As a provider of HR services to other companies, there are times when we get to see the dirty laundry of some other businesses. Of course we’re professionally sworn to secrecy over who these businesses are and what their issues might be, but when we look at the organisations that have the most serious problems, those with high staff turnover or are considered poor to work for, the one word that keeps surfacing is culture.

Culture will pretty much determine the overall success of an organisation, and it isn’t always about how staff are treated. A bad company culture is felt by its customers too and determines how it handles change and approaches innovation.

Good culture is almost tangible. It can be seen in the attitude and morale of the employees; their positive approach and willingness to learn and grow. Organisational culture is always driven by its leadership.
To enable a positive culture, organisations require a leadership strategy that is aligned with the overall business strategy and provides its employees with the leadership skills needed to implement it. A leadership development strategy enables the organisation to positively mould and shape the culture.

You’ll know us to be passionate about Leadership Development; we’ve been delivering leadership training for over 20 years. Here are the most prominent reasons why businesses should implement a leadership development programme.

Provides stronger strategic vision and purpose: Starting with a compelling vision and purpose and developing company strategies to achieve may not be easy but it is an excellent opportunity to demonstrate strong leadership. Leadership training and development can help managers to lay the foundations for their organisational vision and implement the strategy cohesively and therefore successfully.

Drives morale and productivity: When an organisation is guided by a decisive leader or leaders, with good business ethics, clear vision and strong strategic direction, the positive energy will permeate throughout the organisation. By implementing a properly considered leadership training program that is aligned with the company values, all managers will learn to manage consistently and with the same message. They’ll learn to manage their own time effectively, set realistic expectations and motivate employees.

Training trickle-down: Leadership development will benefit everyone in the organisation and have a trickle-down effect from top levels of management to supervisors and lower levels of management. When the management is strong at the top-executive level, the positive effects will filter through to all employees.

Strengthens organisational bonds: Leadership training programs not only develop strong leaders but support managers and supervisors in becoming better followers as well as encouraging feedback from their own teams and front-line staff. The bi-directional teamwork promotes a cohesive and collaborative working environment that fosters creativity and initiative. Team-member training will enable all employees to understand the organisation’s, their manager’s and their co-workers’ expectations of them.

Cross-pollination of ideas: By attending well-run leadership training, managers have opportunity to interact with other managers and discuss common leadership and management issues that will be raised during the training. This is an excellent way to brainstorm new and different ways to approach problems or issues and find innovative techniques to incorporate into your organisation’s own leadership practices.

Follower Satisfaction: Leadership programs benefit the followers as much as the leader. A leader with greater clarity, direction and effectiveness enables those traits to rub-off onto those they are leading. Followers will build admiration and have a greater sense of direction and purpose, which leads to greater motivation and ultimately, productivity.

Recognised Investment: Good quality training that goes above and beyond the compliance led sheep-dip style of training is recognised by employees as investment in them. Managers will be keen to implement their learnings and, knowing they are working for a business that invests in them aids staff retention.

Enables Succession Planning: Leadership skills are fundamental to any role within the business and good leaders are required at all levels. Leadership training programs help identify people with the potential to fill leadership positions and mould and shape the executive team of the future. Promoting from within comes with a raft of advantages and is significantly less expensive than recruiting externally.

Accountability: A Leadership program identifies individuals’ areas of strength and where further development is needed. A good programme will direct individuals to develop their own action plan to overcome areas of weakness thereby enabling accountability for their own performance.

Self Leadership: Ultimately, the aim must be to enable leaders in an organisation to recognise where they are for any particular task or competency and take the necessary steps to upskill themselves. Promoting a culture of self-leadership is something that progressive businesses actively develop as part of a growth strategy.

Good leadership produces a good culture. We can work with you to develop your own leadership development programme for you and your team. We’ll discuss your vision, goals and strategy and design a bespoke solution that works for you. Talk to us. Call 01452 331331 or e-mail This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

At our recent Employment Law Update Breakfast meeting, we were treated to a presentation from Tracy Clark, CEO of Young Gloucestershire, a local charity that supports young people throughout the county. Tracy’s presentation discussed the challenges that employers often face owing to the generational differences of their workforces; something we discussed in last week’s blog post.

The topic became relevant for Tracy after she recognised that she had four different generations working in her own organisation and this was beginning to present some related issues. Delegates at the event also expressed difficulties that multigenerational workforces presented, many of which stemmed from problems with communication, and in particular how different generations interact and utilise different digital platforms.

