The newly proposed Fair Work Agency marks a major shift in how employment law will be enforced under Labour’s employment reform plans. If introduced, it will merge several regulatory bodies including the Gangmasters and Labour Abuse Authority, HMRC’s National Minimum Wage team, and the Employment Agency Standards Inspectorate, into a single watchdog.

The new agency will have strong enforcement powers to uphold workers’ rights, including:

• Investigating underpayment of wages;
• Enforcing holiday pay, sick pay, and protections for zero-hours workers;
• Naming and shaming repeat offenders; and
• Issuing penalties and possibly criminal sanctions.

Now is the time to review your employment practices, contracts, and policies, especially around pay, working hours, and agency or casual staff. Strengthening your compliance now can help protect you from future penalties.

A recent Employment Appeal Tribunal ruling serves as a sharp reminder that a genuine redundancy process still requires genuine support.

Mr Kennedy was made redundant from his training role at Hendy Group despite having over 30 years’ experience in sales. While the redundancy itself was fair, the dismissal was ruled unfair after the company failed to help him seek alternative employment. He was told to apply for internal roles but had his access to the intranet removed, received no help from HR, and was blocked from applying for sales roles, despite training others in that very area.

The Tribunal awarded substantial compensation, highlighting that employers must do more than just point to a vacancy list. Proactive support and fair treatment are essential to avoiding legal risk.

The recent case of Afshah & Others v Addison Lee challenges the long-standing two-year limit on holiday pay claims. An Employment Tribunal ruled that the government’s two-year “backstop” cap on claims is unlawful, potentially allowing workers to reclaim holiday pay going back many years, possibly as far back as 1998 when the Working Time Regulations began.

While this decision is not yet binding and could be appealed, it signals a significant shift in holiday pay claims and increases potential liability for employers. Employers should review their holiday pay policies carefully and prepare for possible changes in the legal landscape.

In the case of Norman v Lidl, an employer was found guilty of indirect age discrimination after using a redundancy scoring system that unfairly penalised older workers for not having a university degree.

Mr Norman, in his 60s and with over 20 years’ service, was marked down due to a qualification requirement that disproportionately affected his age group. The Employment Tribunal ruled in his favour, awarding compensation for unfair dismissal and age discrimination.

This case highlights the risks of using criteria that may unintentionally discriminate against protected groups and underscores the importance of reviewing redundancy processes and policies carefully. Employers should ensure that selection criteria are fair, transparent, and legally compliant to avoid costly claims.