Nationwide Employment Lawyers
Legal enquiries and clients : 0333 242 3851
Get in Touch
Service Rating: Damian McCarthy 5 starts - Service Rate
  • About Us
    • Contact
    • Howell John
    • Damian McCarthy
    • Simon Armstrong
    • Case Studies
    • Employment Law News
  • Employee Services
    • Questionnaire
    • Contact
    • Locations
    • Dismissal
    • Whistleblowing Law
    • Discrimination
      • Sex discrimination
        • Maternity rights in employment
        • Pregnancy or maternity discrimination
        • Returning to work and flexible working
        • Health and safety for pregnant women in the workplace
        • Sexual Harassment
      • Disability discrimination
      • Race discrimination
    • Equal Pay
    • Bullying and Harassment
    • Family Friendly Rights
    • Disciplinary and grievance hearings
    • Contracts
    • Transfer of Undertakings
    • Agency workers and part time workers
    • Privacy at work
    • Constructive dismissal
    • Resignation letter templates
      • Constructive dismissal letter template
      • Standard notice resignation letter template:
      • Short or long notice request template
    • Health and Safety at Work
  • Locations
    • London – Berkeley Square
    • London – Canary Wharf
    • London – Croydon
    • London – Hammersmith
    • London – High Holborn
    • London – King’s Cross
    • London – Liverpool Street
    • London – London Bridge
    • London – Richmond
  • Case Studies
    • A v PWC
    • P v S (confidential)
    • Moira Stuart quits, reigniting BBC ageism row
    • Married HBOS bank manager propositioned by colleagues
  • News
  • FAQ
  • Contact



Whistleblowing Law

View Whistleblowing Cases

 

The Employment Rights Act 1996 protects workers who “blow the whistle” by providing three main rights:

 

  • Protection from dismissal: it makes it automatically unfair to dismiss a whistleblower for making a protected disclosure (ERA 1996 s 103A);

 

  • Protection from detriment: it is unlawful to subject a worker to any “detriment” for making a protected disclosure (ERA 1996 s 47B);

 

  • Protection from breach of contract: any term in the worker’s contract or any other agreement is void in so far as it purports to preclude the worker from making a protected disclosure (ERA 1996 s 43J). It follows that the act of whistleblowing within the terms of the Act will not amount to a breach of contract.

 

Who is protected by the Employment Rights Act?

The ERA 1996 provides protection to a wide range of individuals:

 

  • Employees;
  • Workers (a wider category than employees); 
  • Trainees (such as a student nurses);
  • Agency workers;
  • Member of a Limited Liability Partnership (LLP).

 

The protection begins on the first day of employment, so it is not necessary to work a minimum of two years to claim protection.

 

Grievance or disciplinary

 

If a whistleblower who wishes to pursue a grievance or is disciplined, the employer must follow the ACAS Code of Practice on Discipline and Grievance Procedures. This is set out here 

 

A failure to do so can increase compensation payable to a whistleblower by 25%.

 

The right not to suffer a detriment

The general right is contained at ERA 1996 s 47B(1) which provides as follows:

 

“A worker has the right not to be subject to any detriment by any act, or any deliberate failure to act, by his employer done on the ground that the worker has made a protected disclosure.”

 

The term ‘detriment’ is not defined in the ERA 1996 but it is a term familiar in discrimination law. For example, ‘detriment’ would include:

 

  • any financial disadvantage – such as paying a worker less;
  • bullying or workplace harassment.
  • denying promotion;
  • requiring him/her to work harder or longer;
  • physical discomfort or disadvantage – such as requiring him/her to work unsocial hours;

 

It is not necessary for the whistleblower to actually suffer economic or physical damage to show that they have suffered a detriment. The test is whether a reasonable worker would or might take the view that the treatment accorded to them had in all the circumstances has been to their detriment (see cases below and Shamoon v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary [2003] IRLR 285, [2003] ICR 337).

 

It is important to note that a detriment can occur even after employment has been terminated. So, for example, an employer who provides an unfair reference or unfairly spreads rumours about a worker’s incompetence can be pursued.

