In This Issue‘Tis the Season…to be

Jolly and WaryConcerns about behaviour at

office holiday parties.

Christmas & New Year Bonuses

Be cautious of terms in a resignation letter.

Question of the MonthBlurring the client-employee

relationship?

Top Issues for November

Legal UpdatesImportant changes coming up.

‘Tis The season…To be jolly and wary!

Can an employer be held vicariously liable for an injury caused at a Christmas party?

In the case of Bellman v Northampton Recruitment Ltd, the Court of Appeal found the employer responsible for wrongful conduct at a work party or after party.

Mr Bellman was a Sales Manager for the recruitment firm and Mr Major was the Company’s CEO. A Christmas party was organised followed by an after party where the CEO arranged taxis to transport everyone back to the pub and continued to pay for the drinks.

After a couple of hours at the after party, an argument broke out about a new employee’s placement and their salary. The CEO was angry about this and gave the employees a lecture. When Mr Bellman questioned the CEO’s decisions, the CEO punched Mr Bellman, causing brain damage.

The court was asked to decide whether the company was vicariously liable for the CEO’s actions. The judge at first instance held not, but the Court of Appeal disagreed.

Two key matters were considered:

(i) the nature of the employee’s job— construed broadly and objectively, and

(ii) whether there was sufficient connection between his job and the wrongful conduct to render vicarious liability appropriate.

Mr Major owned the company, was its most senior employee and managing director and had full control over how he conducted his role.

When he lectured his staff at the after party, he was wearing his metaphorical Managing Director’s hat and establishing his authority in that role. Additionally, the party was not a purely social event happening to involve colleagues but a follow-on from an organised work event attended by most of the company’s employees, where the company paid for taxis and drinks.

In those circumstances, there was a sufficient connection between the CEO’s role and his wrongful conduct, and, accordingly, the company was vicariously liable for his actions.

Issue 8 A dedicated update for CTHR Members December 2018

WhaT2WaTCh4

A service ofDirect Law & Personnel

1

2

Christmas & New Year boNusesDid a clumsily worded resignation acceptance letter vary the termination date by agreement?

No, held the Court of Appeal in JLT Specialty v Craven.

Craven and JLT entered into an agreement which provided that Craven’s employment would continue unless terminated earlier “by either party giving to the other 52 weeks written notice, provided that any such notice given by the Executive shall not expire before 31 December 2016”. Craven received a £500,000 “Bonus Advance” which was repayable if he resigned “on or before 31 December 2016”.

On 23 September 2015, Craven gave “notice to resign with effect from today’s date”. JLT replied on 29 September “your resignation is accepted and your employment will end on 1 January 2017”. JLT sent further correspondence stating “your final date of employment is 31 December 2016” and the Bonus Advance was due to be repaid by 7 January 2017. Craven’s employment ended and he declined to repay the Bonus Advance, in part as it was a ‘penalty clause’. JLT applied for summary judgment unsuccessfully and subsequently appealed.

The Court of Appeal, rejected an argument that the agreement had been varied by JLT’s 29 September letter such that Craven’s employment ended on 1 January 2017. The letter was not an offer; it was not an “expression of willingness to contract on specified terms”. Craven did not accept that ‘offer’ by continuing to work under the agreement. The parties conduct was

“explicable by their existing rights and obligations”The court went on to hold that the Bonus Advance

was repayable as employment came to an end on 31 December 2016 such that JLT were entitled to summary judgment. It declined to decide whether

“resign” meant the act of resignation or the date the resignation takes effect. It also avoided the question of whether the repayment obligation was a penalty clause, presumably because Craven did not pursue that argument.

3

QuesTIon of The MonThBlurring the client-employee relationship? Not sure how to maintain a professional working relationship?This month we received a very interesting question from one of our clients in the care sector regarding working relationships with clients and service users and how friendly is “too friendly”.

While it is true to say that it is key to develop relationships with service users it is also crucial to acknowledge where professional boundaries begin and how these could become unclear. Hence, in order to protect the business from a conflict of interest with the service user caused by an employee (often unintentionally) becoming over-friendly, we advise establishing clear policies and guidance to clearly communicate those boundaries.

Often—and especially within the care sector—friendships develop between an employee and service user. This is because empathy and a humanistic approach is high in the care industry. The problem occurs when the boundaries are blurred, people

become unsure what their roles are, and question whether they are working within their job profile or if they are going above and beyond which could be misconstrued.

An employer needs to ensure each employee is aware of the difference between being ‘friendly’ and being ‘friends’ and how to maintain professional distance.

Furthermore, an interpersonal relationship could give rise to a number of negative consequences, like the question of safeguarding clients with special needs that could potentially put the safety of the employee in danger, as well as favoritism, or the breach of confidentiality and trust during discussions conducted in a home environment. In short, interpersonal relationships should be avoided.

Need help writing a memo to a ‘confused’ employee? Contact your CTHR specialist today: we’re here for you.

ToP Issues foRnoVeMBeR 2018

4

We welcome all our new members to the

What2Watch4 newsletter.Remember, included in your membership is full insurance, unlimited telephone advice, email support, and discounts on CTHR face2face on your premises to chair disciplinaries, terminations, appeals, welfare meetings, home visits, or other HR-related meetings.

Here4YouWhatever the HR issue or problem...if you want to talk through a scenario, or just say ‘hi’ please email us at help@carerstrusthr.co.uk or call 0300 303 3268 and speak to one of our dedicated team.

We’re here for you.

legal updaTes

29th March 2019Brexit day! The UK leaves the EU. We’ll keep you updated with any changes in Employment Law.

6th April 2019Taxation of termination payments. Class 1A employer National Insurance contributions will be payable on termination payments over £30,000.

6th April 2019The abolition of Class 2 NIC for the self employed.

By 2020Parental Bereavement Bill expected to come into force. Once enacted will provide parents with 2 weeks paid leave following the death of a child under the age of 18.