On 1st October, the minimum statutory holiday will increase from 4 weeks to 4.8 weeks. Whilst this increase was designed to compensate those employees whose employers, quite lawfully, designated the bank and public holidays as part of their statutory holiday entitlement (thus leaving employees who work a five day week with only 12 days to take at a time of their choosing), it is a common misunderstanding that the new entitlements mean that employees should have paid time off on the bank and public holidays. This is not correct: the legislation simply increases the total number of days given. This can include the bank holidays, but employers can still equally require employees to work on such days.

So an employee who currently works a five day week will be entitled to a total of 24 days' holiday (to be taken at any time with the agreement of the employer) from 1st October 2007 increasing to 28 days from 1st April 2009.

If you already give at least this amount of holiday, including the bank/public holidays, then you do not need to increase the basic holiday entitlement further. It may however be administratively easier to add the two together into one entitlement, thus making calculations for part-timers and short-term contracts easier.

For further guidance, see the page on our website devoted to this - it includes a table showing the minimum annual holiday entitlements over the next few years depending on when your holiday year starts: /docs/legal/stathol.html BERR has also added additional advice on its website: see www.dti.gov.uk/employment/holidays/faq/index.html and www.dti.gov.uk/employment/holidays/page40455.html

Whilst holiday entitlement may be increasing for some employees (mainly those in the lower paid and temporary or casual sectors), the IDS Report shows that, even after the legislation takes effect, the UK still remains at the bottom of the EU league for paid holiday entitlement. After 2009, the total paid annual leave entitlement, including bank/public holidays where time off is given, will be 28 days in the UK. In Belgium the total figure is 30 days, in the Czech Republic it is 33 days, and in Germany (where the law grants minimum annual leave of 24 days plus an entitlement to a further 10 to 15 days of public holidays) the total is a possible 39 days! And many employees in Germany are legally entitled to 30 days' annual leave under their collective agreements, plus the public holidays, making in some cases a total of 45 days.

The new National Minimum Wage (NMW) rates take effect from the first pay reference period starting on or after 1 October 2007.

The new rates are as follows:

• adult rate: increases from £5.35 to £5.52
• workers aged 18 to 21 increases from £4.45 to £4.60
• workers who have reached school-leaving age but are under age 18 increases from £3.30 to £3.40.
• The accommodation offset increases from £4.15 to £4.30 for each day that accommodation is provided.

The following are now exempted from the NMW provisions:

• workers who are participating in the Programme Led Apprenticeships scheme in England
• workers who undertake a period of work experience (of not more than one year) as part of their further education course
• workers participating in the latest phase of the Leonardo da Vinci Programme, a specific European Community scheme intended to provide its participants with vocational training, and
• workers participating in the European Community Youth in Action Programme.

The national minimum wage, which came into force eight years ago, has risen by 46% since 1999!

The first national minimum wage criminal prosecution was reported last month - this was the owner of a children's day nursery in Walthamstow, London, who was fined £2,500 and £500 costs. The judge said the proprietor of Rascals Day Nursery had shown 'a clear and deliberate intent to obstruct officers'.

There are six potential criminal offences, all of which carry a maximum £5,000 fine and a criminal record. These are as follows:

• delaying or obstructing a compliance officer
• employer refuses or wilfully neglects to pay NMW
• person fails to keep or preserve records
• person knowingly causes or allows false entry in records
• person produces or furnishes false records or information
• person refuses or neglects to answer any questions or produce documents for compliance officer.

Finally, are we likely to see regional variations in the minimum wage? It has been reported that Gordon Brown is considering this after academic studies suggested that this would boost the economy and better reflect living costs - although any such developments are probably some way off. For more details on the national minimum wage see: /docs/legal/minimumwage.html

And a further reminder that the remaining provisions of the Data Protection Act come into force on 24 October, meaning that manual filing systems in existence before 24 October 1998 are now required to comply with the DPA.

See: /docs/legal/dataprotection.html

Does the right of appeal have to be put in writing?

Whilst it is always advisable to do this, there is no requirement under the statutory dismissal procedures to do so. In Aptuit Ltd v Kennedy, an unfair dismissal case, the tribunal originally decided that Kennedy was automatically unfairly dismissed because the employer failed to offer an appeal in writing. The EAT disagreed, and said that there is no requirement for written notification of the right of appeal in the statutory dismissal procedure - verbal communication will do.

They also decided that the uplift of 40% awarded by the tribunal for this was wrongly decided: the tribunal had taken into account that the employer was a large business; that there had been a general lack of consultation; and, that the claimant's treatment had been "shoddy". The EAT considered these irrelevant and said the tribunal should only have regard to the failure to follow the statutory procedure.

For further details see www.employmentappeals.gov.uk/Public/Upload/06_0057fhMT.doc

How late is late?

Would you allow a claim which was submitted 88 seconds out of time? The tribunals wouldn't!

In Beasley v National Grid Electricity Transmissions, Mr Beasley was dismissed, appealed, and was advised (and then reminded) by his solicitor of the three month time limit for submitting a claim. Mr Beasley left it to the last day of the time limit, and when, at 23.44 hours he tried to submit the claim by email, he mistyped the address and put "qsi" instead of "gsi". The email was returned to him as undeliverable, he resubmitted it correctly and it was received by the Tribunal Service at 00.01.28 on 7 May 2006 (88 seconds late).

The Chairman of the tribunal said it was out of time and dismissed the case. The EAT, whilst sympathetic, agreed - Mr Beasley had been correctly advised of the time limit the day before it had expired and it was his own failure to use the correct email address that had caused the delay.

What is the final straw in a constructive dismissal claim?

Well, it can be failure to take a grievance seriously!

