s proposed reforms to employment law

In the autumn of 2011, the government announced the first results of its consultations on removing unnecessary bureaucracy and a tightening-up of regulations concerning workplace disputes. The government wants to create an environment in which businesses can expand, without creating job insecurity for employees. However, employees may worry that any weakening of their legal protection, especially in an economic downturn, will mean that employers can ‘fire and hire’ more freely.

Employment law reforms on the way include:

From 2012 an employee must have given two years’ continuous service, rather than the previous one year, before they can take their employer before an Employment Tribunal. However, there is no change to the rule that employees bringing discrimination claims are able to do so from the first day of employment. The government is also proposing that all workplace disputes between an employee and their employer must be referred to ACAS for mediation, before taking a claim to the Tribunal. This may be advantageous to some employees, as the matter may be settled before court proceedings. Conversely, in serious cases of unfair dismissal, the employee may still have to go to court to obtain appropriate compensation

After 2013, employees who bring a Tribunal claim against their employer will be required to pay a fee, which will only be repaid if the employee’s claim is successful. Additionally, an Employment Tribunal will be able to order a claimant to pay a deposit of up to £1,000, to ensure that they wish to continue with a claim that is considered ‘weak’ by the court. Parties to the dispute will also have to pay witnesses’ expenses up-front; and the losing side will reimburse the successful party through costs. These financial risks mean employees will have to be certain of the strength of their claim

In the near future, small companies with fewer than 10 employees could be exempt from most employment regulations. Although the employees of these ‘micro’ firms will be happy if their company is flourishing, the removal of any employment rights may cause a power imbalance. For example, a manager could say that an employee is underperforming and dismiss them without further explanation. However, if that employee had not been sufficiently trained or if the manager was a bully they may have not legal recourse regarding unfair dismissal

Monday, 16 January 2012

Pay freezes hinder growth of UK economy and contribute to a tough 2012

During the past years many UK workers have had their salaries frozen and have not, as such, seen any increase in income. The situation has been daunting for many as living costs have continued to increase and numerous workers find financial concerns to be an all-too-present concern.

The status quo of income levels has wide implications, which reach beyond individuals struggling with mortgage payments and household bills. On a national level, financial growth will remain slow as many can’t afford much more than the bare necessities.

Working parents carry cost of Government’s cuts

According to a report carried out by the Institute for Fiscal Studies, commissioned by the Family and Parenting Institute, families with children will find the coming years financially straining as the Government’s tax and benefit reforms are implemented. Even working parents will be hit hard as they will lose a significant part of their income.

Coupled with the Government’s employment law reforms, employees are likely to not only struggle with increased job insecurity but also with benefit cuts. According to the report, a family with two children will, annually, be £1,000 worse off.

Certain family structures will suffer more than others according to the report. Amongst the worst affected will be families with children under the age of five, families with more than two children, and unemployed single parents.

However, out of all the groups single unemployed parents will take the hardest hit as they will lose £2,000 of their annual income. The report highlighted that this reality, encountered by many single parents, is a "very real concern" as they will struggle with finding jobs that can cover their childcare costs and offer flexible working times.

According to a Government spokesman, MPs are doing what they can to help families whilst getting the UK economy back on track. “The Prime Minister acknowledged that families are facing difficult times so the Government has taken practical steps to help them - cutting fuel duty, freezing council tax and cutting income tax for millions. The Chancellor also confirmed working-age benefits will go up by 5.2% in April and increased the child element of the child tax credit in line with inflation.”

Katherine Rake, Chief Executive of the FPI, said, “These figures reveal the full extent to which families with children are shouldering the burden of austerity. Having children has always been expensive. But now many families with children face an extra penalty of more than £1,000.

“It is particularly surprising to see that some of the most vulnerable groups – such as families with new babies and lone parents out of work– are bearing the brunt of the tax and benefit reforms.”

Friday, 9 December 2011

Unusually long work hours for UK workers

New data published by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) shows that workers in the UK are working more hours per week than workers in most other European countries. On average, the time worked weekly by UK workers is 42.7 hours, this compares to the significantly lower EU average of 37.4 hours per week.

The data showed that there were only two EU countries, Greece and Austria, in which workers worked longer hours than those in the UK.

Expected rise in equal pay claims following court of appeal judgment

Jobs with women as the prominent workforce have traditionally seen less generous salaries than male-dominated professions. In several recent judicial judgments the courts have actively sought to fill such a gap.

Last week the court of appeal ruled that claims relating to equal pay cannot only be heard in employment tribunals, but that the high court also has jurisdiction over such claims.

It is envisioned that, as a consequence of the judgment, there will be a sharp increase in the number of claims relating to equal pay. The expected rise in claims is envisioned as the high court does not operate under the same strict time limit as employment tribunals. For a case to be heard in an employment tribunal it must be brought within six months of the challenged event, whilst the time limit for bringing a case to the high court is six years.

The case in question involved former female employees of Birmingham City Council who were in traditionally female employment positions and received a lower salary than men in the same pay band.

The court of appeal, upholding the judgment of the lower instance, found that the high court was authorised to hear matters concerning equal pay, even if the employment had ended more than six months ago.

The Council intends to appeal the decision. Chris Benson, the solicitor representing the former workers, said that not accepting equal pay was an outdated notion. "It is disappointing for our clients, and no doubt of concern to the taxpayers of Birmingham, that they have decided to appeal again to the supreme court and we would urge them to reconsider. In some councils these inequalities have only recently been phased out and in other cases the inequalities amazingly still exist."