We’ve seen an increase in enquiries lately relating to holiday calculations and specifically, changes to holidays for existing staff part-way through the holiday year. This appears to have been brought about as current conditions have led to employees changing their working terms and therefore their contracts of employment.

We have seen a number of reductions in working days and hours as employees choose to cut their working week under flexible working requests. But equally we have also seen some increases in contracted hours as the current shortage of workers and the glut of job vacancies means that existing staff are asked to work more hours to cover vacancies that can’t be filled.

Either way, holidays are a statutory right and a change to contractual hours means a change to holiday entitlement.

It’s important to get the calculation right and we would usually default to the online .Gov holiday calculator when calculating holiday as, should there be any disagreements, it would be difficult to argue with what the Government have told you. However, the calculator doesn’t always have options for every scenario so sometimes it’s down to a manual calculation.

There are a couple of ways that we can describe statutory holiday entitlement in a contract of employment. Based on a full-time employee it could be either:

• 20 days holiday plus 8 days public/bank holiday
  Or
• 28 days (5.6 weeks) including public/bank holidays

Our preference is to use the latter option as more jobs these days, especially in hospitality and retail, include working on bank holidays and employees who are contracted to work them should be entitled to the equivalent time off in lieu. It also makes calculating part-time workers’ holiday much easier.

For part-time workers, holiday should be determined using a pro rata calculation based on the full time equivalent hours of an employee; but it doesn’t have to get terribly complicated.

For example, a part time worker, or someone who is reducing their hours from 5 days per week to 3 days, simply has their holiday adjusted by 40% or two fifths. So, someone who would normally be entitled to 28 days including bank holidays, would get 16.8 days which we would round up to 17 days.

For an employee who works part time hours but for five days per week, it’s even easier to calculate as they would still be awarded 28 days holiday. This is because for any day they take off they will only effectively be taking holiday for the time they would usually work. In other words, for someone who works 9.00am to 2.00pm Monday to Friday, any days holiday they take will effectively be for those hours; so one day’s holiday is still only 9.00am to 2.00pm.

Obviously, it’s going to get more complicated if an employee works different hours on different days but the principle is still the same.

Don’t forget that if you give holiday above statutory, you need to add these days in and calculate in the same way and when the calculation produces a fraction of a day you should always round up.

Finally, just to throw a spanner in the works, next year, 2022 will be the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee and an extra public holiday has been declared. The May Bank Holiday will be moved to Thursday 2 June and an additional Bank Holiday will be added on Friday 3 June to give a four-day weekend.

For help on individual holiday calculations, you can call us on 01452 331331 or e-mail This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

You don’t need us to tell you that the view of the Employment Law landscape has shifted as a result of the Covid pandemic and Brexit. We must therefore maintain a watchful on eye on how any new issues that are presented are dealt with by Tribunals and the Courts.

This week we’re looking at three such issues, and whilst it can sometimes take years to reach a final outcome, we can use our experience to give an indication as to which way those decisions might fall and the potential impact for employers.

Long-Covid as a disability: Because it is such a new disease, it’s impossible to tell what the long-term effects of Covid might be. Since shortly after the outset, there have been plenty of reports of individuals suffering from longer term effects, apparently bought on by a Covid infection and commonly referred to as Long-Covid. There is a long list of these extended symptoms and reports are well documented. They include a loss of sense of taste and smell, joint pain, dizziness and nausea, and more seriously, heart palpitations, shortness of breath, memory and concentration problems and depression.

A disability is classed as “a physical or mental impairment that has a substantial and long-term negative effect on a person’s ability to do normal everyday activities”. A rule of thumb for long-term in this instance is twelve months and whilst most people recover within twelve weeks, there are reports of symptoms of Long-Covid lasting for much longer periods of time.

We’re yet to hear of an individual claiming that they have been treated unfairly and discriminated against because they are suffering from Long-Covid, but we think it’s only a matter of time. The TUC has, after all, called upon the Government to list Long Covid as a disability.