In GAB Robbins v Trigg, Ms Trigg worked as a secretary/PA. She put a grievance in writing, complaining of overwork and of bullying by one of her two bosses, received no reply and sent a reminder. A meeting subsequently took place, but Ms Trigg felt that her issues were not acted on, and therefore resigned and claimed constructive dismissal.

Ms Trigg claimed that the failure to carry out a proper and reasonable investigation into her complaint was the "final straw" which, viewed with her employer's previous behaviour, amounted to a breach of the implied term of trust and confidence. Her claim succeeded, and in addition, the EAT held that her employer was responsible for her sickness absence, her constructive dismissal and for her consequential losses. She was therefore able to recover her future loss of earnings from the employer.

Employees who fail to work their notice

Most of us get cross but then shrug our shoulders and carry on when an employee fails to give proper notice - as in most cases, it is not worth the effort trying to get damages unless these are substantial.

But the case of Davis v Pyrz is interesting as the employee, a nanny, brought a case against her former employer, who decided to bring a counter claim. The nanny, Miss Pyrz, failed to give notice. She brought a claim alleging she had not been paid the national minimum wage or holiday pay and that her employer had made an unlawful deduction from her wages by taking four payments of £50 as a deposit. Her employer then brought a counterclaim for Miss Pyrz' failure to work out her notice and other costs (an alleged broken computer, stolen CD and skirt, an unpaid telephone bill and money owed for a travel ticket).

The EAT overturned the employment tribunal's original awards, and decided that Miss Davis was entitled to the damages she had incurred as a result of Miss Pyrz's failure to work her statutory notice, ie the difference in cost between the replacement nanny and the wages that would have been paid to Miss Pyrz (in accordance with the NMW) had she worked her notice. They also confirmed that there is nothing to prevent deductions being made where authorised by the contract, as was the case here. The tribunal could not have dealt with the claim relating to the computer repair as it did not relate to the employment contract, but those relating to the CD, skirt, unpaid telephone bill and travel expenses could be heard. The EAT said there is implied duty of fidelity in any employment contract, which would apply to the CD and skirt. The telephone bill and travel expenses could also be legitimately claimed.

So an interesting one!

This case was a Scottish one and concerns a tyre finisher, John Smith, who lost his claim for unfair dismissal.

Mr Smith was caught smoking in a locker room in the Michelin tyre factory in Dundee, seven months after Scotland's smoking ban came into force. The factory had got rid of its smoking rooms when smoking was banned in Scotland on 26 March 2006. Smoking was permitted in designated sites outside, which were fitted with canopies and ashtrays.

Mr Smith was smoking beside an open fire door which had a "no smoking" sign on it.

Mr Smith told the tribunal he was under pressure and feeling depressed about working 12-hour shifts. He lit a cigarette without thinking. He argued that the decision to dismiss him was too harsh, given his length of service (12 years).

Michelin argued had Mr Smith had attended a staff presentation about the no-smoking policy, and signs were put up warning that breach of the regulations could lead to dismissal.

The tribunal ruled that Mr Smith's dismissal had not been unfair when weighed against the importance to his employers of "preserving their business, their property and, more importantly, the lives of their other staff".

We will shortly be adding the following to the website:

• template sales commission scheme (to be added to the pay and benefits documents)
• guide to the cycle to work scheme (to be added to the pay and benefits section)
• template letters acknowledging allegations of harassment and of whistleblowing (added to the letters and forms section).

Research by Peninsula found that the working week is half a day longer than it was five years ago, and a day longer than a decade ago. Their research found that 36 per cent of employees work in excess of 48 hours per week; 96 percent of those do so out of choice. In 1997 only 26 percent of those polled worked over 48 hours and 30 percent in 2002. A previous survey by Peninsula found that 8 in 10 employees work almost an extra day a month overtime without pay. So have the Working Time Regulations had the intended effect? It would seem not!

And a survey by The Motley Fool discovered that 7% of respondents had two jobs as well as their regular day job. Nearly half of moonlighters (47%) worked for extra money, whilst nearly one in five said they moonlight to broaden their horizons. Seven in 10 respondents said their main employer is unaware of their other jobs, and 43% admitted that holding multiple jobs was forbidden.

Note that the Working Time Regulations apply to the aggregate hours worked each week, not just the hours for each employer. So if you don't already have rules in place requiring employees to notify you of outside work, it may be worth adding a clause into your contracts requiring your employees to get your permission prior to taking on any other paid work. (If you don't have such a clause then you are at risk if they work more than 48 hours on average, and there is no obligation on them to tell you, nor to gain your permission.) Ensure that your staff declare any outside employment and discuss this with them - if this is likely to take them over the 48 hour limit, then an opt-out agreement is advised prior to you giving your permission for the additional work. Keep a note on file of your agreement, and also make it clear that any outside work must not be done on your premises or using your equipment, and also must not prevent them from doing their jobs properly for you. See our template letter: /docs/lf/outsidework/custom.html

Apparently that could benefit your business - and your pay!!

A survey on behalf of the National Lottery of 1029 workers across the UK found that 76% believed that taking part in non-work activity with colleagues (socialising, playing in a sports or quiz team, being part of a syndicate) boosts productivity! When asked to quantify this, it was estimated to be worth 14% a year.

Many also felt such activities increase their pay and help their careers - 15% of respondents felt that good relations helped them to gain promotion and 12 per cent felt it had made a significant difference to their earnings.

Another way of increasing your earnings is to improve your looks! Research at the University of California, published in the Journal of Economic Psychology, found that beautiful people earn an average of 12% more than the rest of us! Apparently they are seen as more helpful and co-operative....

As from early September, 1,300 charities can access BusinessHR's services via the website of The Charity Finance Directors' Group. The Charity Finance Directors' Group is an umbrella charity with the aim of promoting improved standards of management in charities.