Summer 2006 Newsletter


Brave New World

Business Not Pleasure

Summertime Blues

All That Glitters...

Casting The Net

Trust Gordon?

It Ain't Over...

One In The Eye

Keep Your Nose Clean

Foreign Affairs

When Is A Car...

Don't Walk Away

Avoiding, The Issue

Brown Is Anti-PC

VAT's Up Doc?

Fuel's Gold

An Age-old Question?

That's Unfair!

Year In Year Out

How Hard To Try?

It's A Rip-Off!

Outlaws Win

Show Some Restraint

Not Our Problem

They Cannot Be Serious?


Pension Disappointments

Year In Year Out

It's well-known that employees get more legal rights after a year's continuous employment. That's when the rules on "unfair dismissal" kick in, and the employer has to jump through many more hoops to sack someone. Some people exploit this by taking people on for just under that period and then getting rid of them.

A recent court case showed an employer being stung because of bad counting. The worker was employed on 8 April 2002. The employer took care to issue 7 days' notice (all that was required) to expire on 7 April 2003. Just under a year? Er, no. If you start work on 8 April and finish work on 7 April, that's 365 days' continuous employment. The fact that you might have started at 9.00am and finished at 5.00pm - 16 hours short of a year - made no difference. The worker had her rights and her claim for unfair dismissal stood.

Whether or not you want to exploit the rules in this way, it's important at least to know what they are!