Under the existing framework, SSP is payable from the fourth day of absence and is restricted to employees who earn above the Lower Earnings Limit. From 6 April 2026, however, these features will fall away and SSP will become payable from day one of an employee’s sickness absence, removing the waiting period that previously left short-term absences unpaid unless the employee was entitled to occupational sick pay under their terms and conditions of employment. As a result, employees who do not have occupational sick pay entitlements under their terms and conditions of employment will benefit significantly from the immediacy of SSP.

The Lower Earnings Limit will also be abolished under the new framework. Entitlement will therefore no longer depend on an employee’s earnings level, expanding coverage to a broader range of workers. This will be welcome news to part-time, casual and lower-paid workers, who are more likely to be excluded under existing SSP criteria.

How employers calculate SSP is also changing. The reform introduces the payment of SSP at 80% of normal weekly earnings or the flat rate (£123.25), whichever is lower, again increasing eligibility to a greater proportion of the workforce. This means payments will be more proportionate to actual earnings, which could affect the way businesses manage short-term sickness.

Given the scale of reform to SSP, there is now an onus on employers to ensure their policies, procedures and practices are updated to reflect the changes. Employers will be expected to communicate the outworkings of the SSP reform clearly to staff, to ensure that all employees understand their entitlements, and managers are aware of their responsibilities.

The current SSP provisions have been long-standing, but the reform aligns Northern Ireland more closely with developments under the UK Employment Rights Act 2025. This alignment not only promotes cross-jurisdictional consistency but also emphasises the importance of reviewing internal practices to remain compliant with statutory obligations. Working with an employment law solicitor can help employers navigate these changes safely.

Should you have any queries or would like any further information on how Worthingtons can help you in these circumstances, please contact our office on 028 9043 4015 or email ryan@worthingtonslaw.co.uk.

The post Statutory Sick Pay Update 6th April 2026 appeared first on Worthingtons Solicitors.

The scheme will mirror existing parental bereavement provisions for stillbirth (pregnancy loss after 24 weeks) and death of a child under 18 years. Eligible employees who experience a miscarriage will have the right to two weeks’ leave, taken either as a single two-week block or two separate one-week blocks. The leave must be taken within 56 weeks of the date the woman experiences the miscarriage or becomes aware of it. An employer is obliged to pay the employee either £194.32 a week or 90% of their individual weekly earnings, whichever of the two is lower.

Oral notice is sufficient within the first 8 weeks of the loss. Within these 8 weeks, the notice period is minimal i.e., the employee must notify their employer before the time they are due to commence work on the day they want the leave to begin. Should the employee want to take the leave after 8 weeks i.e., between weeks 9 and 56, they must provide 7 days’ notice.

The employee will be able to self-declare their loss. Employers have no entitlement to request medical evidence or any further information regarding the employee’s declaration.

Finally, employees will enjoy protection under this legislation from Day 1 of their employment.

What does this mean for employers?

Training will need to be provided to those in managerial roles around handling sensitive conversations, responding compassionately, avoiding intrusive questions and ensuring those in managerial/HR functions have a solid understanding of the key statutory provisions.

Policies and procedures will need to be amended to reflect this legislative change. A clear policy which sets out employee rights and differentiates between statutory and any enhanced entitlement will remove uncertainty for those employees’ experiencing loss.

In summary, the key takeaways are:

• Two weeks’ statutory miscarriage leave is being introduced, available to the woman who experienced the loss and her partner.
• This amends and extends the existing parental bereavement provisions in Northern Ireland which prior to April 2026 were available in relation to pregnancy loss after 24 weeks and death of a child under 18 years.
• Leave can be taken as one continuous period or two separate weeks, within 56 weeks of the loss.
• Statutory miscarriage pay, paid at the standard statutory rate (expected to be £194.32 per week from April 2026) or 90% of the individual’s weekly earnings. Employer cost recovery where available through existing HMRC arrangements, in line with other statutory payments.
• Oral notice is sufficient
• No intrusive evidence requirements – employees will be able to self-declare the loss.
• The right to leave is a day 1 right i.e., no length of service is required to qualify.
• The right for miscarriage entitlement is not retrospective and will not apply to miscarriages which occurred or were discovered before 6 April 2026.

