Understand Your Rights. Solve Your Legal Problems
“When people face harassment, retaliation or discrimination at work, it affects more than just their jobs. It affects their mental and emotional wellbeing. They might be worried about the various impacts such as losing their jobs, losing hours, suffering a demotion or some other sort of financial harm.”
Twila White speaks to us on workplace harassment and what employers should be doing to avoid such situations.
What do you believe should be done in order for organizations to gain the best out of their employees?
I think that communication is important. People need to feel comfortable asking questions and be in an environment which cultivates open communication. No one wants to feel like they are walking on egg shells when speaking to a supervisor or in an environment where growth is limited. Organizations should have management and leaders that are relatable, so people feel comfortable enough to approach them with questions and issues whenever they arise.
With sexual harassment being a big concern, how would you advise workplaces to handle such situations?
The first thing employers have to do is engage in training, which is key. The employer should have antidiscrimination and harassment policies and procedures, but most importantly abide by them. Policies should be followed and complied with. Some employees don't know what they can or cannot do. Or what is appropriate and inappropriate in the workplace. Therefore, I would recommend yearly training for employees, from the top down. Many people in management believe that they are untouchable and that they do not need to comply with the policies and procedures. These are people in management positions who in many instances place employers at the most risk, because the higher up you go, the greater the liability and legal exposure that the employer can be held accountable for. For example, if an officer, director or managing agent was engaged in the conduct, knew about it, ratified it and/or adopted it, the employer could be held liable for punitive damages. We know from reading about large verdicts that punitive damages can be many times more than any compensatory damages verdict that a jury decides for the plaintiff. That is why I say training has to be a top down approach; we lead by example.
In regards to clients that may approach you, how would you advise them to tackle such a situation, especially if they would want to continue working for the company; how do you ensure their safety?
I would not recommend a resignation to someone who has worked so hard to secure a position that they enjoy or climbed the corporate ladder by investing years of their life only to be confronted by a difficult situation at work. Many people who work in hostile environments enjoy their jobs, but they don’t enjoy the way that they are being treated. The environment can be distinguishably different from the work itself. The first course of action is to get legal advice and consultation so that the employee knows what their rights are before making any drastic decisions. While the employee may be in despair about their workplace situation, sometimes companies do the right thing and will seek to correct whatever it is that may be wrong. This would be an employer who has written policies and complies with them by taking immediate and prompt measures to correct the situation. The assumption should never be made that the employer will not do the right thing. Many times, if the employer is unaware of the misconduct, they cannot fix the problem. On the other hand, if the employer is given the opportunity to remedy the situation, and they choose to do nothing and not stop the conduct, problems increase. The employee may want to explore the possibility of retaining a lawyer for any harmed caused or to put a stop to the harmful workplace conditions.
Are there any regulations or legislations that you are hoping to see change in employment law?
I would like to see arbitration clauses eradicated in employment cases. Doing away with arbitration in this context would prohibit employers from requiring employees or applicants to waive their legal right to a trial by jury in order to work. Signing an arbitration agreement that waives your Seventh Amendment Constitutional Rights should not be a condition of employment. Employers devise contracts of adhesion, where they make employees sign an arbitration clause in order to get the job. Of course, most people are not going to disagree with their potential employer, because they want the job and if they refuse, they will never get work. In my opinion, these contracts are one-sided bargaining situations. When something bad happens in the workplace, after an employee has signed an arbitration agreement, most of the times the employee will end up in arbitration where there is a retired judge or lawyer, who is the ultimate decision maker. The employer is paying the arbitrator. The employer has the opportunity to have a repeat player dynamic where that employer has been before a particular arbitrator many times over, and has a familiarity with an arbitrator, whereas the plaintiff has no familiarity with that arbitrator or process. Lawyers call it the “repeat player effect”. The California Supreme Court[1] has held that a neutral arbitration is essential to the integrity of the process. But the “repeat player effect”, as noted by the California Supreme Court and California appellate courts, and discussed in various law journals, conveys distinct advantages to the employer including knowledge of the arbitrator’s temperaments, procedural preferences, styles, and the arbitrator’s cultivation of further business by taking a ‘split the difference’ approach to damages.[2]
Therefore, in some instances where employees should win arbitration, they end up losing, or where they have sought full justice, they only receive partial justice, with a lower verdict with an arbitrator than with a jury. Moreover, when a case is litigated by jury, it is in a public forum, a courthouse, where anyone can attend, listen and watch the proceeding, including the media. In arbitration, the proceedings are usually private and the public does not know when the arbitration is occurring or where, and oftentimes many documents are designated as confidential, also without becoming part of public court records. With the #MeToo movement and many women and men feeling empowered to speak up about sexual harassment because they feel they have a voice and are not alone, arbitration allows those proceedings to be kept confidential and private so that the rest of the world knows nothing about the developments in the legal proceedings. These proceedings should be in the open and public, and the right to trial by jury preserved.