Most symptoms are not outwardly obvious and can be attributed to other illnesses so a problem for health professionals, and consequently employers, will be diagnosis. However, we don’t want to be the first to end up in court so until more is understood about the disease, we should take cases of Long-Covid seriously and engage with an Occupational Health specialist where appropriate. They will be able to translate any symptoms into a work context and make recommendations for reasonable adjustments the employer can make.

Mandatory Vaccinations: Currently, this is only an issue that is affecting people who work in care homes but there will likely be occasions where it spills over to some related industries so it’s worth taking note.

The Government is implementing legislation that will make the registered persons of all Care Quality Commission (CQC) registered care homes, responsible for ensuring that, from November 11th, no-one enters their indoor premises who has not been fully vaccinated. In other words, barring a very few exceptions, anyone who works in a care home must be fully vaccinated. This will, of course, include carers, but also anyone else who works on site including kitchen, cleaning and admin staff.

Moreover, because of the date that the legislation is due to be enforced, the latest day for people working in care homes to get their first jab is Thursday 16th September.

This isn’t quite “no jab, no job” but it’s verging on it. Certainly, anyone who works in a care home and isn’t vaccinated is going to struggle to justify why not unless they’re covered under a recognised exemption. Whether or not it’s possible to dismiss a care home employee because they aren’t vaccinated is still up for debate and some less ambiguous guidance from Government would be very useful here.

Currently, someone who has to visit a care home on an emergency basis, such as an emergency plumber, doesn’t have to be fully vaccinated. If on the other hand, you are contracted to a care home, to deliver food or medicines for example, you may find your contract up for review if you are unable send someone who can prove that they are vaccinated to make the deliveries.

Recruiting from Abroad: Not a direct result of Covid but certainly affected by the exodus of foreign workers during the pandemic and then compounded by the new Brexit rules, the restrictions on recruiting foreign workers are having a real impact on businesses. The HGV driver shortage has been the main story in the news but other industries, and hospitality in particular, are being affected by an inability to recruit workers. For most, recruiting from abroad is no longer an option.

Since Brexit on 1st Jan, companies need to follow UK government procedure on recruiting from abroad unless it is for Irish citizens or EU nationals that have Settled or Pre-settled status in the UK.
The process is not easy and full details can be found at: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/recruiting-people-from-outside-the-uk To stand any chance, the roles that you are recruiting for will need to fall within a government defined skill shortage area and at the time of writing, hospitality workers aren’t on the list. Indeed, the transport industry is lobbying Government to have HGV drivers added.

A top level summary of the steps organisations need to take are:

• The recruiting organisation must apply for a granted a sponsor licence
• Recruits must speak English at the required level
• The job offer is at the required skill level of RQF3 or above (equivalent to A level)
• Recruits will be paid at least £25,600 or the ‘going rate’ for the job offer, whichever is higher
• There terms of the points-based system, allowing trade between qualifications and salary etc. are met

Worst case outcome from this issue is that we will see businesses close because they can’t fill vacancies. But what we are also likely to see is pay and benefits packages in some industries improving dramatically in order to attract workers. Working environment and company culture are going to play a huge part in this and we are likely to see more worker-led terms of employment; as we discussed in the blog a couple of weeks ago. Employers will need to think creatively and higher wage costs will inevitably be reflected in higher prices.

You can rely on HR Champions to be on top of current news and thinking so keep an eye on our website for news and updates that affect businesses and employers. If you need direct support or training we’re here to help. Call us on 01452 331331 or e-mail This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

After being extended to October 2020 and then to April 2021, the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme, or Furlough Scheme, is finally due to conclude at the end of September. As of July, ONS figures show that less than 8% of employees remained on furlough for most regions in England and Wales, and for many regions the figure was less than 5%.

This still means however that at least one in every 20 employees remains on furlough in England and Wales and amounts to many hundreds of thousands of workers across the country. As the scheme winds up, we’re heading toward crunch time for decisions to be made about these workers and their return to work, or otherwise.

