EMPLOYMENT LAW

Employment Law

Table of Contents

Introduction2

Case 1: Alison and Bernard2

Legal Issues2

Grounds To Resist The Claim3

Procedure To Prevent The Claims3

Minimizing The Risks Of Future Disputes5

Case 2: Deirdre6

The Legal Issues6

Grounds To Resist The Claims7

Procedure To Prevent The Claims9

Recommendations To Prevent The Future Claims10

Conclusion11

References12

Employment Law

Introduction

The paper discusses and analyse the two cases and insight of the laws and the [procedures that the organization need to take in handling the employee law. Both the cases deal with the termination issues which brought the employees to take the issue in the tribunal court and place the claims. The analysis shows if the claims are justifiable and if the organizations can avoid them.

Case 1: Alison and Bernard

Legal Issues

The case of Alison and Bernard is one which involves an unfair dismissal due to the neglig3cne of the company. Illegal dismissal is when an employer terminates an employee in violation of their legal rights. Wrongful dismissal and termination of employment for any reason preclude the possibility of human labour. According to the law in this case, the employer shall reimburse for the employee who did not receive their wages. Such a duty arises if the income, is not received by the illegal removal of an employee from work, dismissal or transfer to another job, the employer's failure to perform or delayed execution of a court, commission on labour disputes or legal state labour inspector to restore the employee to former job; delay the employer granting the employee work record, work record in making improper or inappropriate language the reasons for the legislation dismissal, and in other cases stipulated by unified laws and collective bargaining agreement. Dismissal or transfer to another job worker illegally can be restored to previous work by the court. In this case, the court finds the employee during the absence from work of enforced idleness. Estimated time of forced absence from the day following the dismissal to the date of the decision to reinstate or re-formulating dismissal. In this case, the court will decide on the payment of the employee's average salary for all time of enforced idleness.

Grounds to Resist the Claim

The company can protect the rights of dismissal by declaring the court's declaration of both the employees as involved in illegal activities. The administration should seriously think about to settle the issue with the employee on dismissal amicably (for example, leave the parties agree to payment of employee compensation) or to violate the law. In the latter case, the prospect shines at once to pay the salary is, actually a non-working employee for a long time, the amount of indexation on this salary, taxes (too many), indemnify, and even to "receive" unnecessary and "harmful" employee back. For a small company, such restoration at work can be a serious financial blow. Of course, there will be some losses. The court, determining the amount of wages for the time of enforced idleness, may not make it out of any retention, particularly income tax, as this duty is vested in the company of the employer (Article 226 of ...