Twila White
Founding Partner
(001) 213-381-8749
The Law Office of Twila S. White stands ready to protect the rights and livelihood of workers across California. Attorney White is a prolific speaker on employment law and uses her extensive knowledge to passionately represent her clients' interests. Her care and concern for California's workers has resulted in being selected for inclusion in the Southern California Super Lawyers and Rising Stars list for multiple years
Armendariz v. Foundation Health Psychcare Services, Inc. (2000) 24 Cal.4th 83, 103
[2] Schwartz, Enforcing Small Print to Protect Big Business: Employee and Consumer Rights Claims in an Age of Compelled Arbitration, 1997 Wis. L.Rev. 33, 60-63 (Schwartz).)
Isbell, Compulsory Arbitration of Employment Agreements: Beneficient Shield or Sword of Oppression? Armendariz v. Foundation Health Psychcare Services, Inc. (2001) 22 Whittier L. Rev. 1107, 1142-1144
Bingham, Employment Arbitration: The Repeat Player Effect (1997) 1 Employee Rts. & Employment Poly. J. 189.
Mercuro v. Superior Court (Countrywide Securities Corp.) (2002) 96 Cal.App.4th 171, 178
Armendariz, supra, 24 Cal.4th at p. 115.
VLET Holdings S. a. r. l., a subsidiary of the Abris CEE Mid-Market III LP Fund managed by Abris Capital Partners Ltd. in close cooperation with Velvet CARE Board, signed a preliminary agreement with AVALLON Fund to acquire a majority equity stake in Velvet CARE Sp. z o. o.
Abris Capital Partners is an independent private equity fund which invests in Central & Eastern Europe. Abris manages the capital commitments of many prestigious, international institutional investors including university endowment funds, pension funds, insurance companies and private asset managers.
The key assumption of Abris's strategy is to create Polish and regional champions in their industries from companies that will reach their wings. These are also the ambitions for Velvet Care. The goal is to become a leader in the Central and Eastern Europe within a few years and to accelerate their already very dynamic growth thanks to the continuation of the Velvet Care management strategy and cooperation with a new partner.
Key Pöyry experts involved in the Abris Capital acquisition of the Polish tissue company Velvet Care
We hear from Pirkko Petäjä and Mikko Helin.
Pöyry Management Consulting played an important role when Abris Capital Partners acquired majority stake in Velvet Care. Pöyry’s work included a Commercial Due Diligence assessment of Velvet’s business and business plan. Another important part was an assessment of the on-going major investment project. An independent valuation appraisal of the Target was also included.
Pöyry’s tissue business experts, Pirkko Petäjä and Mikko Helin with their team conducted the assignment end 2017- early 2018, providing support for the Abris team throughout the process.
We at Pöyry considered Velvet Care as the single best opportunity available for the Central Eastern European tissue consolidation where Abris already was a player through its tissue ownership in Romania. Velvet is starting a new large tissue machine and is in excellent position through its leading brands in the region.
Pöyry has a solid industrial logic based on in-depth understanding of both business and technical perspectives of tissue and hygiene operations. As a pulp, paper, packaging and tissue/hygiene focused consultancy, Pöyry has continuously assignments providing views on key trends and issues in Europe and globally. Pöyry also has proven capabilities in due diligence analysis, with relevant tools, processes and framework thanks to continuous cooperation with a large number of industrial and financial sector clients.
Pöyry has worked in a role of board-level adviser for many of the leading tissue companies and has also been involved in a number of strategic acquisitions in the European tissue industry.
In addition to forest-based industries, Pöyry also has industry specific expertise in energy and infrastructure businesses.
With a rise in workplace-related stress, illnesses and mental health issues, over a third (36%) of working adults in the legal industry believe that businesses are not doing enough to support the physical and mental wellbeing of their employees, according to a new study.
Current treatments such as health check-ups, cognitive behavioural therapy and chiropractic treatment are provided by the NHS, through National Insurance contributions, but 68% of those surveyed by Westfield Health stated that the NHS does not have the budget to provide wellbeing services like these.