Furlough was always intended to support those workers for whom there was not enough or no work to sustain their job because of the effects of the pandemic. At the time of writing the closure of the scheme is just a few weeks away so employers should already have a reasonably accurate idea as to whether or not business is going to pick up enough to bring furloughed works back into the business.

The available options for what employers can do with furloughed workers are fairly straightforward:

• Bring them back to work under the same terms and conditions as before furlough
• Bring them back under new terms
• Dismiss, if less than two years’ service
• Make them redundant

With the exception of a few industries that rely on the business generated by schools, colleges and Universities operating as normal, we should probably question why workers haven’t already been brough back to their old jobs if it is cost effective to do so.

If a change of terms is required to make it cost effective for workers to resume, such as reduced hours, reduced pay or both, then conversations should have already taken place as a change of terms usually requires a period of consultation. There is the fire and rehire option of course but this is quite a drastic measure that comes loaded with risk and should only ever be used as a last resort.

If there isn’t enough work for the worker to come back to and they have been employed for less than two years, then normally, they can simply be let go. However, remember to factor in notice periods and realistically, is this likely to be an option for anyone who has gone through 19 months of furlough?

Finally, there is the redundancy option. Again, if this is likely to be the outcome then employers should already be engaging in conversation with employees and starting the required consultation period. If redundancy is the plan, then are those who at risk in a pool of one, a few or many?

Imagine a call centre say that has 10 agents of equal standing, eight are at work and two remain furloughed. If at the end of September there is only enough work to sustain the eight working operators and two redundancies are required, then all 10 staff members must be put at risk and a selection process undertaken. Simply making the two furloughed staff members redundant is laden with risk.

Employers, take note; the end of furlough is not a fair reason for dismissal. A proper process needs to be executed, and one that will probably incorporate some form of consultation.

There has been some commentary in the media that employees who have been furloughed for a long period of time may need to undertake some re-training on their job function and/or re-integration back to the workplace. Making use of the flexible furlough option is a great solution for manging this.

With so many employees remaining on furlough we may be heading for something of a crunch-point on October 1st.

The key point is to make sure you have communicated with your furloughed employees in plenty of time of the scheme ending at the end of the month. Explain what your expectations are and the potential and probably next steps following furlough.

Don’t overlook that you may have individuals who have underlying health issues or mental health issues, possibly exacerbated by their time away from the workplace, who don’t want to come back to work. If you are confident you have made your work environment a safe place then hold a meeting and listen to their concerns. Agree a return plan and discuss any adjustments you can make. If necessary, consider a referral to an Occupational Health specialist. Dismissal may become an option if all other routes have been exhausted.

For support and advice with any of the issues raised here, call us on 01452 331331 or e-mail This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Managing employees back into workplace and the associated challenges this presents, remain probably the main issues faced by employers as the Covid chaos settles down and solidifies into the new life as we know it. Indeed, it was the subject of discussion at my Peer Networking meeting last week.

Aside from the Employment Law aspects of home-working, such as employment contracts, flexible working requests and risk assessments, employers are having to contend with a general resistance to return from employees. There appears to be a strong contingent of workers throughout the UK, and indeed the wider World, who have taken quite a liking to working from home, even if only partially, and don’t want to return to the conventional going out to work.

UK employment figures announced recently point to a strong and growing economy. But, with over 1 million vacancies currently up for grabs, has the balance of power swung so far in the employees favour that they are now the ones calling the shots.

There’s no doubt that from most employers’ points of view, the benefits of employees working in the office, far outweigh those of working from home. One of my network peers had undertaken a very thorough investigation into it. Apart from the obvious advantages of training and learning, supervisory direction and company standards, there were the more intangible benefits that sharing a workplace offers, such as:

• The transmission of ideas and information, almost by osmosis
• Instantaneous communication and therefore problem solving
• Creativity and a space for ideas to ignite
• Reading the body language and visual clues of others
• Team bonding
• Spontaneity

However, with the buoyant jobs market making practically every employee a potential “flight risk”, are employers bowing to the wishes of their workers? Have employers become fearful of holding their employees to account and insisting that they return to the workplace for fear of losing them?