 

The right not to be dismissed

The right not to be dismissed due to making protected disclosure is contained in the ERA 1996 s103A.

 

What is a protected disclosure?

In order to qualify as a “protected disclosure”:

 

  • a “disclosure” must occur (within the meaning of the ERA 1996);
  • that disclosure must be a ‘qualifying disclosure’;
  • the disclosure must be made by the worker in a manner that accords with ERA 1996 ss 43Cto 43H

 

How is the Disclosure Made?

 

 

What is a disclosure?

The ERA 1996 provides a very broad definition of what amounts to a disclosure: it is ‘any disclosure of information’ (ERA 1996 s 43B(1)).

 

The definition has been broadened by the finding that a disclosure can arise from an amalgamation of several communications, even if one or more in themselves would not qualify (Shaw v Norbrook Laboratories (GB) Ltd UKEAT/0150/13 [2014] All ER (D) 139 (Mar)).

 

A disclosure of information will also take place where the information is provided to a person who is already aware of that information (ERA 1996 s 43L).

 

The most important limitation is that information must be disclosed. It is not enough for a worker to make allegations alone. In Cavendish Munro Professional Risks Management Ltd v Geduld [2010] IRLR 38, EAT it is was stated:

 

”… the ordinary meaning of giving “information” is conveying facts. In the course of the hearing before us, a hypothetical was advanced regarding communicating information about the state of a hospital. Communicating “information” would be “The wards have not been cleaned for the past two weeks. Yesterday, sharps were left lying around.” Contrasted with that would be a statement that “You are not complying with Health and Safety requirements”. In our view this would be an allegation not information.”

 

See Case Law below for more detailed analysis

 

View Case Law

 

Most cases will involve a disclosure made during the course of the whistleblower’s employment.  However, in Onyango v Berkeley Solicitors [2013] IRLR 338 it was held that the legislative protection can apply to a disclosure made after termination of the employment.

 

What is a qualifying disclosure?

The ERA 1996 s43B(1) states that a “qualifying disclosure” is any disclosure of information which, in the reasonable belief of the worker making the disclosure, is made in the public interest and tends to show one or more of the following:

 

(a) that a criminal offence has been committed, is being committed or is likely to be committed,

(b) that a person has failed, is failing or is likely to fail to comply with any legal obligation to which he is subject,

(c) that a miscarriage of justice has occurred, is occurring or is likely to occur,

(d) that the health or safety of any individual has been, is being or is likely to be endangered,

(e) that the environment has been, is being or is likely to be damaged, or

(f) that information tending to show any matter falling within any one of the preceding paragraphs has been, is being or is likely to be deliberately concealed.

 

The whistleblower must have a reasonable belief that the disclosure is in the public interest and fits into one of the above categories.

 

The disclosure does not actually have to be true. However, the whistleblower must (in his or her view) believe it to be true. It follows that a disclosure may still be a qualifying disclosure even if it is incorrect.

 

It is also important to note that the statutory test is a subjective one.

 

It does not matter whether the “relevant failure” occurred, occurs or would occur in the United Kingdom or elsewhere (ERA 1996, s43B(2)).

 

A disclosure of information is not a qualifying disclosure if the person making the disclosure commits an offence by making it (ERA 1996, s43B(3)).

 

How is the disclosure made?

 

The final element that a worker must demonstrate is that they have disclosed information to the appropriate person or body.

 

As a general rule, the worker should in the first instance seek to resolve the matter privately within their employer. If the circumstances are such that it is unrealistic or impossible for them to resolve the matter in that way, or if they have already tried to do so without success, then, but only then, would it be appropriate to bring the matter to the attention of a wider audience.

 

A worker can disclose to the following:

 

 

  • Disclosure to the employer or other responsible person (ERA 1996, s43C)

 

 

A disclosure can be made to the employer or a third party where the worker reasonably believes that the relevant failure relates solely or mainly to:

 

  • the conduct of a person other than his employer, or
  • any other matter for which a person other than his employer has legal responsibility, to that other person.

 

 

  • Disclosure to a legal adviser (ERA 1996, s43D)

 

 

A qualifying disclosure is made in accordance with this section if it is made in the course of obtaining legal advice.

