Lucinda Bromfield: Orders from the top

-

It has recently been ruled that the dismissal of the Director of Children’s Services for the London Borough of Haringey was unfair, because the dismissal relied on unlawful directions from the then Secretary of State for Children and Families. The Government may appeal the decision. Most people will remember the ‘Baby P’ case that led to Ms Shoesmith’s dismissal. Baby P died as a result of abuse. Social workers had made visits to the home, and there was a huge public reaction to the Baby P’s death, along with significant adverse media coverage.

Sometimes, pressure from an important third party can be a fair reason to dismiss. These are ‘some other substantial reason’ dismissals and often happen where a client needs to maintain some control over a service provider’s staff. Sometimes the client even has the right to insist on dismissal, or the right to chose which of the employer’s staff work with the client, written into the contract for provision of services. But even in these situations, it is vital to follow a fair and correct process. Ideally, an employer also needs to have something in writing from the third party to show the pressure to dismiss, and the reasons for the dismissal. And as shown by the Shoesmith case, the third party needs to be giving lawful directions. For example, pressure to dismiss an employee because of a protected characteristic such as age, race or sexual orientation will nearly always be unlawful.

So what should an employer do if it finds itself in the unfortunate situation of having to dismiss an employee because of third party pressure? If the request for the dismissal is because of the employee’s capability or conduct the employer should carry out an appropriate investigation and procedure in line with the Acas Code on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures. If it isn’t within the reasonable range of responses to dismiss, the employer could try and reach a compromise with the third party on an appropriate sanction. Alternatively, it might be possible for the employer to move the employee to different part of the business to deal with the third party concerns without dismissing the employee.

If the third party is still insisting on dismissal and the employer feels they have no choice (for example, because the third party will withdraw their business and this will threaten the employer’s continued existence) then the dismissal may potentially be fair. But employers need to be incredibly careful in these situations and should always seek appropriate advice and make sure they follow appropriate and fair procedures.

HRreview Logo

Get our essential weekday HR news and updates.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Keep up with the latest in HR...
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
Optin_date
This field is hidden when viewing the form

 

This information is believed to be correct as at June 2011. It is not a substitute for legal advice and no liability attaches to its use. Specific and personal legal advice should be taken on any individual matter.

Lucinda Bromfield, Employment Specialist, Bevans Solicitors

Lucinda Bromfield is an employment specialist at Bevans, advising on all aspects of employment law and alternative dispute resolution. Before becoming a solicitor she had experience of working in compliance and HR for large private and public sector organizations. She is a qualified mediator and has a particular interest in the role of effective communication and HR in building sustainable, profitable businesses.

Latest news

Personalising the Benefits Experience: Why Employees Need More Than Just Information

This article explores how organisations can move beyond passive, one-size-fits-all communication to deliver relevant, timely, and simplified benefits experiences that reflect employee needs and life stages.

Grant Wyatt: When the love dies – when staying is riskier than quitting

When people fall out of love with their employer, or feel their employer has fallen out of love with them, what follows is rarely a clean exit.

£30bn pension savings window opens for employers ahead of 2029 reforms

UK employers could unlock billions in National Insurance savings by expanding pension salary sacrifice schemes before new limits take effect in 2029.

Expat jobs ‘fail early as costs hit $79,000 per worker’

International assignments are ending early due to family strain, isolation and poor preparation, as rising costs increase pressure on employers.
- Advertisement -

The Great Employer Divide: What the evidence shows about employers that back parents and carers — and those that don’t

Understand the growing divide between organisations that effectively support working parents and carers — and those that don’t. This session shows how to turn employee experience data into a clear business case, linking care-related pressures to performance, retention and workforce stability.

Scott Mills exit puts spotlight on risk of ‘news vacuum’ in high-profile dismissals

Sudden departure of a long-serving BBC presenter raises questions about how employers manage high-profile dismissals and limit speculation.

Must read

Derek Mackenzie: What does the London Growth Plan mean for job seekers and businesses?

London mayor Sadiq Khan and shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves recently unveiled the London Growth Plan to create 150,000 high-quality, high-paid jobs by 2028, highlights Derek Mackenzie.

Fiona Young: How EAs are redefining their roles with AI & automation

Executive Assistants (EAs) are on the brink of a huge shift, as AI is rewriting the rulebook for what it means to be an EA.
- Advertisement -

You might also likeRELATED
Recommended to you