'To our knowledge, this is the oldest spider ever recorded,' said study lead author Leanda Mason on LIVE SCIENCE this we
NO MORE STRINGS A grand old lady dies behind her door
DOWN WITH DADS A case of shared parental leave and sex discrimination
FRESHLY QUALIFIED Our Chris Greep becomes a Solicitor
Your weekly bulletin of wit & wonder in the world of…
Wg Employment Issue 599/May 2018 Q: What do Ken Dodd, Dale Winton, Professor Stephen Hawking and Gaius Villosus No 16 all have in common? GO ON… ask everyone in the office (unless you work alone in which case ask the weeping fig or a photo on your desk). A: They all have all, sadly, been claimed by the grim reaper in 2018. But while many of you are no doubt still reeling from the deaths of Dale, Doddy and the Godfather of modern science, few of you will have noticed the passing of poor No 16. Yet No 16 is every bit as eminent. She lived to the age of 43. She didn’t get out much and it’s fair to say she was a bit jumpy. She was a trapdoor spider. This week it was announced that No 16 had been killed by a parasitic wasp which bashed its way through the door of her home, where she had been studied by Australian scientists since 1975, when she was only a spiderling. But, like Dale Winton (albeit with six extra legs), No 16 will never be forgotten. ‘To our knowledge, this is the oldest spider ever recorded,’ said study lead author Leanda Mason on LIVE SCIENCE this week. ‘Her significant life has allowed us to further investigate the trapdoor spider’s behaviour and population dynamics.’ They learned that female trapdoor spiders make a burrow and then never move from it. These agoraphobic arachnids only nip out an inch or so to seize prey - and they wait for males to pop in and mate. Even if the burrow gets damaged, she’ll fix it rather than leave to find a new one. It’s a small world. 43 years staring at spiders. Go on, admit it. You wish you’d had that career.
Mamas & Papas And speaking of staying at home brings me to the case of Capita Customer Management Limited v Ali. Mr Ali was an employee of Telefonica until Telefonica transferred their employees and policies to Capita, and he became an employee of Capita. Female employees who had transferred from Telefonica were entitled to enhanced maternity pay. The maternity policy stated that female employees who had been employed for at least 26 weeks were entitled to 14 weeks’ enhanced maternity pay on full salary, followed by 25 weeks’ statutory maternity pay. In contrast, male employees taking paternity leave were entitled to take two weeks’ ordinary paternity leave on full pay, followed by up to 26 weeks’ additional paternity leave during which they “may or may not be paid”. Mr Ali’s wife gave birth and Mr Ali took the first two weeks’ ordinary paternity leave. His wife was then diagnosed with post-natal depression, the suggested treatment of which was to return to work. To look after his daughter, Mr Ali planned to take further leave and so approached Capita to ask about his rights. They told him he was eligible for shared parental leave, but that they would only pay statutory shared parental pay. Mr Ali asserted that, beyond the first two weeks after birth, he should receive the same entitlement as the female employees. Capita rejected this grievance.
EVENT SEASON 2018 SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN THE WORKPLACE th Thursday 7 June
MENTAL HEALTH CHECK th Tuesday 10 July
PULLING A SICKIE th Wednesday 5 September
PRACTICE MAKES PERFECT th Wednesday 17 October
12 DAYS OF CHRISTMAS nd Thursday 22 November
To book onto any of our events email Karen Clarkson or Gina Spampinato at
[email protected]
Peace of Mind Do you want to save your business time and money, and reduce stress?