As for employees, working from home has uncovered a raft of benefits that they are now enjoying and unsurprisingly don’t want to give up. For example:

• No Commute
• No dress code
• More time with family
• More flexible working hours

But again, it’s likely to be the more difficult to define elements that are the main motivators for remaining at home. In particular the lack of a need to conform to company culture; the freedom of choice and of not being under constant scrutiny.

We can explore options to entice our employees to return to the workplace, perhaps with niceties such as gifts, free lunches, social events or bonuses. For many however, this may amount to little more than short-term bribery that is difficult to maintain and runs the risk of becoming normal and expected.

Alternatively, we can look at Leadership. As business leaders, we need to role-model the behaviour that we want and expect our employees to follow. We must be present, decisive and effective so that our employees “buy-in” to who we are and to the culture of the organisation; the shape of which is always going to be influenced from the top, down.

If we haven’t kept on top of things over the past 18 months, good leadership might be something that’s difficult to suddenly start demonstrating to a workforce that working from home. We need to initiate some measures that remind people of their accountability and that they’re part of a team with colleagues who rely on their performance. Holding regular meetings where individuals are asked to share their achievements might be a good place to start.

As the fallout from Covid continues to settle, the danger is that we leave it too long to wait and see what the lie of the land is. We must remain pro-active and take the opportunity of an economy that’s still in a state of flux to shape things to our own benefit. Why wait to see what everyone else is doing when you can take the lead and influence others to follow you?

Our Leadership training has continued throughout lockdown and remains funded for businesses in Worcestershire, Wiltshire and Bristol. We cover leadership at all levels from supervisory skills up to boardroom strategy. If you have signed up to one of our courses yet, now might be the time. Take a look at our training pages, call us on 01452 331331 or e-mail This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

We need to recognise that even though we are making progress against Covid-19, there isn’t going to be a defining day when it’s finally all over; no Victory over Covid or VC Day. We may never eradicate the disease in entirety and whilst cases exist, there is always the danger of a new variant of concern arising, such as the Delta variant, which could set us back.

What has become apparent during the pandemic is that businesses have recognised that they need HR. Not just in the practical sense of issuing furlough letters, dealing with flexible working request or making redundancies. But also in supporting employees’ mental health, ensuring a safe working environment and strategic workforce planning.

We shouldn’t allow this newfound reliance on HR just to be something we did because there was a global crisis. With staff already conditioned to accepting new rules and ways of working, now is the perfect time to re-enforce, or introduce where necessary, positive working processes and practices that will benefit employers and employees alike. The traditional summer lull is a perfect opportunity to re-group and plan ahead. After all, nobody saw Covid coming, and another crisis cold be just around the corner.

After nearly 20 years of working with other businesses, we see some recurring themes. Certain issues that keep cropping up, which, if dealt with effectively or pre-emptively would have a huge positive impact on how businesses operate, and on the wellbeing and attitude of employees.

Below, we’ve compiled the usual suspects when it comes to getting your HR in order. Easy to implement quick wins that organisations should be on top of to keep operations running smoothly and employees happy.

• Contracts of Employment and Staff Handbooks: Employees will be happier if they know the rules and boundaries and what is expected of them. Just look at the disquiet that’s been caused from the ambiguous and wishy-washy rules the Government has tried to implement during Covid. There’s no excuse for not having your company handbook in place and up to date, with clear rules against which employees can be held to account. Contracts are a legal requirement from day one of employment so again, there’s no excuse not to have them. If you don’t have your own rules in writing, in place and up to date, you’ll have to rely upon statutory regulation, which isn’t always as geared toward the employer as you may like, or require.
  