 

 

  • Public employees (ERA 1996, s43E)

 

 

Where a worker works for a government agency or quango, then a disclosure made to a government minister is a protected disclosure.

 

  • Other prescribed cases (ERA 1996, s43F(1))

 

 

A disclosure may be a protected disclosure if it is made to an appropriate public authority and if the subject matter of the disclosure properly falls within the remit of that authority.

 

 

  • Publicly (ERA 1996, s43G)

 

A qualifying disclosure made by a worker to persons other than the above may become a protected disclosure if it is reasonable in all the circumstances for the worker to make that disclosure to that person, and provided certain other conditions are satisfied (ERA 1996 s 43G).

 

Employer’s liability for co-workers

 

A whistleblower has a right to bring a claim against an individual co-worker or agent of the employer that subjected them to a detriment because they have made a protected disclosure (ERA 1996 s 47B(1A).

 

Common defences to whistleblowing claims

 

Employers on the receiving end of a whistleblowing complaint will often attempt to defend a claim by:

 

  • trying to discredit a whistleblower. It is common for an employer to argue that a whistleblower was treated less favourably or dismissed due to other factors and not the whistleblowing. For example employers will often claim that an employer did not “get on” with others, was rude or unpleasant to other members of staff or management in the workplace or their work was inadequate or poor;
  • arguing there has not been a disclosure of “information”;
  • arguing that the whistleblower did not have a reasonable belief in the disclosures made;
  • arguing that any disclosure was not made “in the public interest”.

 

Are there any time limits to issuing a whistleblowing claim?

 

All claims should be submitted to an Employment Tribunal within three months (plus the ACAS conciliation period) of the date of the act. In a case where the conduct of the claim is ongoing rather than just a one-time occurrence, the time limit will begin from the most recent date that the event took place.

 

If the case involves the whistleblower being dismissed from their job, the time limit begins from the last of employment.

 

In certain circumstances it is possible for the deadline to be extended – where it was not “reasonably practicable” to submit a claim earlier.

 

Compensation

 

There is no statutory cap on compensation where there has been a dismissal or detriment due to whistleblowing. However, all losses must be proved.

It will be necessary to obtain expert advice on what can be claimed.

 

Determining the level of compensation will depend on a number of factors, these include:

 

  • A basic award;
  • How much salary has been lost;
  • How much salary will be lost in the future;
  • Notice pay;
  • Injury to feelings;
  • Expenses incurred in mitigating losses (this can include costs incurred in studying or setting up a new business);
  • Whether there has been a breach of the ACAS Code of Practice on Discipline and Grievance Procedures;
  • Interest.

 

Can a whistleblowing claim be made anonymously?

 

A whistleblowing claim can be made anonymously if an employee would rather not reveal their identity. However, it would be difficult to argue that a whistleblower had suffered unfair treatment because of whistleblowing if the employer was not aware of the identity of the whistleblower.

 

Below is summarised :

  • Key cases.
  • Main parts of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (“ERA 1996”).

 

Case Law

Disclosure of information – what must be disclosed?

Cavendish Munro Professional Risks Management Ltd v Geduld [2010] IRLR 38, EAT : it is not sufficient that the claimant has simply made allegations. Justice Slade said :

… the ordinary meaning of giving “information” is conveying facts.

Smith v London Metropolitan University [2011] IRLR 884, EAT applied the case of Cavendish Munro to make a finding that the raising of grievances about the claimant’s workload as a ‘disclosure’.

 

Goode v Marks & Spencer plc UKEAT/0442/09 (14 April 2010, unreported) – an employee wrote to a newspaper about possible changes to be made by the employer to the pension scheme. It was held that he was not a whistle blower because all that he had done was to vent his highly adverse opinion of what the employer was proposing.

 

Western Union Payment Services UK Ltd v Anastasiou UKEAT/0135/13 (21 February 2014, unreported) Judge Eady, applying the Cavendish distinction found that ‘the distinction can be a fine one to draw and one can envisage circumstances in which the statement of a position could involve the disclosure of information, and vice versa. The assessment as to whether there has been a disclosure of information in a particular case will always be fact-sensitive.’