Whether you’re an employer who needs assistance amending your policies and procedures or an employee seeking to understand your rights, our specialist employment solicitors are here to help.

Chloe Perkins is currently an Apprentice Solicitor in our Employment Department, having worked as a Legal Executive in the department for a number of years prior to commencement of her apprenticeship. Chloe can be contacted on 028 9043 4015 or chloep@worthingtonslaw.co.uk

The post Statutory Miscarriage Leave & Pay from April 2026 appeared first on Worthingtons Solicitors.

Before initiating a formal process, employees may wish to try to resolve grievances informally with Line Managers. This can be advantageous, particularly where there might be a close working relationship between a manager and an employee. It also allows for problems to be resolved quickly.

However, should matters not be satisfactorily resolved, it may be necessary for that employee to initiate the formal grievance procedure.

All formal grievances should be dealt with in line with the Labour Relations Agency Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures. Industrial Tribunals will consider the Code in the process of their decision making following a substantive hearing and can decide to financially penalise any employer or employee for an unreasonable failure to adhere to the Code. Industrial Tribunal awards can be increased or decreased by up to 50% in these instances. The Code of Practice can be found here: http://Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures – 3rd April 2011.pdf

Therefore, it is imperative that employers handle grievances swiftly, fairly and in line with their own internal policy and the Code of Practice.

Best practice grievance process

1. The employee should raise the grievance in writing with management setting out the nature of the grievance and how they consider it might be resolved.
   Employers should then act without reasonable delay and invite the employee to an investigation meeting to discuss the grievance. Employees have a statutory right to be accompanied at this meeting by a trade union representative or a work colleague. 
2. Employees and their representatives should take all reasonable steps to attend the grievance investigation meeting, where they should be given an opportunity to fully present their case.  The investigating panel should also meet other relevant persons and potentially consider documents or other evidence. The investigator should be suitably independent and free from potential adverse influence from the subject of the grievance. Consideration should be given to adjourning the meeting, if necessary, to allow for further investigation. In certain circumstances, consideration should be given to holding the meeting virtually. However, employers should assess this on a case-by-case basis.
3. In the event an employer is a small business with limited resources and personnel to address a grievance, it may be worth considering engaging the services of an external HR consultant to investigate the grievance. The involvement of an expert from outside the business can help demonstrate your commitment to providing a fair and unbiased investigation. The employee may feel their employer is taking their complaints seriously, which will encourage trust and active involvement with the grievance process.
4. Following the investigation meeting, the employer should decide on what action, if any, to take. The decision, and a full explanation of how the decision was reached, should be communicated to the employee in writing and without unreasonable delay. The employee should also be informed of their right to appeal the outcome and any deadline for an appeal to be submitted should be stipulated.
5. The employee should submit any appeal without unreasonable delay and should set out the grounds of appeal clearly.
6. Appeals should be dealt with impartially and whenever possible, by a more senior manager who has not previously been involved in the case. Employees have a statutory right to be accompanied to the appeal hearing by a trade union representative or a work colleague.
7. The outcome of the appeal should also be communicated without unreasonable delay. It should be made clear to the employee that this is the final stage of the grievance process.
8. Where an employee raises a grievance during a disciplinary process, the disciplinary process may be temporarily suspended in order to deal with the grievance. However, depending on the nature of the grievance, there may be situations where the employer may find it more convenient to deal with both issues concurrently and legal advice should be sought as to the most appropriate course of action.

As outlined above, it is essential that employers should have a written grievance policy which is made available to all employees.

Whether you’re an employer addressing a grievance or an employee seeking advice in relation to raising a grievance, our specialist employment solicitors are here to help. Chloe Perkins is currently an Apprentice Solicitor in our Employment Department, having worked as a Legal Executive in the department for a number of years prior to commencement of her apprenticeship. Contact Chloe or the employment team on 028 9043 4015.

The post A Fair Hearing for All: How Effective Grievance Procedures Benefit Everyone appeared first on Worthingtons Solicitors.

What are Reasonable Adjustments?

