Hi everyone, here’s today’s round-up of HR and employment law news.
Cadbury workers set to benefit from 3.2% pay rise – The Guardian
Workers at three Cadbury plants have won an inflation-linked pay deal for the next two years, bringing employees relief from the squeeze on British households amid the rising cost of living.
About 1,300 staff at sites in Bournville in the West Midlands – the historical home of the chocolate maker – Chirk, near Wrexham in Wales, and Marlbrook in Herefordshire, voted in favour of the pay deal, according to the Unite union. It said the two-year deal was designed to counter rising inflation, and also includes an increase in maternity pay.
HR becoming a more female and less accidental career choice – Personnel Today
The human resources profession is becoming increasingly female according to new research released this week. However, fewer people are “falling into” a career in HR by chance, than previously.
The research by XpertHR also found that women are more likely than men to have joined HR having been asked to take on HR responsibilities in a previous role; and men are more likely to have trained in HR from the start.
A care support worker fired over a misunderstanding about a pottery class booking was unfairly dismissed, a tribunal has ruled.
Reading Employment Tribunal heard that Mrs S Gough was dismissed by Carers Trust East Midlands after a pottery class at the day centre where she worked did not go ahead. The Trust alleged that she had cancelled the classes, whereas the pottery supplier had actually told her the lessons did not make economic sense so wouldn’t be sending anyone to run the class.
Gough was also asked to invite a former worker to a colleague’s leaving party, but was then accused of creating a safety risk by inviting people who the day centre might not have insurance for.
After appealing the initial dismissal, the case was taken to tribunal. Allowing the claims for unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal, Judge Chudleigh decided that, although Carers Trust East Midlands had genuinely thought Gough’s actions amounted to misconduct, that conclusion had been reached through an investigation that was “wholly inadequate even when judged through the prism of the range of reasonable responses test”.