Question: Part I: Employment Tribunal Visit (1000 words)
Part II: Employment Tribunal Procedure (1000 words)
Toby Washington was employed as a research scientist by Chemlabs plc. Mr. Washington was dismissed summarily by Chemlabs plc following an investigation into allegations of theft. The investigation into Mr. Washington’s conduct was carried out by senior management in a thorough and professional manner and in accordance with the appropriate procedural requirements. The management uncovered firm evidence that Mr. Washington had committed gross misconduct as defined by the company’s disciplinary procedures, the sanction for which is instant dismissal. During the disciplinary hearing Mr. Washington stated that that he was being falsely accused for raising concerns about the procedure Chemlabs uses for disposing of hazardous waste materials. He asked Chemlabs if it wanted the issue to be reported to the relevant authorities or made public.
Chemlabs plc believe that any complaint against them is wholly without merit. It has no record of Mr. Washington ever raising concerns about the disposal of hazardous waste and it believes that Mr. Washington is motivated by the prospect of extracting a financial settlement from the company. Chemlabs plc is concerned that, notwithstanding the apparent weakness of a potential claim, Mr. Washington’s claim may cause unwanted publicity and unnecessary bureaucracy for the company.
Advise Chemlabs plc. on Employment Tribunal procedures should Mr. Washington complain to a tribunal. How can the company prevent the case proceeding to a full hearing and explain the advantages and disadvantages of the different options available to them in this respect. The company also seek advice on how to minimise adverse publicity for the company should the case proceed to a Tribunal. Please note, this assignment requires you to demonstrate knowledge and understanding of Employment Tribunal procedure and not the substantive law on unfair dismissal.
Mark - 72
Coursework 1 - Employment Law (Year 3)
Answer: Part 1 – Facts Mrs Arnold was looking to bring a claim against her former employer, Rosol Limited, in relation to a breach of contract amounting to unpaid wages and a redundancy pay claim. Mrs Arnold was a senior care assistant responsible for caring for two individuals. She was required to work shifts, along with other employees, to provide around the clock care for the two patients. In May 2015, one patient died, leaving the claimant and the other carers to care for just one individual. When the second patient died on 26th December 2015, Mrs Arnold claimed that her employment was ended without notice. She claimed that under usual business practices, when the patient she cared for no longer required care, she would be assigned another patient, which had not happened in this instance. M......(short extract)
To download the full answer, please Sign in or Register then make a payment or submit coursework.
Details: - Mark: 72% | Course: Employment Law | Year: 2nd/3rd | Words: 2571 | References: Yes | Date written: November, 2016 | Date submitted: February 15, 2017 | Coursework ID: 1003
