The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has held that where the terms of an engagement have been substantially determined by both the employer agency and the end user, both are capable of being the individual's employer for the purposes of the whistleblowing legislation.
In Garamukanwa v Solent NHS Trust  IRLR 476 EAT, the EAT held that an employee who was dismissed for sending anonymous malicious emails to his former girlfriend could not rely on art.8 of the European Convention on Human Rights to prevent his employer from using evidence from his iPhone connecting him with the fake email addresses from which the messages were sent. Since the iPhone evidence had been supplied by the police following their investigations and with permission for it to be used, the tribunal had not erred in finding that the employer acted within the range of reasonable responses.
In this unusual case, an employment tribunal struck out four claimants' cases and ordered them to pay £17,371 each in costs after the respondent NHS trust's chief executive and lawyers were sent a covert recording of the trust receiving legal advice.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has rejected a reasonable adjustments claim by an NHS worker with severe phobias of blood and needles. Ryan Stringer explains this recent decision on reasonable adjustments for a disabled person.
In Wasteney v East London NHS Foundation Trust  IRLR 388 EAT, the EAT held that disciplinary proceedings against an employee were taken because she had acted inappropriately by imposing her religious views on a junior employee. She had not suffered unlawful religious discrimination, nor had her human right to manifest her religious belief been breached.
In Bone v North Essex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (No.2)  IRLR 295 CA, the Court of Appeal upheld an employment tribunal decision that an employer's "deliberate failure" to deal with "a campaign of harassment and bullying" against a trade union member amounted to a detriment because of trade union activities.
The employment tribunal has upheld a claim for discrimination arising from disability against an employer that withdrew a job offer when it discovered the extent of the claimant's previous long-term ill-health absences.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has held that the employee had no reasonable expectation of privacy in respect of inappropriate emails and photographs on his iPhone relating to a work colleague that affected the workplace.
In Pnaiser v NHS England and another  IRLR 170 EAT, the EAT held that a former employer unlawfully discriminated against a disabled employee who had taken significant disability-related sick leave in giving her a negative reference, and her prospective employer discriminated by withdrawing the job offer.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has held that an employee was subjected to disciplinary proceedings because of her own inappropriate actions, and not because she was manifesting her Christian beliefs.
HR and legal information, news and guidance relating to employers in the health sector.