It’s not necessarily the burden it first appears to be, writes Shirley Barnes, Client Relationship Director, Dinamiks Ltd
Employee legislation has not made it any easier to do business in the UK. The latest significant piece of legislation was the abolition of the Default Retirement Age [DRA] which came into effect on April 1st 2011 in a phased manner. The completion date is October 1st this year.
It means that employers will no longer be able to use the DRA to compulsorily retire employees. Employers who fail to embrace this new legislation may face claims of unfair dismissal and discrimination
Preceding it with another challenge to employers is legislation that has increased the maximum limits on statutory unfair dismissal compensation, redundancy payments and other awards.
The increase in retirement age means that many companies will experience situations where age/experience/capability will be a challenge and where the companies will require evidence leading up to and beyond the legislation change to justify why people should retire from a role or even why they should stay.
Employee legislation can help employees but it also increases costs and adds to the many burdens that businesses face. Legislation changes also add a layer of complexity to HR and other aspects of the business.
Changes provide challenges around constructive dismissal, data protection, DRA, disciplinary procedure, equality, employment tribunals, fair and unfair/wrongful dismissal, grievance procedures, statutory rates, working time regulations, performance, training, coaching and productivity.
Key points about, and arising from, the abolition of the DRA
Guiding principles associated with the retirement age change are provided by ACAS. Below are key points to consider and take action on.
Until April 6th, the law set a DRA of 65 years. Provided an employer properly followed the prescribed statutory retirement procedures, a business could fairly dismiss an employee on the ground of retirement at or above the age of 65.
The DRA change means that in order to retire an employee, a company now needs to demonstrate just cause and follow due procedure.
“Just cause” and “due procedure” are viewed as problems but, as with other issues arising from employee legislation, can be managed to a satisfactory conclusion with an online system that…
(i) Aligns every employee's objectives to those of the business
(ii) Provides the means to set development plans, track and record progress
(iii) Provides a record of capability for all employees, thereby supporting a common and consistent set of guidelines and principles that apply across all employee ages of the business.
(iv) Allows an employer to demonstrate just cause and follow due procedure
A variety of factors can determine at what stage an employee should step down. All these can be tracked, recorded and analysed by the system.
The DRA has long been viewed as a valued stake in the ground for employers, because it has been a focus for performance issues and succession planning. It has allowed poorly performing employees to retire gracefully and has enabled - in an orderly fashion - open discussion for succession planning. That has now changed. From October 1st, the door closes on it.
The “stake in the ground” concept does beg the question of why or how organisations don’t take action about poorly performing employees before they retire. Succession planning may have been months or even years in the making, to ensure a smooth transition and the engagement of a [hopefully!] more productive employee, but that does not excuse the inaction.
The opportunity for businesses
The reasons why unproductive employees are tolerated are not in the scope of this article, but the subject does lead us to the question “Is the change in retirement age actually an opportunity for employers to re-tune the business in an era of suppressed economic activity, squeezed margins and demands from investors to optimise performance?”
We can also ask if the legislation that increases the maximum limits on statutory unfair dismissal compensation, redundancy payments etc, helps a business in unintended ways? If the business uses a system that helps it conform to employment law while improving performance, then, yes. The system does this by providing an audit trail of performance, behaviour, attitude and the ability of individuals to meet set objectives.
A manager in the business can track an individual’s performance over a period of time and share the view he or she has of it with that individual and/or with another manager, such as the individual’s line manager.
There is the belief in some quarters that employees don’t like change, but in reality we find that if the CEO and board get behind change initiatives, staff are happy to learn and advance in order to help the business and themselves. In fact, many desire it and employees in outsourcing are no exception.
That desire can, if harnessed, help business benefit from new, or changes to, employee legislation, by re-scoping the business where it needs it.
More at www.ikdevelopments.com