Employment Law Cases

The UK is often thought of as good on parental rights, maternity leave rights and pregnancy leave in general. It is true that compared to many other countries around the world, Britain is fairly advanced. However, it lags behind other countries (mostly Scandinavia) in some aspects. The question is should we change?

Mothers

There are lots of different sides to the argument; should fathers have greater rights in terms of Paternity leave? Pregnancy in heterosexual couples is as much a joint matter as it is in homosexual couples or single parent families, but includes a slightly different problem. One of the huge questions involved is “Who will stay home with the kid(s)?” No matter your personal views on maternity leave rights and different families, sexes and situations,there are some clear differences in maternity law, right or wrong.

In the UK, under current maternity law, mothers get a year’s leave. They are allowed six weeks maternity leave at 90% of pay, 33 weeks at a fixed rate and the remainder unpaid. While a vast amount of legal documentation is necessary to ensure pregnancy leave, the amount is legally prescribed and enshrined in law. There are other allowances and benefits to allow for problems with informing employers in a timely manner, how long you have worked for the employer and more. But on the whole, as long as you follow maternity laws to the letter, you will get the Maternity leave owed.

Fathers

Fathers are also allowed pregnancy leave, sometimes unknown to the fathers involved. Pregnancy leave for fathers is set in the UK at two weeks. This is at the same fixed rate as mothers - £117.18 a week currently, or 90% of your average weekly earnings if less than this. Similar amounts of legal documentation are necessary to apply for both types of leave, but, again, both are guaranteed under UK parental regulations.However,it is one of the main differences in the benefits that affect new and repeat parents the most.

Mothers are entitled to much more unpaid leave than fathers under UK maternity law. This is the time that the parent is entitled to as leave while the employer must keep them in employment. This means that if they take more leave (not holiday or for other reasons) fathers are effectively AWOL, and can be fired. However, there are fairly obvious reasons for this difference in length of maternity/paternity leave. Maternity leave is an absolute necessity for the physical and mental health and wellbeing of both mother and baby, but arguably not for fathers.

There are arguments on both sides of the divide in terms of more or less paid and unpaid leave for fathers. Despite your views either way, what is clear is that it often makes much greater sense for a mother to stay at home while the father continues to work, purely from an economic point of view. The question of whether fathers can have the same rights of mothers is therefore slightly mute. They can physically choose to be the parent who cares for the child, but pregnancy leave is often better overall when it is taken as maternity leave rather than paternity leave for reasons of income and job security.

The EPLI Insurance or Employment Practices Liability 101

Myth #1: Employees are ‘exempt’ if they are paid a salary.
Payment of a ’salary,’ however, is only one of many requirements to create an ‘exempt’ employee. So, while state and federal rules regarding overtime, meal & rest periods, and similar wage/hour laws do not apply to ‘exempt’ employees, don’t assume that someone paid a ’salary’ is exempt. Mistakes are expensive - unpaid overtime, interest, penalties, and more!

Myth #2: Employees on ‘probation’ can be terminated easier.
Many employment laws apply on the first day of employment. Since at-will employees are always on probation, having a defined ‘probationary’ period actually hurts the employer and can limit its right to terminate a poor performer.

Myth #3: You don’t have to pay an employee who works from home, after hours, without being asked to do so.
A non-exempt employee must be paid for all hours worked whether you authorize the time or not. Therefore, a non-exempt employee who works 40 hours per week and extra hours at home answering emails may have a legitimate overtime claim. Even if their work at home doesn’t result in overtime, they would have an unpaid wage claim.

Myth #4: If I hire someone on a short term basis, I can “1099″ them.
1099 refers to the IRS form used to document monies paid to an independent contractor. If you pay someone to fix your roof, they are an independent contractor. However, an employee is just that, an employee, and must be paid through payroll and issued a W-2 at year end. Mis-classifying someone as an independent contract can result in substantial penalties, back taxes and benefit plan implications.

Myth #5: My employees are like family…They would never sue me.
Even if your employees feel a part of your family, family members sue each other all the time. Employers assume their employees (or former employees) would never file a lawsuit against them. This assumption is not based on fact. The fact is that small employers are vulnerable to employment claims. Recent statistical data shows that a plaintiff will win an employment lawsuit filed in state court about 67% of the time. While verdicts exceed $1 million frequently, the most likely verdict will range from $41,250 to $197,500. This may cripple a small business.

Here are examples of the damage a lawsuit can have on a small business…

• A small construction company paid $225,000 in a same-sex harassment case. The victims in this male on- male harassment case claimed they were subjected to a hostile work environment when their employer failed to respond to complaints of unwanted physical contact and offensive comments.
• An Illinois gas station paid $250,000 to settle sexual harassment claims against the husband of a former employee. The EEOC said that the women employees were subjected to fondling, sexual comments and sexual intimidation by their manager’s husband, who performed odd jobs at the station.
• A small family-owned business will pay $325,000 to settle a sexual harassment suit brought by the EEOC on behalf of several former employees. The suit contended that the employees were constructively discharged (forced to resign) due to the sexually charged, hostile work environment created by several co-workers.