Millbank Financial Services Ltd v Crawford [2014] IRLR 18, EAT complaints by a probationary employee of failure to give feedback, consult or stipulate the length of the probationary period were held to be covered. A qualifying disclosure of an employer’s omission to act, was covered, not just of a positive act.

 

Kilraine v London Borough of Wandsworth [2018] EWCA Civ 1436. in the Employment Appeal Tribunal ([2016] IRLR 422) the Judge (Mr Langstaff):

 

I would caution some care in the application of the principle arising out of Cavendish Munro. The particular purported disclosure that the Appeal Tribunal had to consider in that case is set out at paragraph 6. It was in a letter from the Claimant's solicitors to her employer. On any fair reading there is nothing in it that could be taken as providing information. The dichotomy between “information” and “allegation” is not one that is made by the statute itself. It would be a pity if Tribunals were too easily seduced into asking whether it was one or the other when reality and experience suggest that very often information and allegation are intertwined. The decision is not decided by whether a given phrase or paragraph is one or rather the other, but is to be determined in the light of the statute itself. The question is simply whether it is a disclosure of information. If it is also an allegation, that is nothing to the point'.

The case was appealed to the Court of Appeal. It was held that to be a protected disclosure the disclosure must contain sufficient information to qualify under the ERA 1996, s43B(1).

 

It was held that there is a spectrum : although pure allegation is insufficient a disclosure may contain sufficient information even if it also includes allegations. Ultimately, this will be a question of fact for the ET, which must take into account the context and background.

 

Was the information obtained unlawfully?

Bolton School v Evans [2006[ EWCA Civ 1653, [2007] IRLR 140, – an IT teacher, had his complaint about computer insecurity rejected. He hacked into the system to show the insecurity and was disciplined. This led to him leaving and claiming (constructive) unfair dismissal due to whistleblowing.

 

The EAT rejected his claim because he had been disciplined for hacking, not whistleblowing. The Court of Appeal also rejected his claim because neither the hacking nor informing the headmaster afterwards was a ‘disclosure’.

 

Panayiotou v Chief Constable of Hampshire Police [2014] IRLR 500 the EAT upheld a decision by a tribunal that a police officer’s dismissal was due to his long-term sickness and his obsessive pursuit of complaints and ‘in no sense whatsoever’ connected with the whistleblowing disclosures made earlier.

Martin v Devonshires Solicitors [2011] ICR 352, an employee was dismissed after making multiple allegations of sex discrimination, which would normally have constituted unlawful victimisation. However, the allegations were totally false and caused by her paranoid delusions. It was accepted that the dismissal was because of her conduct, her refusal to accept the falsity and the likelihood of further disruptive behaviour in the future.

 

Detriment

Bolton School v Evans [2006[ EWCA Civ 1653, [2007] IRLR 140 : It is not enough to demonstrate that the employee has suffered as a result of the employer’s act or deliberate omission to act. It must further be shown that the employer’s act or omission was ‘done on the ground that’ the employee had a protected status or did a protected act. That is to say, there must be a causal connection between the employee’s protected act or status and the employer’s decision.

 

Fecitt v NHS Manchester [2012] IRLR 64 : The employer must prove on the balance of probabilities that the detriment was not because the employee had done the protected act – meaning that the protected act did not “materially influence” (in the sense of being more than a trivial influence) the employer’s treatment of the whistleblower.

 

Automatic unfair dismissal

Kuzel v Roche Products Ltd [2008] IRLR 530 : when an employee positively asserts that there was a different and inadmissible reason for his dismissal, such as making protected disclosures, he must produce some evidence supporting the positive case. That does not mean, however, that in order to succeed in an unfair dismissal claim, the employee has to discharge the burden of proving that the dismissal was for that different reason. It is sufficient for the employee to challenge the evidence produced by the employer to show the reason advanced by him for the dismissal and to produce some evidence of a different reason.

