In terms of discrimination, significant findings at the Court of Appeal included that legal protection against disability discrimination extends to a perception that an individual has a progressive condition likely to result in a disability in the future. Another was that it is not unlawful sex discrimination for men to be paid less during periods of shared parental leave than mothers during statutory maternity leave (the Supreme Court will rule on this in 2020).
Holiday-pay cases rumbled on, with the Court of Appeal upholding a ruling that holiday-pay calculations should include pay received for voluntary overtime, rejecting a suggestion that a contractual obligation to work such overtime is required. Further, the Northern Ireland Court of Appeal held that workers do not lose the right to claim historic arrears of holiday pay where there is a gap of more than three months between underpayments. A similar case is due to head to the Employment Appeal Tribunal in 2020.
On the reason for dismissal and the fairness of suspension and disciplinary processes, the Court of Appeal provided a reminder that the correct test is whether the employer had reasonable and proper cause to suspend. The argument that an employer cannot have had reasonable and proper cause to suspend unless the suspension was ‘necessary’ was rejected, reinforcing the position that there is no test of ‘necessity’. The Supreme Court has also found that, if a more senior member of staff to the employee influences that employee’s dismissal, and the dismissing officer is unaware of this fact, an unfair dismissal finding can still apply.
The courts also considered worker status claims, determining whether individuals are employees, workers or self-employed. The categorisation is important for a number of reasons, including from an employment rights perspective. Looking ahead, an important test case for worker status is due to be considered by the Supreme Court in 2020.