So is National Insurance becoming unfit for purpose? Employees in the legal industry don’t seem to know, four in ten (40%) of employees saying they do not know how much National Insurance they pay and over a third (37%) saying they do not know how much of the contribution goes where, be it the NHS, social security or their state pension.
With an ageing workforce and more hours spent in the office than ever, should the NHS’s frontline resources continue to be used for wellbeing services? The research found that over half (57%) of workers in the legal industry would like to see the Government do more to promote their physical and mental wellbeing. And three quarters (74%) believe their employer is specifically not doing enough to help employees deal with work-related stress, anxiety and other mental health issues.
Similar to the recent rollout of the workplace pension opt-out, could a government-backed auto-enrolment scheme for wellbeing programmes - funded by employers and by a portion of employees’ National Insurance contributions - be one of the solutions to address the NHS’s long-term financial needs?
Certainly the appetite is there in the legal industry with long working hours leading to stress, anxiety and sleep deprivation and pressure coping with deadlines impacting on their overall health and productivity. As a result, almost two thirds (61%) of employees stated they’d use wellbeing services if their employer provided them.
The top things they would like to be offered are:
David Capper, Commercial Director of Westfield Health, said: “The total number of UK working days lost to stress, anxiety and depression resulting from long working hours is 12.5million days. Therefore, it makes sense for employers to relieve some of the pressure through wellbeing initiatives. Not only would they be supporting our economy, they’ll make huge cost savings by looking after their staff’s health, with presenteeism now costing businesses up to three times more than absenteeism*.
“From sleep to nutrition and mental health to physical fitness, there are so many elements that contribute to your overall wellness, happiness and healthiness. It’s more than free fruit in the office and discounted gym memberships. As business leaders, we need to create a culture where our people’s health and wellbeing is prioritised to drive confidence, capability, inspiration and ultimately prosperity.”
Chris Allen, Managing Partner at Blacks Solicitors LLP, which is passionate about wellbeing in the workplace, commented: “Law is a highly competitive industry and so standing out and attracting the best talent is paramount.
“We’ve recently moved offices to create a more positive and collaborative working space for our employees, with lots of natural light and social spaces. We purposely have kept our office open plan to encourage junior staff members to feel at ease with senior staff and partners, and to reinforce our open door policy.
“I believe our high retention rate is due to us investing time to nurture and care for our employees. In addition, I consider sport as an important part of maintaining both a physical and mental healthy lifestyle. We have set up both a netball and football team that take part in matches every week. This not only acts as a great teamwork building exercise, but also encourages staff to look after themselves and help relieve any stresses from the week. We still have a way to go, but health and wellbeing is firmly on our agenda in order to keep ahead of the competition.”
For more information about workplace health and wellbeing, call 03331 227343 or visit www.westfieldhealth.com/business.
(Source: Brass Agency)
The Democratic National Committee (DNC) has filed a multimillion-dollar lawsuit against Russia, the Trump campaign and Wikileaks over an alleged 12 offences, including conspiracy, fraud and violations of the Wiretap Act.
The suit comes in response to an alleged cyberattack on the DNC by Russia. Trump is also accused of both being aware of and supporting their efforts to undermine the DNC. Such offences are considered to have contributed to an illegal interference of the 2016 presidential election.
The Washington Post reports that DNC Chairman Tom Perez said: “During the 2016 presidential campaign, Russia launched an all-out assault on our democracy, and it found a willing and active partner in Donald Trump’s campaign.”
He continued: “This constituted an act of unprecedented treachery: the campaign of a nominee for President of the United States in league with a hostile foreign power to bolster its own chance to win the presidency.”
According to CNN, the Trump campaign called the lawsuit “frivolous”, with Campaign Manager Brad Parscale stating: “This is a sham lawsuit about a bogus Russian collusion claim filed by a desperate, dysfunctional, and nearly insolvent Democratic Party.
“With the Democrats' conspiracy theories against the President's campaign evaporating as quickly as the failing DNC's fundraising, they've sunk to a new low to raise money, especially among small donors who have abandoned them.”
DNC officials hope to recover monetary damages with the lawsuit. One such official said: “We are not going to just stand by and let Russia hack the DNC. We are the victims.”
The lawsuit additionally names several Trump advisors, including Donald Trump Jr., Campaign Chairman Paul Manafort, long-time Trump confidant Roger Stone, former Campaign Adviser George Papadopoulos, Julian Assange and WikiLeaks.
Trump continues to insist that there is no collusion between his campaign and any Russian involvement.