  
• Document Implementation: Simply having contracts and handbooks isn’t enough. These are crucial documents that dictate your expectations from employees. Initiate a proper launch and make a copy available to all employees. If you have updates, and we suspect you will after Covid, a relaunch is a great way to re-enforce policies and introduce new ones.
  
  
• Employee Reviews: Regular employee one-to-one meetings with a line manager give you the opportunity to assess and appraise performance, set individual targets and discuss development plans. They’re also an opportunity to deal with small problems before they are allowed to become serious issues. Remember, they should be a two-way communication channel and opportunity for both sides to raise concerns. If action is required, make sure it happens.
  
  
• Staff Survey: Sometimes you need an anonymous staff survey to give your employees the chance to air their true views without fear of reprisal. You’ll get to know the general sentiment and levels of morale amongst the workforce, and you may get some good ideas and suggestions about how processes can be done differently or improved from the people at the coal face.
  
  
• Continue Development: Senior managers and Directors usually know their business or industry inside out, but few take steps to make themselves better managers. Leadership can always be improved upon and the effects of good leadership and management practices will translate to increased productivity. Even if senior managers don’t go on an official course, they should put themselves in position where they can continue to learn from others. Peer Networks is a good example of this.

We’re scratching the surface with the points laid out here, but these suggestions will create the foundations for a truly successful, people-centric organisation. To discuss any of the points in more detail simply call us on 01452 331331 or e-mail This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

We’ve been longing for things to return to ‘normal’ for well over a year now, but we should remember that the normal that we used to know and love wasn’t all unicorns and moonbeams. It hasn’t taken long for some people to revert to their old, questionable ways and we were starkly reminded of this when we were involved in a case of someone who can only be described as a professional litigator.

Most of us will already know that individuals don’t have to have attained employee status before they can be discriminated against and therefore enter a Tribunal claim. The Equalities Act applies from the outset of the recruitment process, so a claim can occur if a job advert or the recruitment process is felt by the applicant to be discriminatory.

We don’t believe that anyone would deliberately discriminate when recruiting new employees, but we must remain diligent of anything that we might think is innocent but could be interpreted as otherwise by others. In the online world, there seems to be a group of people who are deliberately on the lookout for things to be offended by.

As we get to grips with the new recruitment options that digitalisation presents, such as recruiting through Linked-In, we must ensure that our processes remain unambiguous and water-tight in regards to discrimination. Online profiles can provide more information than we would traditionally be accustomed to, including details presented visually through images. This creates more opportunity for unconscious bias as gender, age and race are all discernible in a fraction of a second.

In our case in point, the applicant had claimed unfair treatment because he had disclosed a mental health condition at application. In actual fact, his disclosure had not been read and he had been deselected on other criteria. Thus, he had been treated equally, and not less favourably to other applicants; exactly what the Equalities Act is meant to achieve.

Unfortunately, this didn’t stop him entering a Tribunal claim which, it was later discovered, was one of over 40 such claims that this individual had submitted.

The case of Royal Mail vs Mr Efobi, heard at the Supreme Court, should come as some comfort to those facing similar claims. In short, Mr Efobi had claimed he was overlooked for various jobs within the Royal Mail, where he already worked, and cited race discrimination. The judgement of the Supreme Court effectively confirms that the burden of proof that discrimination has taken place lies with the claimant. It does not lie with the respondent to prove that discrimination has not taken place. Full details here. https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2019-0068.html

This doesn’t let anyone off the hook however. We must continue to be absolutely impartial in our actions and processes. Using phrases that describe positions as suiting either a young or a mature person instantly crosses the line. Specifying too that you are looking for someone of a particular gender, unless there is a cast-iron reason to do so, is an absolute no-no.

During the selection process, scoring systems are usually a good method for shortlisting applicants for interview. Depending upon the vacancy, you could award scores for relevant qualifications, experience in similar roles and/or business sector, career continuity and IT skills. Make sure that any scoring system you use is applied consistently and fairly to all applicants. Hold on to your results for six months as evidence that a fair process was followed.