• Changes to the work environment, policies, criteria, or practices that help disabled people access and progress in work.
• They aim to remove or minimize disadvantages compared to non-disabled colleagues, ensuring equal opportunity. 

Emphasis on the word ‘Reasonable’

The reasonableness of an adjustment will depend on the individual circumstances of each case, meaning that what is reasonable in one situation may not be reasonable in others and therefore all requests or recommendations for reasonable adjustments should be considered individually and not on a ‘one size fits all’ basis. The primary aim of the duty is to enable a disabled person to obtain, remain in, or return to work. The main consideration therefore should be whether a proposed adjustment will help to achieve that goal.

When are They Required?

• When an employer knows, or should reasonably know, an employee is disabled.
• When a ‘provision, criterion or practice’ (PCP) or a physical feature puts a disabled person at a substantial disadvantage.
• When an auxiliary aid is needed but not provided. 

The Employer’s Duty

• It’s a proactive duty, not just avoiding discrimination; employers must take steps to prevent disadvantage.
• The duty applies from recruitment through employment.
• Employers cannot charge the disabled person for adjustments. 

Steps to Assess the Requirement for Reasonable Adjustments

• Consult the disabled person about his or her needs.
• Obtain expert advice, where appropriate, for example by requesting an Occupation Health Report or a GP letter.
• Refer to the guidance given in the DDA Code of Practice issued by the Equality Commission.
• Use trial periods to test the effectiveness of potential solutions.
• Keep an open mind to possible solutions.
• Review adjustments periodically.

Examples of Adjustments

• Physical: Ramps, accessible toilets, specialised equipment.
• Work Arrangements: Flexible hours, part-time working, phased return, job sharing, altering tasks.
• Support: Time off for treatment, assigning some duties to another person, providing technical aids, modified interview processes. 

Recruiting and retaining people with disabilities

As an employer, you should follow fair recruitment and selection procedures as outlined in employment and disability legislation and the Labour Relations Agency Best Practice models.

A failure to comply with the duty may constitute an act of unlawful disability discrimination.

Should any employer wish to discuss the above general guidance further, or would like assistance with drafting or amending policies, such as Dignity at Work, Equal Opportunities Polices, to remain coherent under current legislation, please do not hesitate to contact our Kerry McDonald at kerrym@worthingtonslaw.co.uk

Key NI Resources

• nidirect.gov.uk: Offers practical examples and guidance for employees.
• https://www.equalityni.org: Provides official guides on the DDA.
• Disability Action NI: Offers advocacy and guides for employees. 
• https://www.lra.org.uk/ Offers Best Practice workplace policies

The post Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and the Employer’s Duty to Provide Reasonable Adjustments appeared first on Worthingtons Solicitors.

Workplace Christmas parties are opportunities to bring colleagues together and celebrate their hard work over the previous year, and whilst we are not recommending employers cancel their Christmas parties, employers should take steps to ensure all colleagues remember to treat their colleagues with dignity and respect.

In recent years, we have had to assist many employers with the handling of grievances, disciplinaries and Tribunal claims in relation to complaints about employee behaviour at Christmas parties, including bullying, harassment, discrimination and reputational damage.

When hosting a staff party, employers need to remember they have a duty of care for everyone’s wellbeing and that all present should be advised that they’re still legally ‘at work’ while attending a ‘work event’.

Here are Worthington’s top tips for the festive season:

1) Inclusive work Christmas parties

Treat all staff equally and include staff in such events. This is a work event and all employees should be invited, whether they work from home, do not drink alcohol, do not celebrate Christmas, or are on leave whether sickness absence, maternity leave or family related leave etc.

2) Reminder of company rules and policies

Whilst Christmas parties are events to reward employees and for everyone to enjoy themselves, remind staff that they are an extension of the workplace and company rules and policies still apply.

Ensure employees know what sexual harassment in the workplace looks like. Remind staff what to do if they witness or experience sexual harassment.

Make sure they know how to challenge and report any instances of bullying, discrimination or harassment. And remind them of the standard of behaviour that is expected of them.