Andrew Walker QC, Chair of the Bar Council, has made the following statement ahead of last week's Vigil for Justice outside the Ministry of Justice.
“As a result of repeated cuts, our justice system has deteriorated over many years to breaking point, and we are now seeing the cumulative impact on practitioners seeking to operate within it – particularly the criminal and family Bar - on all others working within it, and on members of the public passing through it.
“The need for this vigil is, in itself, a troubling reflection of the current state of affairs, in that those protesting against the cuts to legal aid and the wider justice system feel driven to take direct action to make their concerns heard. Its necessity is to be strongly lamented, but it is heartening to see so many across the public and legal sectors, who truly understand the desperate need for change, come together in recognition of such a crucial issue and call on the Government to fulfil its responsibility to the public to deliver a justice system that it works as intended.
“True and proper justice has no substitute; it is not an ‘optional extra’ for which funding requirements can be ignored – otherwise the public will pay the ultimate price. We hope that this evening’s vigil will play a part in driving home in Government the urgent need for long-term reinvestment to ensure that the public remain safe and that confidence in the justice system is restored.”
(Source: The Bar Council)
Firms will increasingly need to employ enhanced due diligence measures to comply with new rules targeting money laundering and terrorist financing, says LexisNexis® Risk Solutions
LexisNexis Risk Solutions, the global information solution provider, has reminded UK firms that a fifth revision of the EU’s Anti-Money Laundering Directive (AMLD) will be presented to the European Parliament on 16 April and enacted into EU law two weeks later. It builds on the 4th Directive implemented in May 2015 to prevent the use of the financial system for financial crimes such as money laundering and terrorist financing.
The proposed changes are part of the European Commission’s wider action plan for strengthening the fight against terrorist financing. In particular, LexisNexis® Risk Solutions has highlighted five key revisions to the current legislation that banks and other financial institutions must be aware of to remain compliant in their anti-money laundering provisions:
Whilst the directive applies to all financial institutions, its enforcement will spill over into adjacent industries and actors including auditors, notaries, estate agents and casinos, according to LexisNexis® Risk Solutions. The directive is expected to fully come into force by the end of 2019, so there will be a transitional period involved.
Michael Harris, Director, Financial Crime Compliance at LexisNexis® Risk Solutions comments: “Removing these abhorrent crimes from the financial system will require far more thorough customer due diligence. Companies must be checking the identity of customers, particularly those from high-risk countries, and ensure they have ongoing monitoring in place to identify the true beneficial owners of assets, be those physical or digital.
The transitional period will prove interesting, as it comes at a time when the UK will be looking to implement its own anti money-laundering regulations once we have left the European Union. The global alignment of anti-money laundering regulations will be essential, otherwise compliance departments face a logistical nightmare.”
(Source: Rostrum)
What happens when someone is injured or killed in a car accident? Who is held responsible? And how does that change with a driverless car? Victor Schwartz, partner at Shook, Hardy & Bacon, explains the fault damage rules, suggesting that current liability rules will chill innovation unless they are changed to account for this emerging technology.
Thousands of UK investors are set to take legal action against Spanish banks for refusing to return deposits on failed property developments.
During the property boom period that started in the 1990s, around 800,000 holiday homes were built in Spain each year. Buyers (a large proportion of them British), ploughed cash into Spanish real estate, with many of them parting with significant deposits and stage payments for off-plan investments.
But many had dreams of long holidays in the sun, retirements spent relaxing on the beach and financial peace of mind shattered in 2008 when the property market in Spain crashed.
This left builders and developers bankrupt, off-plan homes nowhere to be seen, and buyers with very little hope of recovering their money. Official figures showed unsold and incomplete homes totaled 617,000, although unofficial estimates double this number and thousands of British investors were dragged into this financial disaster.
The Centre for Business and Economic Research estimates British citizens in Spain lost a total bill of £5.3 billion. Couple this with the lost interest, which adds around 42% to the total, and the banks were looking at an eye-watering £7.5 billion.
One of the investors affected by the financial meltdown were Mr. and Mrs. Maby. For years they had dreamt of spending their retirement in Spain, attracted by the sun, it’s gastronomy and its way of living. They finally found what they thought was going to be the home of their dreams in a spectacular location near the sea and close to the lively city of Alicante.
After spending their lives working and saving they could not think of anything more exciting.
So, they made the decision to follow their dreams and headed to Alicante on the Costa Blanca, southeast Spain. With more than 2,800 hours of sunshine per year and an annual temperature of 19.3 degrees, it seemed the perfect location to spend their retirement.