Mr Ali took his case to the Employment Tribunal (ET), among other things, argued that the policy assumed that a man caring for his baby is not entitled to the same pay as a woman caring for her baby. The ET upheld his claim of direct sex discrimination, stating that beyond the first two weeks (when maternity pay is primarily used to help mothers recover from childbirth), pay is largely designed to facilitate the care for the baby. Given men are encouraged to care for their babies, parents should be able to decide who will take on the role of primary carer and both parties should be offered full pay. Capita appealed the case to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT). The EAT agreed with Capita, upholding the appeal, deciding that there was no direct sex discrimination. They disagreed with the ET’s findings - the purpose of maternity pay is for the health and wellbeing of the mother, whereas the purpose of shared parental pay is to care for the child. Given the purpose of his leave was to care for the baby, Mr Ali could not therefore compare himself to a woman on maternity leave. The correct comparison would be to a woman on shared parental pay, who would be paid on the same terms as Mr Ali.
“I cannot speak highly enough of the service we have received. Our queries are always dealt with promptly and the advice we receive is clear and practical.” Contact us today on 02380 717717 or email
[email protected] to find out how Peace of Mind can help your business.
It is useful to have authority from the EAT on this issue. However, it is also worth reviewing the recent judgment of the case of Hextall v Chief Constable of Leicestershire Police, where the ET held that the police force’s policy of providing full pay to mothers on maternity leave but only statutory shared parental pay to fathers on paternity leave was not discriminatory. This case was appealed and heard in the EAT in January 2018, and the EAT has this week found that there was potential there for indirect discrimination – however, due to an absence of facts in the particular case, they referred it back to the ET for a new hearing.
A solicitor is born Our cockles are always warmed when one of our trainees qualifies. And as it’s now May and (allegedly) full on spring, it’s a delight to congratulate Chris Greep as he spreads his wings as a fully fledged solicitor. It seems like no time at all since Chris arrived with the Employment Team as an Intern in 2013. Over the past five years he’s done the rounds of WG, building experience and expertise with our colleagues in Commercial Property, Company Commercial and Commercial Litigation.
Are you following us on Facebook?
This week Chris finally qualified as a solicitor. They grow so fast… We’re delighted he’s settled here in the Employment Team, where he’ll be working alongside Howard Robson dealing with Employment Tribunal litigation cases, advising on settlement agreements and supporting our Peace of Mind team.
If you haven’t liked us already, follow the link below…
‘Working as an Employment Solicitor has been my goal since I first joined the firm five years ago so this is a very proud moment for me,’ said Chris. But, be fair, until today nobody had told him about studying trapdoor spiders for a living…
…and after liking us on Facebook, why not follow us on Twitter?
Contact the team Sarah Whitemore (Partner) – 02380 717462 Howard Robson (Partner) – 02380 717718 Lisa Joyce (Associate) – 02380 717447 Emma Kemp (Associate) – 02380 717486 Natalie Rawson (Solicitor) – 02380 717403 Chris Greep (Solicitor) – 02380 717448 DISCLAIMER While every effort is made to ensure that the contents of these diaries are up -to-date and accurate, no warranty is given to that effect and Warnergoodman does not assume responsibility for their accuracy and correctness. The diaries are provided free o f charge and for information purposes only. Readers are warned that the diaries are no substitute for legal advice given after consideration o f all material facts and circumstances by an experienced employment lawyer. Therefore, reliance should not be plac ed upon the legal points explained in these diaries or the commentary upon them.
UNSUBSCRIBE If you do not wish to receive future editions of this newsletter, please simply reply to this e-mail and include the word "Unsubscribe".
Simply click on the logo to start following us and see our daily updates.
COPYING THESE DIARIES ON TO OTHERS While the author retains all rights in the copyright to these diaries, we are happy for you to copy them on to others who might be interested in receiving them on a regular basis, provided Warnergoodman is acknowledged as the publisher of the diaries and provided those persons register directly with ourselves, so that we are able to send future editions to them direct. No charge will be made for doing so. Alternatively, simply send us the e-mail contact details for anyone who wishes to receive the diary and we will be happy to add them to the circulation list. Unless expressly agreed by Warnergoodman in writing, nobody has authority to copy or use these diaries, or extracts from them, for any promotional or commercial purposes.