Email and text messaging are pretty much ingrained as digital communication formats, and a lot of companies rely heavily on established platforms such as Twitter and Facebook; with some using the latter for their entire digital presence. Newer, and some might say ‘trendier’, platforms are becoming much more prevalent now, and the likes of Instagram and Snapchat are the default platforms for many.

A side-effect of Covid and the ensuing lockdowns was how we were forced, almost overnight, to adopt new technologies such as Microsoft Teams and Zoom in order to maintain visual relationships with work colleagues as well as with family and friends. How quickly these technologies would have otherwise been taken up on such a scale, will of course, never be known. We might speculate that, knowing some people’s resistance to change, quite a while. Possibly never.

The propensity for individuals to adopt new technologies may be explained by an alternative set of generational labels or stereotypes to the more commonly referred to Boomers and Millennials. These are:

• Digital Dependants: Born at or after the turn of the current century, these are people who have always known life with digital technology. For them technology is simply part of life and an expectation.
  
  
• Digital Natives: Are those who grew up alongside technology and have seen the changes happen. Being able to adopt and adapt to change is likely to come naturally for this group as they have needed to accept change in order to survive and thrive.
  
  
• Digital Migrants: Born without mainstream technology, this group have had to make a step-change from life without to life with. The rapidity of technological advancement over recent years has possibly been very challenging for people in this group, and for some, overwhelming.

As employees and workers, there is nothing to say that any one of these groups group has an advantage over the others. What is important however, is that we recognise that the differences exist so that it can be taken into account when we want to communicate to them. Just as we are aware that individuals have preferred learning styles, so too must we recognise that they have preferences in how they want to be communicated to.

We’re not suggesting that employers initiate a different communication method for each employee; but finding some common ground will mean that everyone receives communication in a format that they are likely to take notice of and can therefore be held accountable to.

Well worded clauses in your company handbook stating what form of communication the organisation accepts in which circumstances it a good idea. For example, we liked Tracy’s organisational policy that employees who are sick must speak to a line manager. So even if they send a text message initially, they must be available to receive a telephone call back from their manager or otherwise be assumed to be on unauthorised absence.

Insistence on written documents has given way to e-mails over recent years and now the likes of insurance companies, banks and even the Inland Revenue accept, and sometimes insist that communications are made electronically.
Let’s also not forget that digital communications come with some inbuilt advantages. Texts, Whatsapp messages and Tweets come with an in-built date and time stamp, which can prove very useful if a timeline of events has to be substantiated; in a disciplinary case for example.

You may want to supplement some more formal communications with a document that requires a ‘wet’ signature. There’s the psychological factor of physically signing your name to something that adds gravitas, plus we have never heard of anyone who has ever sent or received a ‘final texted warning’. And we wouldn’t want to be the ones who test whether or not it would stand up in a Tribunal.

Technological innovation continues at a blistering rate. We’re on the verge of driverless cars and no-one really knows what we can expect from Artificial Intelligence. If you feel like you might benefit from some support with a communication strategy or perhaps with organisational and cultural change, we’d be delighted to help. We still accept phone calls on 01452 331331 and e-mails too at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

The workforce in the UK is currently experiencing a collection of circumstances that have given rise to a noticeable diversity in age amongst employees. But it’s not unique to the UK. Multi-generational work teams are being reported globally. It is now not uncommon to see employees from four or five different generations working alongside one another.

We welcome and applaud diversity in the workplace. It provides a larger talent pool to recruit from, improves businesses innovation and problem solving and provides a broader range of perspectives upon which to base decisions. Whilst age diversity brings these benefits and others, it also comes with its own set of challenges.

Age diversity has become more prevalent as people are living longer and recognise that they will need to work for longer to ensure they accumulate sufficient wealth to see them comfortably through their retirement; magnified by the current cost of living crisis and soaring food costs.

There are also the indirect effects of Covid such as the rise in remote and flexible working, which make continuing to work more attractive and easier to combine with other interests. Plus, the UK’s persistently high vacancy rate has meant that employers have had to cast a wider net to recruit for the 1.1million vacancies (ONS figures April 2023) we are currently experiencing nationally.