3) Think ahead to prevent problems

Think about the risks that could arise at social events:

• Alcohol: Alcohol lowers inhibitions and can lead to inappropriate behaviour. Consider what limits you can put in place, such as tokens for a certain number of drinks on behalf of the employer rather than an unlimited free bar,  and address any inappropriate behaviour promptly in line with company procedures. Also, ensure that non-alcoholic drinks are available.
• Overnight stays and travel: For events involving travel or an overnight stay, ensure accommodations are safe and appropriate. Make clear that the same standards of behaviour apply at all times, not just during the event itself. Provide taxis or appropriate travel arrangements to ensure staff get home safely.
• Power imbalances: Are senior staff mingling with junior colleagues? Is there a predominantly male or female workforce? Make sure all employees know the behaviour expected of them.
• Social media: remind staff of your social media policy and ask them to consider what they are posting/sharing, including photos which could potentially damage their reputation or the reputation of their colleagues or employer.

Should any employer wish to discuss the above general guidance further, or would like assistance with drafting or amending policies, such as social media, grievance, disciplinary or absence management policies ahead of the festive season, please do not hesitate to contact our Victoria Murphy at victoriam@worthingtonslaw.co.uk.

The post Some advice and reminders for employers, with the festive period around the corner appeared first on Worthingtons Solicitors.

The Order specifies that a protected disclosure is any disclosure of information which, in the reasonable belief of the worker making the disclosure, tends to show one or more of the following:

(a) Commission of a criminal offence

(b) Failure to comply with a legal obligation

(c) Miscarriage of justice

(d) Endangerment of health and safety of an individual

(e) Damage to the environment

A worker must also satisfy that they had a reasonable belief that they were making the protected disclosure in the public interest, in order to enjoy protection under the legislation.

Where a claim to the Industrial Tribunal is concerned, it will be for the Claimant to prove that their disclosure falls under one of the above categories. In the recent oral decision handed down in Philip Jackson -v- Serious Fraud Office, an Industrial Tribunal panel in London found that Mr Jackson had failed to demonstrate that he made protected disclosures. Mr Jackson had alleged that management had instructed him not to record certain observations relating to cases in writing, arguing that same was in breach of the prosecution code of practice. However, the Tribunal accepted SFO’s explanation that the instruction was a procedural request intended to ensure staff exercised caution when commenting on case files, as opposed to an attempt to conceal wrongdoing.

It may not always be clear to an employer that a protected disclosure is being made by an employee. A protected disclosure can by communicated verbally or in writing, whether expressly identified as a disclosure or not. A whistleblower may raise that they have suffered detriment because of making a protected disclosure via the formal grievance procedure. Whilst dismissal as a result of raising a protected disclosure is a clear disadvantage; detriment may also appear in more subtle forms.  An employer should be live to the fact that a whistleblower may be subject to criticism or, in worse cases, bullying and harassment by colleagues as a result of raising a protected disclosure. Additionally, should a whistleblower be demoted or laterally transferred to a less attractive role after raising a protected disclosure, this may potentially be found to amount to detriment.

Employers would be well advised to have a Whistleblowing Policy in place, under which whistleblowing disclosures or any complaints in respect of same can be formally investigated. Such a policy may encourage employees to speak up about any acts of wrongdoing at the earliest stage and would give an employer the opportunity to address the issue before any financial or reputational damage arises.

If you require further advice in relation to protected disclosures, or assistance with drafting a Whistleblowing Policy, please get in touch with Grainne Rice, Solicitor in our Employment Department on 028 9043 4015 or email grainne@worthingtonslawco.uk.

The post An Employer’s Guide to Whistleblowing & Protected Disclosures appeared first on Worthingtons Solicitors.

Mr Murly-Cleve’s was initially pursuing a claim of disability discrimination, Public Interest Disclosure and unlawful deduction from wages. Murly-Cleves withdrew his entire claim which he’d valued at around £1 million, in November 2024 when the tribunal ordered a more detailed probe of his evidence. The worker argued that his further involvement in the case would go against medical advice he’d received. This led the NHS trust to apply for costs on the grounds that the worker had behaved unreasonably by altering a key piece of evidence. The Respondent argued that the real reason for Murly-Cleves withdrawing his claim was “to avoid the revelation of wider dishonesty.”