After visiting a few developments that, at the time, where just building sites they made the decision to purchase a property on the EL PINET resort. With only a brochure and the promises of the builder, SAN JOSE INVERSIONES Y PROYECTOS, they took a risk and purchased the property off plan, securing it with a 50,100 euros deposit. Mr. and Mrs. Maby signed the purchase contract on 28 October 2004 and after 13 years the property remains unfinished.
After waiting four years for the dream home to be completed, in 2008, the Maby’s were given the devastating news that SAN JOSE INVERSIONES had gone into bankruptcy and the company had been liquidated.
It is impossible to imagine the stress that Mr. and Mrs. Maby and the 965 other investors experienced following the collapse of San Jose Inversiones, but as almost 70% of them were British it must of felt like their future happiness was being taken from them and there was little that they could do about it.
Without knowledge of the Spanish Law and being far from the place where they had invested their money, the 965 were lost and forgotten and there seemed know where they could go for help?
Many of those affected by the collapse had invested their entire savings and so, although it seemed ridiculous to walk away from such a large investment, they could not afford the risk of financing legal actions, as failure would have been unthinkable.
Not only was Spanish property law completely different to Britain’s, there was no one to take action against as the builder had gone into bankruptcy. They were facing the stark realization that all their money was lost, and it would be impossible to get it back.
During the years that followed the collapse of many real estate developers in Spain those that lost their savings faced confusion and uncertainty.
Mrs. Maby was distraught at the lack of support. “We had little or no assistance from lawyers, they were simple not prepared to fight our cases, despite the fact that the law that was supposed to protect us dated back to the year 1968.”
After years of back and forth the judges had not managed to dictate anywhere near enough judgments to clarify a solution to the conflict. The clients, who had been represented previously by other law firms in Spain, felt disappointed and demoralised since no one was able to help them.
They did not trust the Spanish legal system and they had just lost the hope of recovering the money invested. They thought that their dreams had vanished forever.
In 2016 Pilar Alonso, a Spanish lawyer at ALONSO HARO SOLICITORS in Spain but with offices in Bolton and Manchester, approached Mr. and Mrs. Maby with the news they had been waiting for. Mrs Alonso, who runs the law firm jointly with Carlos Meoro, explained to the Mr and Mrs Maby that there was no reason to give up and that there was a way to recover their investment by taking proceedings against the bank where their investment had been transferred.
Mrs. Alonso explained that legal actions could be taken against the bank where their deposit were being held as they had an obligation to guarantee the amounts deposited in their accounts. She told them that the chances of recovering their deposit were very high.
The fact that Mrs. Alonso was established in UK, was familiar with the aforementioned law and had previously helped almost 200 clients in the same situation reassured Mr. and Mrs. Maby needed to trust Mrs Alonso and her team.
There was also the fact that no fees were requested up front and that only in the event that the case was won would fees be payable. Mr and Mrs Maby went ahead with the case.
Court actions against the bank started in September 2016 and following sixteen months of protracted hearings, Mr. and Mrs. Maby recovered their full investment.
“I would like to thank you and the team at Alonso & Haro Solicitors for all your excellent work and perseverance in recovering our investment in the El Pinet resort. It was an investment we had lost hope in recovering. I am very happy that you were able to diligently work through the challenges that prevailed and keep us informed of the progress, culminating in the return of our money from the banks. I would have no reluctance in recommending you to anyone else considering undertaking the recovery of funds from a property investment”, Mr and Mrs Maby said.
Speaking after the case Mrs Alonso said: “There are still thousands of British investors out of pocket and many of them have no idea that there is a ruling that would mean they could recover the money they have lost.”
(Source: Alonso Haro Soliciters)
According to the data revealed by the ONS, Britain has the fifth largest gender pay gap in Europe behind Estonia, Czech Republic, Germany, and Austria, but ahead of countries like Poland and Greece. In London, the gender pay gap has barely changed in over two decades, with full-time female employees earning 14.6% less per hour than their male counterparts.
This can be compared to 1997 when the gender gap sat at 15.1 % – which means it has narrowed by a mere 0.5% in twenty years. However due to the gap in male and female salaries, women start working for free in the UK from 10 November – a date that has remained the same in 2015 and 2016.
While the gender gap in the UK has been steadily closing, the average woman in the workplace still earns 9.1% less than the average man.
Instant Offices delves deeper into the issue of pay by gender in the UK and the steps that can be taken to bridge the gap.
