The Workplace Prescription
Workplace Q&As and the latest news in employment law and HR
Here is your free prescription delivered straight to your inbox. If you have a colleague, friend or acquaintance who could benefit from a dose of HR and employment law news, please hit the share button, I would appreciate it!
Scrapping the winter fuel allowance. Are there employment law and HR consequences?
In a significant policy shift, the prime minister Sir Keir Starmer has proposed scrapping the universal winter fuel allowance for pensioners, suggesting instead that it should be targeted only at those in need. While primarily a matter of social policy, this change could have implications for employment law and human resources practices across the country.
The proposed change
The winter fuel allowance, introduced in 1997, has been a universal benefit for pensioners, providing financial support to help with heating costs during the colder months. Under Starmer's proposal, this benefit would be means-tested, directing resources to those pensioners most in need of assistance. This shift represents a significant departure from the current system and aligns with broader discussions about the sustainability of universal benefits in an ageing population.
Implications for Employment Law
The Equality Act 2010 protects workers from age discrimination. If the winter fuel allowance becomes means-tested, employers may need to be more vigilant about age-related benefits and compensation packages to ensure they don't inadvertently discriminate against older workers.
With the potential loss of a universal benefit, employees nearing retirement age may need to reassess their financial planning. This could lead to increased pressure on employers to provide more comprehensive retirement packages or financial planning assistance.
Older employees who lose access to the winter fuel allowance may seek to work longer or request flexible working arrangements to compensate for the loss of income. Employers will need to handle these requests fairly and in compliance with the statutory right to request flexible working.
HR departments will need to effectively communicate any changes in government benefits to employees, particularly those nearing retirement age. This includes providing clear information about how the changes might affect their overall compensation and benefits package and there may be an increased need for financial wellness programs and retirement planning support, especially for employees who may no longer qualify for the winter fuel allowance.
The potential scrapping of the universal winter fuel allowance could have wider economic implications that indirectly affect employment, for instance, some pensioners who lose the allowance may choose to re-enter the workforce or delay retirement, potentially changing the dynamics of the labour market.
Reduced disposable income for some pensioners could impact consumer spending, potentially affecting businesses and, by extension, employment levels in certain sectors.
If some pensioners struggle with heating costs, it could lead to increased health issues during winter months, potentially impacting sickness absence rates and healthcare costs for employers.
The government vote on the proposals tomorrow (Tuesday) and there significant underlying dissatisfaction from Labour backbenchers over this policy. Some will abstain but not enough to prevent the cghange in policy being effected.
Q&As
Can an employee return to work before maternity leave ends?
Q. An employee has asked to return to work before her maternity leave is due to end. Can she do that and if so, what notice does she need to give?
A. Yes, an employee can return to work before her maternity leave is due to end, but there are specific notice requirements she must follow.
The law states that if an employee wishes to return to work earlier than the full 52 weeks of statutory maternity leave, she needs to give her employer at least 8 weeks' notice of her intended return date. This applies whether she’s on ordinary maternity leave (the first 26 weeks) or additional maternity leave (weeks 27 to 52).
If she does not provide the required notice, you can delay her return until the 8-week notice period has been fulfilled, although it cannot be delayed beyond the end of the maternity leave period.
The notice doesn’t have to be in writing unless you specifically request it, but it’s generally a good practice to have it in writing for clarity and record-keeping purposes. If she provides the correct notice, you cannot refuse her request to return early.
20 minute rest break turns into 10!
Q. Hi, I currently work in service station, attending pumps and taking payment. On a 12 hour shift we are entitled to a 20 minute break, but we are only allowed to leave the unit for a maximum of 10 minutes, so how is this a break?
A. Under the Working Time Regulations 1998, if you work more than 6 hours in a day, you are entitled to a rest break of at least 20 minutes. This break:
Must be uninterrupted and not just a few short breaks added together.
Should be taken away from your work station, ideally somewhere where you are not expected to be actively working or monitoring anything, pump and payment kiosk in your case.
Should be a true break—meaning you should be free from all duties, and ideally, you should be able to leave the work area if you wish.
If your employer is only allowing you to leave the workplace for 10 minutes of your 20-minute break, it doesn’t fully meet the requirement of being a proper rest break. The idea behind the legal rest break is to give you time to relax and recharge without the pressure of work tasks.
What can you do about it?
You might want to have a quiet word with your manager or HR department about this discrepancy. You could phrase it as a query rather than a complaint—ask if the current arrangement fully meets the legal requirements for a rest break.
If informal discussions don’t work, you can formally request that your breaks be adjusted to comply with the law. Point out that you’re entitled to a full 20-minute break away from your duties.
Your employer is legally required to provide you with proper rest breaks, and it’s important for your well-being and effectiveness at work. You shouldn’t be put in a position where your break is effectively compromised. By raising the issue, you’re not only looking out for yourself but potentially for your colleagues as well, who may also be affected by this policy.
If you are dismissed or suffer any other detriment for raising the issue you can claim in the employment tribunal, even if you have less than two years of service as you are asserting your statutory right to a rest break.
Using a tracking app and privacy concerns
Q. Hi been working at a company for 8 years now on site. We’ve been been sent an app called blip which requires us to click in and out on site, it also has a tracker on constantly so even if we went to the shop it would send a notification to the office to say we’d left site, this is already on top of having trackers on our vans. This doesn’t sound legal at all just wondering your thoughts as apparently some people have refused and they’ve said they have the right to discipline and even let people go!
A. It sounds like your employer has introduced a level of tracking that goes beyond what's reasonable, and you're right to be concerned about it. Employers do have a right to monitor employees, but there are strict rules around how this should be done, particularly when it comes to personal data and privacy under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the Data Protection Act 2018.
Employers must have a lawful basis for processing personal data, including location data from trackers. They should inform you clearly about what data is being collected, why it's being collected, how it will be used, and who it will be shared with. This is usually done through a privacy notice or policy, so check if your employer has either of these.
Data collected should only be used for specific, explicit, and legitimate purposes. If the app is being used to track whether you're on-site, using it to monitor personal movements, like going to a shop, could be considered excessive. Furthermore, your employer should only collect data that's necessary for the stated purpose. Continuous tracking of your movements, especially if it's redundant (e.g., you already have van trackers), may go beyond what's necessary.
Consent isn't always the basis for processing in employment settings due to the imbalance of power between employer and employee. However, you still have rights to object to processing if it significantly impacts your privacy. You can request to see the data being collected about you and ask for corrections or deletion if the data is not handled correctly.
Your employer should have a clear policy on monitoring and the disciplinary implications. Any action taken against you for refusing to use the app should be reasonable and proportionate.
Disciplinary actions, including dismissal, should follow fair procedures and only be used if there is a legitimate business need that outweighs your privacy rights.
If you have concerns you should contact the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO). It is the body that oversees data protection. They can provide guidance or intervene if your employer’s practices are not compliant with the law.
In essence, while employers do have some rights to monitor staff, this must always be balanced with your right to privacy. It sounds like your employer's current approach may not fully comply with the legal requirements, particularly around fairness and proportionality. Refusing to use the app shouldn’t automatically lead to disciplinary action without first exploring reasonable alternatives and ensuring that all data protection requirements are met.
Useful Links
The legal bit. . .