A number of labels have been attributed to different generations which many of us will recognise, and through social and media coverage these have tended to stick, although there is no scientific methodology behind them. They are:

• Silent Generation (Traditionalists) – born 1928-1945
• Baby Boomers – born 1946-1964
• Generation X – born 1965-1980
• Generation Y (Millennials) – born 1981-1996
• Generation Z – born 1997-2012

These labels define different generations solely and strictly by the years of their birth which is a position we would contest. They do not account for individual’s life choices; when they start a family for example. nor do they account for education or affluence. Wealthier individuals are proven to have had better and earlier access to technology and therefor the Internet; one of the prime markers for identifying Generation Z.

If we do want to adopt labels such as these, we should account for a degree of overlap.

Regardless of what we call the different generations, what defines them and whether they overlap, as employers, we must recognise their existence and that there may be a need to modify our management styles in order to get the best from them. Some of the challenges presented by an age-diverse workforce include:

Communication issues: Not only is there likely to be differences arising from use and familiarity with the vast array of technologies and platforms that is available, there is likely to be differences in communication style preference as well as interpretation and tone. Selecting the best way to connect with team members and avoid communication breakdowns requires careful consideration.

Negative stereotyping: As with any situation involving diversity, there is a risk that individuals will have preconceptions of those in a different age group. The older generations may consider the younger people to be entitled and oversensitive, whilst the younger groups may see older employees as inflexible technology-phobic. Careful management is required to avoid a toxic company culture and age discrimination against both young and old. “Boomer” has disrespectful overtones and expresses criticism of someone’s age and perceived lack of digital awareness.

Differing expectations: Employees of different generations may desire the same outcomes from their employment nor hold the same expectations. How individuals accomplish their duties, take on new information or expect to have their performance evaluated can vary greatly. Furthermore, what is considered a desirable benefits package is likely to vary wildly across different generations.

Employers must embrace generational diversity to reap the rewards that an age-diverse workforce can bring. However they must maintain their employees’ dignity at work and safeguard their wellbeing for all age groups.

Tracey Clark, CEO of local charity Young Gloucestershire will be making a guest presentation on the topic of a Multi-Generational workforce at our Breakfast Club next Thursday, 25th May at The Leonardo Hotel, Cheltenham. It’s free to attend and places are still available.

In the meantime, talk to us about training for managers as well as our Dignity at Work and Effective Communication training. Contact us on 01452 331331, or e-mail This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Mental Health Awareness Week in the UK has rolled around again and runs next week, 15th to 21st May. This year the theme is anxiety. Whilst attributing a theme and a specific week brings it to the fore and encourages conversations, we should recognise that Mental Health is with us all of the time and has become a factor that employers must take into consideration much more frequently than even just a few years ago.

Working days and productivity lost to poor mental health are significant, so it’s in employers’ best interests to maintain a mentally healthy and motivated team. Good working practices exemplified and encouraged by motivated and properly trained managers will maintain engaged and mentally healthy employees and promote your business as a good place to work.

Mental health issues can be complex, diverse and wide ranging. In addition to anxiety, commonly recognised conditions include stress and depression. We should remember however that severe and enduring mental illness can be life changing.

Whilst we often have to deal with employees who are suffering with poor mental health, work isn’t always the root cause. The cost of living crisis is high on the blame scale for a lot of issues currently, particularly anxiety, but death of a loved one, physical illness or a sudden event such as a serious accident or a partner’s job loss can all be triggers.

That said, we must recognise when factors at work are the source of mental health issues or exacerbate the external issues that are causing it. Even in good work environments, pressures such as tough schedules and tight deadlines can have a massive negative impact on someone’s feeling of wellbeing. Add bullying, harassment or toxic leadership into the mix and we have a recipe for a very unhealthy situation.

There also remains the fact that admitting to having mental issues remains shrouded with stigma and is seen as a weakness; especially amongst men. Historically, individuals have been unwilling to admit to being unable to cope or feeling stressed for fear of being judged or accused of being inadequate. Employers should try to create an environment where employees feel they can freely express their concerns, problems and feelings.

Taking steps to engender a buoyant and happy workplace will have long reaching and measurable benefits. Not only will productivity me maximised, but less days will be lost to absence. Furthermore, environments that offer support and where poor mental health is kept in check will thwart opportunities for less scrupulous employees to spuriously use it as an excuse for poor performance or behaviour.

Where it is appropriate, reasonable adjustments can be considered to enable those who are mentally unhealthy to remain in work and performing to the required standards. For longer term reasonable adjustments, consultation with an Occupational Health professional is advisable.