When you get to interview stage, continue to be conscious of the questions you ask. Health and disability issues do not have to be declared until after a job offer has been made and accepted unless the issue relates intrinsically to the role.

Asking a female applicant if she plans to have children in the future is blatant sexual discrimination, but now that there is Shared Parental Leave, asking the same of a male applicant could also get you into hot water.
Ultimately, you should always aim to employ the best person for the job regardless of any other factors and after following a fair and unbiased process.

If you’re recruiting and would like a review of your vacancy ad or recruitment processes call us on 01452 331331 or e-mail This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

One of the peculiarities of the Covid-19 emergency occurring during our current age of digital transformation is something that is widely being referred to as the “Pingdemic”. On the run up to, and following Covid freedom day on the 19th July, there has been a marked resurgence in the number of Covid cases being reported. Consequently there has been an increase in the number of individuals being “Pinged” by NHS Test and Trace and having to self-isolate.

The knock-on effects have been extensively reported in the media and we have seen disruption at airports where teams of ground and border control staff have been required to self-isolate after being contacted by Test and Trace or through the NHS mobile App. There have also been reports of food supply chain disruption as a result of delivery drivers being similarly affected.

Even the Prime Minister and Chancellor were unable to escape the curse of the ping, despite an attempt to include themselves in a pilot scheme which allows certain sector workers to avoid self-isolation provided they test negative for Covid-19 on a daily basis.

At the time of writing, the seven-day average for Covid cases has reached nearly 45,000; a figure last seen around the middle of January this year, shortly after the peak in cases of the disease. Hospital admissions and deaths on the other hand remain comparatively very low and this is of course attributed to the effects of the vaccine, particularly in those who have had both doses.

However, despite the vaccine rollout, even double jabbers are still becoming infected with Covid-19, and some, including one of our own members of staff, have suffered the effects quite significantly. Generally, the effects of covid on the double jabbed seem to be reduced but it remains an offence to fail to self-isolate if you have been instructed to do so by Test and Trace or if you or a household member develop symptoms. The fine for failing to self-isolate also remains, starting at £1000.

The current situation creates new problems for employers.

Self-isolation is classed as sickness absence, and as such those who are self-isolating are entitled to Statutory Sick Pay (SSP) unless the employer enhances this. There is always the work from home option of course but for say, a construction or manufacturing company this simply isn’t viable.

Danger arises when workers who should be self-isolating choose not to and continue to come to work because they don’t want the reduction in wages. This then risks spreading the disease amongst co-workers creating further issues that could manifest within a few days, potentially affecting the entire workforce.

Equally, as co-workers, by definition, will be sharing space, there is a risk that a large proportion of employees are self-isolating at the same time making it impossible to operate a proper functioning business and causing a temporary closure affecting turnover and profits.

Employers need a clearly communicated stance for which we must defer to the Government guidance. Despite the unlocking on the 19th, the rules are still firm for those who:

• Suffer Covid-19 symptoms
• Test positive for Covid-19
• Are in the same household as someone who test positive
• Are contacted by Test and Trace

In short, for any of the above, you must self-isolate for 10 days and get a PCR test is you haven’t already had one. The only exception to self-isolation would be if you suffered the symptoms but returned a negative PCR test. This may be because you have another infection such as flu. Even then, you should only return to work if:

• you are well
• no-one else in your household has symptoms or has tested positive for COVID-19
• you have not been advised to self-isolate by NHS Test and Trace

The NHS have produced an infographic which explains most of the above and can be downloaded https://bit.ly/3ePS1mp and the full details can be found at https://bit.ly/3kNinJv

For those living in England who are forced to self-isolate, there is a £500 Test and Trace Support Payment that can be applied for, the details for which can be found at https://bit.ly/3y2iYLl

To avoid any confusion regarding Test and Trace, references in this article relate to the NHS Test and Trace service and not the NHS mobile app. There is a theory that those contacted through the App alone do not need to self-isolate. Indeed, it’s been reported that some businesses have advised employees to delete the app from their mobile phones to avoid being pinged. It’s a very grey area as, after all, it’s not compulsory to have the app installed and it doesn’t collect any personal data. However, we should all remember that it is our civil duty to act responsibly and help to keep ourselves and one another safe.