Compensation

In Virgo Fidelis Senior School v Boyle [2004] IRLR 268 the EAT stated that subjecting a whistleblower to a detriment was a form of discrimination and confirmed that awards of compensation for injury to feelings in whistleblowing detriment cases were available and should be based on the guidelines applicable to discrimination cases (see Vento v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police (No 2) [2003] IRLR 102.

 

EMPLOYMENT RIGHTS ACT 1996

Free access to the Employment Rights Act 1996 is available here :

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/18/contents

 

THE RIGHT NOT TO SUFFER DETRIMENT 

 

s47B(1) Right not to suffer detriment – protected disclosure

''A worker has the right not to be subject to any detriment by any act, or any deliberate failure to act, by his employer done on the ground that the worker has made a protected disclosure.''

 

QUALIFYING DISCLOSURE

43B Disclosures qualifying for protection.

 

(1) In this Part a “ qualifying disclosure ” means any disclosure of information which, in the reasonable belief of the worker making the disclosure, is made in the public interest and tends to show one or more of the following— 

(a) that a criminal offence has been committed, is being committed or is likely to be committed,

(b) that a person has failed, is failing or is likely to fail to comply with any legal obligation to which he is subject,

(c) that a miscarriage of justice has occurred, is occurring or is likely to occur,

(d) that the health or safety of any individual has been, is being or is likely to be endangered,

(e) that the environment has been, is being or is likely to be damaged, or

(f) that information tending to show any matter falling within any one of the preceding paragraphs has been, is being or is likely to be deliberately concealed.

 

(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), it is immaterial whether the relevant failure occurred, occurs or would occur in the United Kingdom or elsewhere, and whether the law applying to it is that of the United Kingdom or of any other country or territory.

 

(3) A disclosure of information is not a qualifying disclosure if the person making the disclosure commits an offence by making it.

 

(4) A disclosure of information in respect of which a claim to legal professional privilege (or, in Scotland, to confidentiality as between client and professional legal adviser) could be maintained in legal proceedings is not a qualifying disclosure if it is made by a person to whom the information had been disclosed in the course of obtaining legal advice.

 

(5) In this Part “ the relevant failure ”, in relation to a qualifying disclosure, means the matter falling within paragraphs (a) to (f) of subsection (1). 

 

43C Disclosure to employer or other responsible person.

 

(1) A qualifying disclosure is made in accordance with this section if the worker makes the disclosure —
(a) to his employer, or
(b) where the worker reasonably believes that the relevant failure relates solely or mainly to—
(i) the conduct of a person other than his employer, or
(ii) any other matter for which a person other than his employer has legal responsibility,
to that other person.

(2) A worker who, in accordance with a procedure whose use by him is authorised by his employer, makes a qualifying disclosure to a person other than his employer, is to be treated for the purposes of this Part as making the qualifying disclosure to his employer.

 

PROTECTION FROM DISMISSAL

Sources

  1. Harvey on Industrial Relations and Employment Law (available from Lexis Nexis (www.lexisnexis.co.uk)).
  2. Industrial Relations Law Reports (available from Lexis Nexis (www.lexisnexis.co.uk)).

 

View Whistleblowing Cases Here

 

Latest News

How A Whistleblower Lawyer Can Support You With Your Claim 

 

Deciding to voice your concerns, report wrongdoing and ultimately, ‘blow the whistle’ can be very daunting, but it is key to remember that you will be protected by whistleblower laws when doing so. The Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA 1996) protects you by making it unlawful for employers to dismiss a worker for making a protected disclosure or subject a worker to any detriment for making a protected disclosure. So, if you are experiencing unfair treatment in the workplace or you have been dismissed after blowing the whistle, you may be able to take a whistleblowing claim to the employment tribunal.

 

Making a whistle blowing claim

If you are a whistleblower, you have the right to bring a claim against a co-worker or an employer who has subjected you to detriment. The ERA 1996 provides protection to a range of individuals, including employees, trainees and agency workers, and this protection begins on the first day of employment. If you are ever unsure whether you have a whistleblowing case that will be admissible by a judge, an employment law specialist will be able to assist you.