To promote an environment of positive wellbeing, more and more organisations are introducing mental health awareness training for managers and staff. Some are also introducing Mental Health First-aiders; employees within a business that other employees can approach in absolute confidence if they feel a mental health issue might arise.

Although not qualified in dealing with mental health issues per se, the first-aiders are trained to spot the early signs of mental health issues and can signpost individuals towards an appropriate course of action or mental health practitioner.

Our own two-day Mental Health First Aid training courses are regularly available and we provide in-house mental health awareness training for all staff as well as workshops for managers. So far this year our Mental Health - Skills for Managers course has been our most popular. It provides advice and guidance for managers to ensure that they:

• create a mentally healthy team environment
• understand the range of mental health conditions
• have confidence to hold conversations with all team members to support their mental wellbeing.

We also have an area on our website dedicated to Mental Health and Wellbeing where you can find more information about our courses and other support services.
Alternatively, just call us on 01452 331331 or email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

In recent months, American banking giant JP Morgan has demanded that their senior managers return to working five days per week in the office. This has been followed in the UK by a curb on flexible working by Lloyds Banking Group who now expect employees to spend at least 40% of their working week in the office.

Lloyds have also moved to scrap their compressed hours policy, which allows workers to effectively cram the hours for ten working days into nine giving a nine-day fortnight, with a ‘pilot scheme’ in a couple of its divisions. Unsurprisingly the bank is suffering something of a backlash from disgruntled employees.

Living through Covid lockdowns is gradually fading in people’s memories but managing employees back into the workplace following the great Working From Home revolution has remained a significant issue for many organisations. Businesses saw the short term benefits of cost savings on property expenses that WFH enabled without considering the longer term consequences of a dispersed workforce.

At HR Champions, we were always clear to tell our clients that any options they introduced for their employees to work from home should be classed as benefits, thus retaining a degree of control. Many companies however were too keen to make new flexible working conditions an employee right, and are now they are struggling to take them away again, and are suffering the consequences.

It’s hardly surprising that businesses trying to force through these changes are facing an employee backlash. Many employees have taken quite a liking to working from home. There’s no commute, childcare is easier and there’s more time for family. The washing can get done during the week and there’s no dress code.

Employers on the other hand, are seeing the disadvantages more starkly. A memo from JP Morgan’s operating committee included "Our leaders play a critical role in reinforcing our culture and running our businesses. They have to be visible on the floor, they must meet with clients, they need to teach and advise, and they should always be accessible for immediate feedback and impromptu meetings.”

Workers at Disney in the US have had to work four days per week in the office since March after Chief executive Bob Iger made clear his view that, “face-to-face collaboration is key to a creative business like ours".

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. Apart from the obvious advantages of training and learning, supervisory direction and company standards, there are 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

With still over one million vacancies in the UK, employers may fear losing employees if they insist they must return to the workplace. However, the wider workplace economy might be slowly waking up to the fact that WFH isn’t a panacea and, actually businesses need employees to be on site.

Whilst the banking industry looks like it’s taken the option of waving a fairly big stick to get its employees to return to the workplace, at HR Champions, we see the most effective tool in the employer’s armoury is effective 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.

Employees should be reminded 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 could be a good place to start.

In the meantime, if you would like some personalised advice or if you want some more information on our excellent Leadership & Management training call us on 01452 331331 or e-mail This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Inappropriate behaviour in the workplace has come under the spotlight once recently after CBI chief Tony Danker stepped down from his role following a slew of allegations. And, more latterly, this morning, Deputy Prime Minister Dominic Raab has made the decision to resign following disclosure of a report relating to accusations of bullying. Mr Raab has claimed that the bar for what constitutes bullying has been set too low.

In addition to these high profile cases, at HR Champions we’ve also experienced a spike in the number of incidents regarding inappropriate behaviour and comments for which we have been asked to provide support to clients.

Evidence suggests a number of reasons why we might be seeing this increase:

• Victims and affected individuals are more courageous and willing to speak out
• Individuals are more aware of what does or has potential to be inappropriate behaviour
• Individuals are more ready to take offence, possibly a side-effect of the proliferation of social media

It has long been established that it is how comments and behaviour are received rather than how they are intended that determines whether or not they are offensive or inappropriate. Referring to an off-hand comment as being intended simply as a joke or passed off as banter probably won’t stand up in tribunal if an individual is truly offended by it.

