2016/23 Are employers obliged to provide childcare vouchers during maternity leave? (UK)

An employee challenged whether her employer’s refusal to provide childcare vouchers during maternity leave was discriminatory. The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) determined, somewhat tentatively, that where childcare vouchers are provided through a salary sacrifice scheme, it is not discriminatory for employers to cease to provide childcare vouchers during maternity leave.

2016/16 ‘Too conspicuous’ hairstyle was no reason for dismissal during parental part-time (AT)

Austrian law permits the dismissal of an employee during parental leave only in cases where the employer cannot reasonably be expected to continue the contractual relationship. The colour of a hair ribbon does not justify the termination of a young father’s employment as a bus driver.

2016/16 ‘Too conspicuous’ hairstyle was no reason for dismissal during parental part-time (AT)

Austrian law permits the dismissal of an employee during parental leave only in cases where the employer cannot reasonably be expected to continue the contractual relationship. The colour of a hair ribbon does not justify the termination of a young father’s employment as a bus driver.

ECJ 16 July 2015, case C-222/14 (Konstantinos Maïstrellis - v - Ypourgos Dikaiosynis, Diafaneias kai Anthropinon Dikaiomaton), Working time and leave

Mr Maïstrellis, a judge, applied for parental leave after his wife gave birth to a child....

<strong>ECJ 16 July 2015, case C-222/14&nbsp;(Konstantinos Ma&iuml;strellis - v - Ypourgos Dikaiosynis, Diafaneias kai Anthropinon Dikaiomaton), Working time and leave</strong>

Mr Maïstrellis, a judge, applied for parental leave after his wife gave birth to a child....

ECJ 21 May 2015, case C-65/14 (Charlotte Rosselle –v- INAMI and UNM), Maternity and parental leave

Mrs Rosselle was a teacher in the Flemish Community. She was a public servant. On 1 September...

<p><strong>ECJ 21 May 2015, case C-65/14&nbsp;(Charlotte Rosselle &ndash;v- INAMI and UNM), Maternity and parental leave</strong></p>

Mrs Rosselle was a teacher in the Flemish Community. She was a public servant. On 1 September...

2015/17 Employee may not be dismissed on the day after returning from parental leave (LV)

Latvian Labour Law does not prohibit the employer from making the employee’s position redundant while the employee is on parental leave. However, if it does this the employer must remember that it is still obliged to offer the employee similar or equivalent work on no less favourable conditions and terms of employment. Labour law does not make this obligation conditional on what the employer is able to achieve.

2015/17 Employee may not be dismissed on the day after returning from parental leave (LV)

Latvian Labour Law does not prohibit the employer from making the employee’s position redundant while the employee is on parental leave. However, if it does this the employer must remember that it is still obliged to offer the employee similar or equivalent work on no less favourable conditions and terms of employment. Labour law does not make this obligation conditional on what the employer is able to achieve.

2015/10 Duty to offer woman on maternity leave a suitable alternative vacancy arises when role becomes redundant (UK)

The Employment Appeal Tribunal (‘EAT’) has held that the duty to offer a woman on maternity leave a suitable alternative vacancy under regulation 10 of the Maternity and Parental Leave Regulations 1999 (SI 1999/3312) (the ‘MPL Regulations’) arises when the employer first becomes aware that her role is redundant, or potentially redundant. The EAT found that if the duty only arose after a redundancy or restructuring process was complete, it would undermine the purpose of the legislation.

The EAT also commented on the relationship between the regulation 10 duty and direct discrimination, as defined in section 18 of the Equality Act 2010 (‘EqA 2010’). Section 18 makes it unlawful for an employer to discriminate on grounds of pregnancy or maternity. The EAT found that where the regulation 10 duty is breached by an employer, it did not automatically follow that there would also be a case of direct discrimination under section 18.