Employment Judge Abbott ruled that large parts of a report on the Claimant’s medical condition came from himself rather than his doctor. The judge noted different spellings of “characterized” and “characterised” within the text, suggesting more than one author was at play. The report also suggested that issues in the workplace caused Murly-Cleves’ complex post-traumatic stress disorder, which was contrary to his doctor’s earlier letters, the ruling on Sept. 8 says.

The judge also referred to “forms of phraseology that … cannot have originated” from his doctor, deciding “on the balance of probabilities” that the Claimant had added AI-generated text into the document. “The incoherent formatting and paragraph numbering of the report … gives it the appearance of a Frankenstein-like document, with different sections deriving from different sources,” the judge added.

Judge Abbott concluded Murly-Cleves’ reason to withdraw the claim “was a false one,” adding that the true reason was likely that he “knew that more detailed probing would reveal, sooner or later, that the [medical] report had been written to a significant extent by [Murly-Cleves] himself.”

The judge also noted a “high degree of fault” belonged to Murly-Cleves’ doctor who penned the medico-legal expert report, pointing out that he should not have allowed the Claimant to influence its contents. The Tribunal ly held that the Claimant was primarily responsible, deciding that a payment of £18,000 to the NHS trust was appropriate. Read the full decision at EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS.

Here in Northern Ireland, costs orders awarded by an Industrial Tribunal or Fair Employment Tribunal have a statutory cap of £10,000. A Tribunal may make a costs order where a party (or that party’s representative) has acted vexatiously, abusively, disruptively or otherwise unreasonably in either the bringing of the proceedings or the way that they have been conducted; or all or part of any claim or response to the claim had no reasonable prospect of success.

Worthingtons are one of few employment law practices in Northern Ireland to have successfully obtained a Tribunal Costs Order against an opposing party for the maximum amount of £10,000.

Despite the jurisdictional differences in the level of costs which may be awarded, this decision provides some important considerations for employers and employees when contemplating the use of AI. The key takeaways are:

• Save for any appropriate corrections approved by the expert or legal representatives, parties must not change or inappropriately influence the content of medico-legal or expert reports.
• The increasing use of AI, particularly in legal proceedings, comes with material risks. Generating or editing evidence using AI risks may undermine the integrity of the evidence or the party to proceedings.
• While costs remain the exception rather than the rule in employment tribunals, dishonest or unreasonable conduct may lead to significant cost awards.

Whether you’re an employer facing a tribunal claim or an employee seeking to understand your rights, our specialist employment solicitors are here to help. Chloe Perkins is currently an Apprentice Solicitor in our Employment Department, having worked as a Legal Executive in the department for a number of years prior to commencement of her apprenticeship. Chloe can be contacted on 028 9043 4015 or chloep@worthingtonslaw.co.uk

The post Employment Tribunal Orders £18,000 Costs After Claimant Amends Medical Report Using AI appeared first on Worthingtons Solicitors.

Normally, an offer of compensation (for example, an enhanced redundancy package) is made in consideration of the employee agreeing not pursue such legal action against the employer.

Advice from a solicitor is essential throughout the process. The agreement must be in writing, and the employee must have the compromise agreement to review with an independent solicitor to explain the effect same has on his/her ability to pursue their rights in a tribunal, before the agreement can be considered binding. The solicitor giving the independent advice must also sign the agreement (as well as the employee and employer) and certify that the appropriate advice was provided. The cost of the independent legal advice is typically covered by the employer for a specified amount within the agreement, however where negotiation is required and costs surpass this amount, this would be covered by the employee.

These agreements are commonly used in situations where disputes have arisen and the employee and employer relationship have broken down, or in voluntary redundancy situations.

Worthington’s Employment department are experienced with dealing with compromise agreements, whether that involves drafting the agreement for the employer, providing independent advice to the employee, or assisting with negotiations.

Should you require advice with a compromise or settlement agreement, either as an employer or employee, please contact our Employment department.

Should you have any queries or would like any further information on how Worthingtons can help you in these circumstances, please contact our office on 028 9043 4015 or email victoriam@worthingtonslaw.co.uk.

