If you’re in Manchester city centre today or tomorrow (Wednesday / Thursday), come and see us at the Business North West Exhibition and Conference Centre at Manchester Central (formerly the G-Mex) We’re at Stand 107A in the centre of the hall next to the infoUK Network Centre.
We have solicitors on hand to provide instant advice and demonstrations of our services. and we’re offering a discount of 10% for all show delegates as well as the opportunity for all visitors to our stand to win a fabulous red letter day.
The show is open to all from 8.15 a.m. to 7.00 p.m. Wednesday and 8.15 a.m. to 4.00 p.m. Thursday.
We’ll be at Business North West, Manchester Central (formerly the G-Mex), Petersfield, Manchester on 28 (8.15 a.m. – 7.00 p.m.) and 29 October (8.15 a.m. – 4.00 p.m.). If you’re in the area, why not call in and see us?
We’re at stand 107a which is ahead of you when you access the hall from the main entrance and just opposite the infoUK Network Cafe.
We’ll have advisers on hand throughout both days to demonstrate our full range of CLB Business Solutions services and answer any enquiries you may have.
If you want to make an appointment for a presentation tailored to your particular requirements or area of interest, please call free on 08000 320 974.
Jackie Orme, Chief Executive of the Chartered Institute of Personnel Development, the organisation for HR managers, has remained defiant in the face of stinging criticism of the decision to retain her bonus.
Earlier this year the Institute lost 41 staff as well as axing discretionary bonuses for all staff and imposing a pay freeze. Ms Orme is reported to be on a salary of £300,000 and the bonus is believed to add a further £60,000.
The story was broken by Personnel Today and, notwithstanding the resulting furore, Ms Orme appears unwilling to apply the same restrictions to herself as other CIPD staff.
In what many might regard as a striking coincidence the CIPD issued guidance on executive pay last month. According to their press release they are:
“…designed to act as a framework to help HR directors and Remuneration Committees when developing executive remuneration policies, practices and structures. They have been drawn up to be applicable across sector, industry and organisation size. They are also intended to stand the test of time, rising above some of the excessively heated aspects of the current debate on executive reward, but without losing sight of the crucial issues around risk and reward that have been thrown into sharp focus by the crisis in the financial sector.”
So what have the CIPD done? – they’ve issued a press statement seeking to justify the payment of the bonus and caused consternation on the part of HR professionals in doing so.
Simon Howard, chairman of the Work Group, is forthright in his views:
Apart from asking itself how it got into this mess…the CIPD board should face up to the damage the row has caused – morale within the CIPD could not be lower and the business challenges it faces will not go away. While on the public stage, it is difficult to see how the CIPD can comment on the whole issue of rewards and the many failures of the bonus culture, when its own leader is seen to be a recipient of it.
In our September newsletter we reported the claim of PC Gurmeal Singh:
Sikh policeman says “I felt that I was on ‘Only Fools and Horses’”
Sikh police officer Gurmeal Singh has brought employment tribunal proceedings against Greater Manchester Police for religious and race discrimination on account of his turban. We could be forgiven for thinking that “the turban issue” was resolved in the early days of discrimination law when a high profile case was brought shortly after the Race Relations Act 1976 and led to the Motor-Cycle Crash Helmets (Religious Exemption) Act 1976. However, Mr Singh maintains that he was not allowed to use pedal cycles without wearing a helmet so that he had to cover the same area by foot “when others had the luxury of pedal cycle policing”. According to the SikhiWiki website (yes, it does really exist with that name), employers need to make suitable adjustments to allow Sikhs to wear turbans so that (as legislated by section 11, Employment Act 1989) Sikhs on construction sites do not need to wear safety helmets but damages for injuries are limited to those recoverable had a safety helmet been worn. Mr Singh also maintains that his application for promotion was held up for 18 months after an assistant chief constable expressed concern that he did not wear an official police badge on his turban.
Mr Singh says that when he was asked to wear a modified turban he felt that he was in a famous episode of ‘Only Fools and Horses’ in which Del Boy, taking a delivery of 200 “crash turbans”, said that they were the “essential accessory for fashion-conscious, motorbike-riding Sikhs throughout Peckham”.
Mr Singh has won his claim, at least in part. The tribunal found that he had been subjected to indirect discrimination and harassment. However, 13 of his 15 complaints were rejected and the tribunal found that he suffered a single case of indirect race and religious discrimination when he was included in a group email to officers confirming that riot training was mandatory and he would therefore have to remove his turban.
He was awarded £3,500 for indirect discrimination, £6,500 for harassment after suffering psychological damage, injury to feelings and personal injury and £1914 for loss of earnings. The case is reported to have cost £250,000.
The Department for Business Innovation and Skills has, in conjunction with the Chartered Intitute of Personnel Development and ACAS, produced a new guide outlining procedures for dealing with discipline, dismissal and grievance procedures. The guide can be downloaded here. Although the ACAS Guide should still be the primary point of reference (since this is the one which tribunals are required to consider), nonetheless the BIS guide is a handy summary of the online resources available for employers.
There is a similar guide available for employees.