I have just come back from a company day out a summer party featuring sizeable amounts of alcohol, food, games and speeches.
As befits an organisation that counts HR magazine within its stable, the company sent out an edict warning that alcohol must be consumed moderately and unsuitable behaviour would not be tolerated. But, as I contemplated whether to try archery as I sipped my Pimms, I couldn't help but think of the sticky situations many companies find themselves in when it comes to the office day out.
Employers are legally responsible for the behaviour of staff at work dos. The wide range of employment laws mean liability can arise in a number of ways. It could be a racist or sexist joke, or unwelcome advances towards a colleague after too much alcohol is consumed. You must even be careful about gossip.
Think I am joking? Well, last year the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) ruled on a case involving just that. The claimant was in the early stages of pregnancy when she attended an office party and was seen accompanying an employee to a hotel room. A month later she told the MD she was pregnant. Within an hour gossip, had spread about her pregnancy and the paternity of the child.
As a result, the claimant asked to be relocated. She was allowed to work in a new location for a short period, then expected to return to the original office. After raising a grievance, refusing to work and not being paid, she resigned claiming constructive unfair dismissal, sex discrimination, discrimination on the grounds of pregnancy and harassment. An employment tribunal dismissed all her claims aside from constructive unfair dismissal, reducing the award as a result of her "foolhardy behaviour" at the party.
The EAT, however, held that her conduct should not affect the award. Moreover, it overturned the tribunal's decision in relation to the other claims, saying the gossip relating to the paternity of the baby did constitute harassment and was connected with pregnancy. It said the refusal to relocate the claimant to another office was sex and pregnancy discrimination.
Companies holding summer parties and rewarding top performers with days out the cricket season is in full swing, Henley Regatta is just round the corner and Wimbledon begins this week need to be aware of the breadth of potential liability for discrimination claims.
Remember to protect yourself by setting out clear guidelines on standards of behaviour and have a plan to deal with inappropriate conduct. And remember to consider post-party travel so that staff get home safely.
As befits an organisation that counts HR magazine within its stable, the company sent out an edict warning that alcohol must be consumed moderately and unsuitable behaviour would not be tolerated. But, as I contemplated whether to try archery as I sipped my Pimms, I couldn't help but think of the sticky situations many companies find themselves in when it comes to the office day out.
Employers are legally responsible for the behaviour of staff at work dos. The wide range of employment laws mean liability can arise in a number of ways. It could be a racist or sexist joke, or unwelcome advances towards a colleague after too much alcohol is consumed. You must even be careful about gossip.
Think I am joking? Well, last year the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) ruled on a case involving just that. The claimant was in the early stages of pregnancy when she attended an office party and was seen accompanying an employee to a hotel room. A month later she told the MD she was pregnant. Within an hour gossip, had spread about her pregnancy and the paternity of the child.
As a result, the claimant asked to be relocated. She was allowed to work in a new location for a short period, then expected to return to the original office. After raising a grievance, refusing to work and not being paid, she resigned claiming constructive unfair dismissal, sex discrimination, discrimination on the grounds of pregnancy and harassment. An employment tribunal dismissed all her claims aside from constructive unfair dismissal, reducing the award as a result of her "foolhardy behaviour" at the party.
The EAT, however, held that her conduct should not affect the award. Moreover, it overturned the tribunal's decision in relation to the other claims, saying the gossip relating to the paternity of the baby did constitute harassment and was connected with pregnancy. It said the refusal to relocate the claimant to another office was sex and pregnancy discrimination.
Companies holding summer parties and rewarding top performers with days out the cricket season is in full swing, Henley Regatta is just round the corner and Wimbledon begins this week need to be aware of the breadth of potential liability for discrimination claims.
Remember to protect yourself by setting out clear guidelines on standards of behaviour and have a plan to deal with inappropriate conduct. And remember to consider post-party travel so that staff get home safely.
No comments yet