Rules regarding self-isolation are due for revue on the 16th August so any policy that you implement may be short-lived. Our advice is to refer to the current Government guidelines to avoid confusion.

If you’d like a more detailed conversation about the content of this article or if you think you have a situation the falls outside of it, call on 01452 331331 or This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Stage 4 of the Government’s Roadmap out of lockdown plan finally comes into effect, in the main, on "Covid Freedom Day", Monday, 19th July. Controversially perhaps, the decision to unlock has been pressed ahead with, despite a new wave of Covid-19 cases emerging, attributed to the highly contagious Delta variant of the virus.

In England, amongst the restrictions to be lifted, the Government has removed the mandatory requirement to wear face coverings. Instead, it has empowered individuals to make the decision for themselves whether or not to don a mask; recommending their use in enclosed, crowded public spaces, in shops and on public transport.

A number of major supermarkets and other chain stores have already expressed that they will be encouraging customers to wear a mask whilst on their premises and Transport for London has said that they will make mask wearing a condition of travel for passengers. But how do employers stand generally on the issue and can the wearing of a mask in the workplace be made mandatory?

Hopefully, you have already formulated your return-to-work plan in consultation with your employees and have a mutually agreed approach towards the steps to be taken in and around your place of work. This might include:

• a rota system for home-working to keep the numbers in the workplace reduced
• maintaining social distancing measures
• screens between workers
• regular lateral flow testing and temperature checks, and
• the wearing of masks whilst moving around the workplace

Provided your plan has been agreed and acknowledged by your team then you’re unlikely to encounter any issues as employees will be inclined to comply with peer behaviour. But how should you handle any workers who refuse to wear a mask or who use the wearing of masks as an excuse to remain absent from the workplace?

We’ve agreed previously that making vaccinations compulsory for workers is probably difficult to enforce unless you have a strong business case such as working in the care sector or have individuals who have to enter peoples’ homes. For mask-wearing however, we believe that a compulsory order can be made on the grounds of Health and Safety. Employers must carry out a risk assessment to identify the measures necessary to prevent the transmission of coronavirus (COVID-19) in the workplace. This risk assessment may conclude that the use of face coverings in the workplace is necessary.

Just as you would make toe-protector boots or hard-hats compulsory on a building site or in a warehouse to protect the safety of your employees, so too could you insist that mask-wearing was a health and safety requirement. After all, you have a duty of care to your employees and you’ll no doubt have your poster from the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) displayed prominently in your place of work.

The actions that you could take against those who still refuse to wear a mask would therefore be similar to the actions you might take against someone who refuses to wear other health and safety workwear designed to keep individuals and their co-workers safe. This might amount to sending workers home without pay and eventually bringing a disciplinary case for refusing to follow a management instruction.

It’s unlikely that we’ll see an end to recommended mask-wearing any time soon and the practice may be expected for many months, or indeed years, to come, so it’s vital to have a clearly communicated company stance against which employees can be held accountable.

For help and support with writing and implementing policies, we’re just a phone call or e-mail away. Call on 01452 331331 or This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

As of the beginning of July, the Government's Furlough Scheme begins to taper as it is gradually wound up over the coming months. Owen takes a look at what this means for employers and some tips for re-integrating team members back into the workplace.

As the rollout of the Coronavirus vaccine continues at a blistering pace, it won’t be long before the age range of those offered the vaccine begins to include your own employees. With an unapologetic proportion of the population declaring that they do not intend to accept their offer of the vaccine, employers are beginning to wonder what their responsibilities are and will certain action have consequences.

This very point was one of the subjects in our Employment Law Update Breakfast Club this week and we have shared a recording of this part of the session below.