The post Compromise and Settlement Agreements appeared first on Worthingtons Solicitors.

With that in mind – should employers be notified in advance of any industrial action ballots?  

Yes – for industrial action to be deemed lawful, a trade union must take such steps as are reasonably necessary to ensure notice of an industrial action ballot is provided to an employer not later than the seventh day before the intended opening day of the ballot, pursuant to section 105 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (NI) Order 1995. For the purposes of the 1995 Order, an employer is “every person who it is reasonable for the union to believe will be the employer of persons entitled to vote in the ballot.”

Together with specification that the union intends to hold a ballot, confirmation of the date on which the union reasonably believes will be the opening day of the ballot, notice to employers must be in writing and also contain:

• a list of the categories of employee to be called out and a list of the workplaces at which they work;
• the total number of employees affected, the number of employees in each category, and the number of employees in each workplace;
• an explanation of how these figures were arrived at; or
• alternatively, where some or all of the employees concerned pay subscriptions to the union through a “check-off” system i.e where union dues are deducted from employees’ pay at source, the union can instead provide information which will allow the employer to ‘readily deduce’ the above information.

To ensure full compliance with ballot notice requirements, unions must finally provide a sample of the voting paper to the employer at least 3 days before the opening of the ballot. If the sample voting paper is available in time, the union may wish to include it with the notice of intention to ballot.

The ballot process can be legally complex and the above is only intended to be a summary of the notification obligations placed on Unions; however, non-compliance may raise questions regarding the validity of any subsequent industrial action.  If you are an employer and your company faces strike action, and you are concerned about compliance with any of the above notification obligations, specific legal advice should be sought.

Should you have any queries or would like any further information on how Worthingtons can help you in these circumstances, please contact our office on 028 9043 4015 or email ryan@worthingtonslaw.co.uk.

The post Industrial Action: Notifying Employers of an Intention to Ballot appeared first on Worthingtons Solicitors.

The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 states that a person has a disability for the purposes of the Act if s/he has a physical or mental impairment which has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on his/her ability to carry out normal day to day activities.

The Court unanimously allowed the appeal against a decision of the Industrial Tribunal, which determined at first instance that the appellant was not a disabled person within the meaning of the legislation. In allowing the appeal, the Court found that the importance should not be on the diagnosis and whether one has been given or not, but that consideration should be given to the actual impairment of the employee and its effect.

In the appellant’s application to the Tribunal, he claimed that the respondents had discriminated against him on the basis of a mental health disability arising from a failure to make reasonable adjustments, citing generalised anxiety disorder and obsessive compulsive disorder, but without a formal medical diagnosis., Mr Kelly contended that his anxiety and OCD met the definition of disability and significantly impacted his ability to carry out job responsibilities effectively, specifically with regards his ability to concentrate, partake in accepted social interaction, and form social relationships, giving rise to an obligation on the Respondents to make reasonable adjustments; an obligation Mr Kelly contended the Respondents failed to discharge. .

The judgment underscored the importance of individualised assessments and reasonable accommodations tailored to the specific needs of the individual employee. The NI Court of Appeal. ruling in favour of Mr Kelly, emphasised that employers cannot dismiss or neglect employees’ mental health concerns solely due to the absence of a formal diagnosis.

The case is a stark reminder for future cases involving mental health accommodations in the workplace. It highlights that there is no one size which fits all scenario, and the necessity for employers to proactively support employees’ mental well-being and provide reasonable accommodations should the need arise, irrespective of formal diagnoses. Employers are  compelled to consider individual circumstances and ensure compliance with legal obligations to foster inclusive and supportive work environments.

The Judgement can be viewed here: https://www.equalityni.org/ECNI/media/ECNI/Cases%20and%20Settlements/2023/Court-of-Appeal-Judgement-PKelly-v-DeptsCommunities-Finance.pdf

Victoria Murphy is a Solicitor in the Employment Team and can be contacted via email at victoriam@worthingtonslaw.co.uk. If you wish to speak with Victoria, or any member of the employment team, please contact the office on 02890434015.

The post Disability discrimination – can an employee bring a disability discrimination claim without an official medical diagnosis? appeared first on Worthingtons Solicitors.