Banter is only banter if everyone is genuinely involved in it and there is no target or victim. Even then, some individuals may join in because they are afraid of being singled out or becoming a target if they demonstrate or voice that they are uncomfortable or don’t agree with what is being said or implied.

Individuals can also be affected indirectly by comments and incidents. A laddish comment made amongst an all-male group of similar backgrounds may appear innocent amongst those present, however we may not know what friends or relations people present have outside of that group. And this applies to any group of similar individuals, regardless of gender, race, age etc.

Amongst the allegations made against Mr Danker of the CBI was a claim from a fellow female employee that Mr Danker had made unwanted contact that she said amounted to sexual harassment. Speaking on BBC Radio 4 earlier this week, Mr Danker defended his position stating that he had approached numerous employees, both male and female, to meet outside of work in order to garner a true understanding of the workforce and their attitudes towards the CBI. Mr Danker’s superiors were fully aware of his actions and his approach.

If Mr Danker was speaking truthfully, this is a classic example of behaviour that, despite it’s absolute best intentions, was construed as something sinister by the person on the receiving end.

It is also interesting that the CBI is piling so much at the door of Mr Danker, trashing his reputation in the process. This may be an attempt to avoid vicarious liability, which is where an organisation can be held accountable for the actions of one of its employees. By heaping the blame onto Mr Danker, the CBI is trying to swerve any accusations that it was the culture of the organisation that was to blame for complaints about behaviour, including one report of rape, that it received.

The rape accusation was not against Mr Danker and was made before his time in charge. However the messaging in the media is very confused and understandably, Mr Danker has chosen to go public and defend his reputation.

Dominic Raab’s claim that the threshold for bullying is set too low will probably hold sway with a lot of people. Differentiating between bullying and a robust management style might sometimes come down to very fine margins. Clear and unambiguous policies and performance management practices are key, along with clear parameters as to what good behaviour looks like. That they are applied consistently is crucial. Even so, it might just come down to the view of the Tribunal judge on the day should a case ever get that far.

For your own organisation, our Dignity at Work training is a good place to start. Not only will it educate your team about what is and isn’t generally considered to be acceptable behaviour, implementing the training will show you are taking appropriate steps that will help you avoid a vicarious liability charge of your own.

Guidelines over sexual harassment are about to be reformed through parliament, including new harsher sentences for offenders. We’ll be blogging about this once it’s finalised. In the meantime you can contact us on 01452 331331 or email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

The Office of National Statistics (ONS) have stopped updating it’s Covid insights web page and results of the infection survey from 24th March were the last to be published on the website. This is a clear indication that as far as the Government is concerned, Covid has become part of everyday life and a disease like any other that no longer warrants special attention.

The jury is still out on whether or not Long Covid will be categorised as a disability, thereby making it unlawful to discriminate against and require employers to consider reasonable adjustments for workers who suffer from it. Notwithstanding, because there tends to be more cases of Long Covid amongst older people, women and ethnic minorities, an element of potential discrimination already exists.

We still receive calls to the helpline from employers who need support in knowing what to do when handling Covid cases amongst there employees. Advice will vary depending on the industry, the people who work on site and who employees come into contact with. Guidance for care homes is very different to that for construction workers for example.

The final Weekly Covid-19 Infection Survey released by the ONS reveals a recent increase of cases in England and as many as 1 in 40 people in the country are currently infected. This may be a result of more people staying indoors together because of the wetter weather, but it’s a reminder that we should stay vigilant. Over 600 people have been dying in the UK in recent weeks where Covid was a factor.

Employers not only need to look out for their employees’ welfare, they must also remember that absence effects productivity and therefore the performance and profitability of their business. It might not be too difficult to imagine a business that gets into financial difficulties because it got sloppy over its Covid management and mitigation.

The law doesn’t say you must isolate if you are Covid positive any more, so this this is a grey area. But, employers who allow Covid positive individuals into the workplace potentially put their colleagues at risk (particularly the vulnerable which includes those who are pregnant) and expose themselves to having more employees being sick.