 

Our team at Nationwide Employment Lawyers can provide you with the sound legal advice you need when taking a claim to the employment tribunal. We have many years of experience working on extremely complex whistleblower cases and we can assure you that you will be in very capable hands when you turn to us for assistance. Our whistleblower lawyers are dedicated to the work they do and we guarantee you a high-quality service, from start to finish.

 

We do not believe that anyone should be unfairly treated for reporting wrongdoing, even if you have been given a whistleblower reward for doing so, and we will help you to get the compensation you deserve for loss of earnings and injury to feelings. There is no statutory cap on compensation in whistleblowing cases where there has been a dismissal or detriment, and our experts can provide you with the advice you need when determining the level of compensation that can be claimed. It is key to remember that all losses must be provided and our employment law specialists can provide you with some assistance in this regard.

 

Why contact a whistle blower lawyer in Canary Wharf, London?

 

Three whistleblower lawyers in business wear sit around a desk with legal paperwork. There is a statue of lady justice in the middle of the desk

Whether you work in the health, public service or financial sector, it is worthwhile contacting a whistleblower lawyer in London when you want to make a claim. At Nationwide Employment Lawyers, we understand more than anyone that it can be incredibly stressful as well as time-consuming when you are trying to deal with a potential case, so let us help you by shouldering the burden. We can give you the comprehensive assistance you need, providing information, advice and guidance throughout, and we have an in-depth understanding of whistleblower laws. So, you will be in very capable hands with our experienced team.

 

Here at Nationwide Employment Lawyers, our whistleblower lawyers in Canary Wharf work alongside our employment law barristers and senior employment law advocates, enabling us to provide a cost-effective service. You will deal with the same expert team all the way through your case and you can trust that you will receive the highest-quality service. Every member of your legal team will be prepared to help you win your whistleblower case and nothing important will be overlooked or misunderstood. All of our professionals are dedicated to the work they do and our service will be seamless from start to finish.

 

It is important to be aware that all whistleblowing claims have time limits and they should be submitted to an employment tribunal within three months of the date of the act. In certain circumstances, this deadline may be extended, but it is always beneficial to contact a whistleblower lawyer in Canary Wharf as soon as possible. This will help to prevent any problems arising due to missed time limits.

 

Choosing a whistle blowing law firm

 

 A person signs their signature on a legal document with a fountain pen.

The whistleblowing law firm you choose to assist you will directly impact the result of your claim and it is so important to ensure you are enlisting the help of the right specialists. Our team of whistleblower lawyers have a superb record of representing clients and we will be committed to winning your case. Over the years, we have been involved in both smaller cases and very large, complex claims and we always use our extensive experience, knowledge of whistleblower law and sound judgement to ensure our clients have the best prospect of succeeding. We will do all we can to help you get the compensation you deserve.

 

Our reputation for customer advocacy and reliability is excellent – something we are very proud to uphold and client satisfaction is one of our main priorities. You will have the same dedicated whistleblower lawyer and advocate by your side throughout all legal proceedings, ensuring the highest care is provided to you and your case, and you will never be left in the dark. We pride ourselves on fighting hard for our clients and whether you are a banker, doctor, accountant or lawyer, we will present your case well and be tough and effective throughout.

 

If you would like to speak to a whistleblower lawyer in London about a potential case, do not hesitate to contact us at Nationwide Employment Lawyers. We are more than happy to help you with any case that may surround employment law and we can provide you with the support you need once you have blown the whistle. No whistleblowing case will be deemed as being too big or small, and you are guaranteed to receive a friendly, knowledgeable and professional service. So, there is no better legal firm to reach out to.

 

From the outset, we will be honest and to the point, to help keep your legal fees to a minimum and we will provide you with realistic and sensible legal advice. Our end-to-end service focuses on getting results rather than meeting billing targets too and we never compromise on quality. You can be assured that our specialists have years of experience and they know how to develop winning strategies. You can read some of our case studies on our website to get an insight into how our whistleblower lawyers work and the results we achieve.

 

We have a dedicated team of employment lawyers in London, as well as other employment law specialists who are available to work nationwide. You can get in touch with us today and we can arrange a free consultation at serviced offices around the country. For more information about how we can assist you with a whistleblowing claim, give us a call on 020 8263 6080 or fill in the contact form on our website and we will get back to you as soon as possible. We look forward to hearing from you and assisting you with your whistleblower case.