Data revealed that men working full-time earned an average of £592 a week in April compared to the £494 earned by women during the same period. Additionally, there are certain occupations that have bigger pay gaps than others, with jobs like town planners, musicians, and vehicle and metal goods assemblers with a startling 34% pay gap.
Steps Taken to Bridge the Gap
All UK companies and public sector organisations with 250 or more employees are required to publicly report on their gender pay gap as a result of new government legislation that came into effect in April 2017. At the time of writing, only 3000 of the estimated 9000 companies have come forward and released their numbers, while there have been no reports from the financial services sector.
According to the World Economic Forum, it could take 170 years to completely close the gender pay gap on a global level. The ONS states that in the UK, some of the reasons for the wage disparity include women working in lower-paid jobs as well as being underrepresented in senior roles. Additionally, 41% of women work part-time compared to the 12% of men, which could mean a lower rate of pay.
That said, there are a few things companies could look into to help narrow the gender gap:
Incentivise paternity leave – Businesses can be made more female-friendly by incentivising paternity leave for dads. If fathers have additional paternity leave, mothers can return to work sooner, work more hours and earn more money, while allowing fathers more bonding time with their newborns. Sweden has been a trailblazer since 1974 as there is now a new incentive for dads to spend a full three months at home. Fathers are granted 90 days leave, which is allocated on a use-it-or-lose-it basis, which means that if the father does not take the time off work, then the couple as a whole will lose out on three months paid leave. Shared parental leave was introduced in the UK in 2015, although not all parents qualify.
Subsidise childcare – The cost of childcare can be stressful for many families, with an average cost of part-time childcare being up to £6,000 a year. The UK government covers some of the costs of childcare once the child turns three, but with the nursery fees and travel costs, women on low wages often find going back to work to be a difficult and financially draining decision. That said, some businesses have been stepping in to provide female staff with childcare services. According to research, companies providing childcare services saw reductions in employee turnover, increased productivity, and improved quality in job applicants.
Introduce remote working – In today’s digital world, remote working is becoming more acceptable and accessible to millennial workers, although parents can also enjoy the benefits of working from home. The Fawcett Society, an organisation dedicated to gender equality, has called on employers to provide roles that are flexible, part-time or a job share. According to the TUC, flexible working has real benefits for businesses, with employees proving to be more dedicated and productive.
There is a common misconception that mothers working from home are less ambitious than their colleagues are. On the contrary, according to a survey by Ernst and Young, 64% of working women who enjoyed flexible working hours claimed to have a clear career path compared to 10% of women who worked fixed hours. While flexible working conditions enable mothers to juggle work, childcare, and family commitments, it also allows more time for essential tasks.
Be transparent about pay – Being open and transparent about how much you pay your staff, whether listed in the initial job description or the interview, is a good starting point. Businesses should research market rates for a role and offer a fair salary for the job they are hiring for. It is also a good idea to explain how your business determines salaries and pay increases up front so that the candidate can make an informed decision about joining your company or not.
Ensure that promotions and rewards are fair – Disparity in pay can easily occur when employees are offered promotions, pay raises or bonuses. As a business owner, you must ensure that these are not in favour of male employees and that everyone has a fair chance of receiving a promotion, reward, or salary increase. Whether it is an outright or subconscious bias towards male employees, this can easily get out of hand, therefore putting in place clear and concise criteria for promotions, pay raises and bonuses will help keep things fair.
Give female employees a raise – Giving female employees a raise can eliminate the gender pay gap in the most pain-free way. Not only are employees enjoying equal pay, but, as more companies are being scrutinised and being forced to publish their gender pay gap reports, it provides the best strategy for businesses to continue operations with minimal disruptions and additional pressure.
(Source: Media Vision Interactive)
Responding to the Bar Standards Board’s announcement last week of a new consultation on removing the restriction on reporting sexual orientation and religion and belief data, the Bar Council made the following comment.
Sam Mercer, Head of Policy: Equality & Diversity and CSR, said: “The Bar Council welcomes the BSB’s consultation on relaxing rules with respect to reporting characteristics like sexual orientation (with appropriate safeguards to protect individual members). Over the years, chambers have approached us frustrated that they, and their LGBTQI members who were willing to have their numbers published, were prevented by the requirement for every single member of chambers to give written consent, irrespective of their own backgrounds. As a result many chambers were unable to demonstrate the diversity of their members and applicants perhaps got a false impression of a mono-culture in chambers. We will be submitting a considered and detailed response to the BSB’s consultation in due course to assist them in fully assessing the impact that such a change would have and how it might be best implemented.”
(Source: The Bar Council)