As businesses, we should have these ingrained in us by now but it never hurts to have a quick reminder of the key elements for employers to consider:

• Covid remains a highly transmissible disease that poses a significant risk to business continuity when it is identified in the workplace.
• In all cases, the overriding consideration is an employer’s duty of care and their responsibility to protect the health, safety and welfare of their employees and other people who might be affected by their work activities. Employers must do whatever is reasonably practicable to achieve this.
• Covid is now treated in the same way as any other sick absence and the normal sick pay rules apply.
• Guidance states that people who test positive or who have Covid symptoms should try to stay at home and avoid contact with other people for 5 days. They should also avoid contact with those that are higher risk from Covid for 10 days. This period starts the day after a positive test.
• If individuals feel unwell but have either tested negative or not tested positive, they should still avoid contact with people and especially those considered to be vulnerable.
• If a person has Covid symptoms or tests positive, they should work from home where this is possible to act in line with current Government guidance and for at least the 5-day period.
• If the infected employee’s job is one where they are not able to work from home, then they should not be in work and should be on sick leave.
• If an infected employee’s position is one where they are able to work from home, but they are too ill to work, then again, they should be on sick leave. Their absence should be used to rest and recuperate.

If you do allow Covid-positive people into the workplace, or if you turn a blind eye to employees with symptoms, then you should be confident that you have robust procedures in place that are preventing the risk of transmission and that your employees are fully confident and pro-active with these arrangements.

The .Gov website is still probably the best source of information regarding Covid, but if you need help with interpreting what they it says or you need support with a specific case, we’re here to help. Call us on 01452 331331 or email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

When it comes to creating headaches for employers, holiday calculations is a topic that just keeps on giving. With the clocks moving forward to British Summer Time sparking Summer holiday thoughts, and the end of the financial year looming, we thought now is a good time to revisit holiday calculations.

If you are one of the employers who align their holiday year with the fiscal year, then you should note that you’ll have two Easter Bank Holiday Weekends in your holiday year. This year, Easter Sunday is next weekend, meaning the Friday 7th and Monday 10th April will be bank holidays. Next year it falls on March 31st so Good Friday will be in this year’s holiday with Easter Monday in next year’s.

This shouldn’t be too much of an issue as it will balance out again the following year but it might cause a problem if an employee leaves during the year and you have to calculate their final pay. Should you pay them the extra day?

Wording in the employee’s contract of employment might influence how final pay is calculated which is why we always recommend that holiday allowance (for statutory holiday) is described as ‘28 days including public/bank holidays’ as opposed to ‘20 days plus public/bank holidays’.

This not only alleviates the issue caused by Easter moving dates each year, but also ensures that workers in industries such as hospitality, retail and care, who are often contracted to work bank holidays, are still entitled to the equivalent time off in lieu. It also makes calculating part-time workers’ holiday much easier.

For part-time workers, the easiest way to determine holiday allowance is using a pro-rata calculation based on the full time equivalent hours of an employee. 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.

Part-timers who work for part of the day but for five days per week, are still awarded 28 days holiday. This is because any day they take off as holiday will only be for the hours they would have worked anyway. So, 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.

You can combine the two principles above for an employee who works both partial hours per day and partial days per week.

For an employee who works compressed hours, eg. fulfils their weekly contracted hours in four days instead of five to give them Fridays off perhaps, there is a different approach. Because such an employee is effectively working the hours of 1.25 days per day, then any holiday they take is similarly calculated. Someone in this situation then would be granted 22.4 days holiday per year, bearing in mind they are having Fridays off as well.

Our default approach remains to direct enquiries to the online .Gov holiday calculator when calculating holiday as this should avoid disagreements. However, we are seeing more and more anomalies in employee working patterns and so the .Gov calculator doesn’t always have an option for every scenario. Sometimes it’s still a manual calculation.

And don’t forget that, this year, as last year, there will be an extra public holiday to account for Royal events. Strictly speaking, the wording in your employment contracts determines whether or not you are obliged to give the day off for the King’s coronation. But taking into account the fact probably no-one else in the country will be working in the country on that day, except hospitality venues, care and those directly involved in the event, you’re not really going to be the only employer who insists that your staff come into work, are you?

We’re here to help and support with your holiday calculations and questions. Call us on 01452 331331 or email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Amongst a number of legislative bills currently under review in Parliament is a new statutory code on fire and re-hire practices which would require employers to hold “fair, transparent, and meaningful consultations” on proposed changes to employment terms. It’s a change that may have been influenced by cases such as the mass sacking of 800 members of staff by P&O Ferries that you may remember from last year.