 




Social Share
  • google-share

Our specialist areas of law

  • Employment Tribunals
    • Employment Tribunals London
  • Dismissal
    • Unfair Dismissal
    • Constructive Dismissal & Resignation Advice
    • Compromise agreements
    • Executive Dismissal
    • Whistleblowing Law
    • Redundancy claims
    • Age Discrimination & Redundancy – Protection for all Ages In Redundancy
    • Collective redundancy
  • Whistleblowing
    • Whistleblowing Law
  • Discrimination (overview)
    • Discrimination at work – overview
  • –– Sex Discrimination
    • Maternity rights in employment
    • Pregnancy or maternity discrimination
    • Returning to work and flexible working
    • Health and safety issues for pregnant women in the workplace
  • –– Disability discrimination
    • Disability discrimination
  • –– Race discrimination
    • Race discrimination
  • –– Age discrimination
    • Age discrimination in recruitment and selection
    • Age discrimination – your rights at retirement
    • Age discrimination and redundancy – protection for all ages in redundancy
    • Age discrimination and pensions
    • Age discrimination and benefits
  • –– Sexual-orientation discrimination
    • Sexual-orientation discrimination in goods and services
  • –– Religious discrimination
    • Religious discrimination
  • –– Gender reassignment discrimination
    • Gender reassignment discrimination
  • Equal pay
    • Equal pay
  • Bullying and Harassment
    • Bullying and harrasment at work
  • Family-friendly rights
    • Family leave
    • Maternity rights in employment
    • Pregnancy and maternity discrimination
    • Return to work and flexible working
    • Health and safety for pregnant women in the workplace
    • Paternity rights
    • Maternity
    • Part-time workers
  • Disciplinary and Grievance Hearings
    • Disciplinary Hearings & Procedures
    • Grievance procedures
  • Contracts
    • Bonus disputes and discrimination
    • Bonus disputes
    • Bonus discrimination & The Risks Associated With It
    • Contract disputes and permanent health insurance
    • Employment contract disputes – restrictive covenants
  • Transfer of Undertakings
    • Transfer of undertakings (TUPE)
  • Agency Workers and Part Time Workers
    • Agency workers
    • Part-time workers
  • Privacy at Work
    • Privacy at work
  • Letter Templates
    • Constructive dismissal letter template
    • Standard notice resignation letter template:
    • Short or long notice request template

Join our Newsletter!

Twitter

Damian McCarthy
  • I worked with Martin a few years ago on a lengthy case. Always seemed a man of integrity. https://t.co/CwTnxNq5QZ 08:49:06 PM May 19, 2023 from Twitter for iPhone ReplyRetweetFavorite
  • @NationCymru When I was a kid 1970’s - ‘80s always called “chip alley” … I think sometimes Caroline St. 08:47:37 PM May 19, 2023 from Twitter for iPhone in reply to NationCymru ReplyRetweetFavorite
  • @PhilipProudfoot What are you talking about ? King Charles unplugged my sink this morning and Camilla did my ironin… https://t.co/GawUMSYVH1 01:51:10 PM May 08, 2023 from Twitter for iPhone in reply to PhilipProudfoot ReplyRetweetFavorite
@dam_mccarthy

Contact Us

  • We will be able to help you quickly if you leave us a contact phone number. We keep this strictly confidential.
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Copyright Notice | Disclaimer | Website Terms & Conditions | Privacy Statement
ACAS | EHRC
Nationwide Employment Lawyers Ltd is Authorised and Regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. For peace of mind you can find information about our authorisation by checking the Registration number 838365 on the Financial Services Register : register.fca.org.uk. Please note all telephone calls are recorded, as required by the regulator. Nationwide Employment Lawyers Ltd is not a firm of solicitors. Instead we offer an exceptional level of service using specialist employment law Solicitors, Barristers and a Senior Advocate.
Please contact us using either the questionnaire, quick contact form (above) or telephoning us on 0333 242 3851.