A contract of employment determines the terms under which an employee works for their employer in exchange for payment. Therefore any changes to these terms should be reflected in the contract and a new contract issued each time a change is made. If the proposed changes to the contractual terms are significant or fundamental, then a period of consultation should be entered into to give employees the opportunity to object to or influence how the changes are made.

A change of working premises would be considered a fundamental change as would a change in working hours or say a change to a shift pattern. It goes without saying that reductions in pay should always require consultation. Some businesses have used fire and re-hire tactics to avoid entering into a consultation period.

The terms under which a worker is employed fall under two headings; Statutory and contractual.

Statutory terms are those that affect all workers and are set out in law. Some of these are easy to identify, such a statutory maternity pay (SMP) and statutory sick pay (SSP).

We always recommend that statutory terms and those that apply across the entire workforce are included in the company staff handbook. This minimises paperwork when there is a change in statutory law as you don’t have to update individual employee contracts, just the staff handbook.

As well as statutory terms, a staff handbook might include procedures such as disciplinary & grievance and absence, break times and company policies such as Internet policy and Health & Safety policy.

Contractual terms are those that apply to specific employees and may enhance statutory terms, so these are the terms that will differ between employees. These will include the job title, hours of work, remuneration and access to company benefits etc. Although there maybe some statutory requirements that underpin these such as Working Time Directive and Minimum Wage.

A change to contractual terms will mean that the employee is working under new terms and so a new contract reflecting the changes should be issued. Where any changes are deemed to be significant or fundamental, then a period of consultation is required. If you are in any doubt about whether any changes to employee’s terms you are proposing constitute significant changes, you can call us for advice.

How your contracts are worded can help to keep a lid on your administration burden. For example, if you pay minimum wage then using a phrase such as “You will be paid at the prevailing National Minimum Wage rate for your age”, will mean you are not required to issue a new contract every time the NMW rate increases.

We recommend that contracts and handbooks are reviewed regularly to ensure they comply with statutory law and to cater for areas that are subject to frequent change such as Internet and Social Media usage.

If you would like to discuss a contract and handbook review then simply call us on 01452 331331 or e-mail This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

In a fairly uninspiring budget this week, Chancellor Jeremy Hunt did give a nod of recognition to the current and ongoing lack of skilled and experienced candidates available to fill job vacancies with a reform to the free childcare system. Campaign groups have been calling for a change to the rules for some time which, in its current form, means working parents of one and two year old children do not qualify for Government funded childcare.

The Chancellor’s motivation to update the system and therefore release skilled and experienced employees back into the workforce is most likely driven by his plans for economic growth, However, there will be many advantages for those whom the reforms directly benefit; primarily working women.

It’s easy to see how someone who has taken a break from work for any period of time might lack confidence, or perhaps fear that their skills and knowledge have become outdated, thereby making it difficult for them to re-join the workforce. One of the reasons for an extended break may be the inability to afford childcare.

Under the new rules, with childcare costs taken care of, they will be able to return to work with minimal delay and probably to the same job. This will be a boost to employers too as it will enable pregnant employees to plan their return to work more effectively, removing uncertainty over whether or not individuals will be returning to the jobs which must legally be held open for them.

The Chancellor’s plans have drawn some criticism over the upper earnings limit having no tapering and how the phased implementation of the new rules may have a short to mid term ill-effect on those claiming childcare; but we should acknowledge that the changes are another step towards equality.

In the meantime, employers can encourage applications from parents who are ready to return to the workplace by offering what have been referred to in the past as ‘Returnships’.

First discussed back in 2017, returnships provide structured return-to-work programmes targeted specifically at those who have taken an extended, voluntary break from work.

Mostly introduced by larger companies, historically, a returnship was a paid programme of between three and six months, for those returning to work after a break of over 2 years. It includes tailored support, training and coaching whilst the returner actively works in a job role with the final aim, although there is no guarantee, of taking that person on full time.

Often, returnships are targeted at women returners but we would recommend ensuring any such schemes are fully inclusive as the reasons for taking a break from work are not exclusively pregnancy or childcare related.
Previous Chancellor, Phillip Hammond previously announced funding for returnship schemes but we don’t think this ever materialised. Amendments to current apprenticeship schemes to incorporate the returnship concept have been mentioned but details are still to be released.

We suggest that employers who are struggling to fill vacancies design and offer their own returnship schemes to reach those who are already looking for support to return to work. We’d be happy to help with design and implementation. Call us on 01452 331331 or e-mail This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.