The paper “ Employment Law Issues in the United Kingdom” is an impressive example of the case study on the law. In this scenario, Preston pet products, a company that deals with the distribution of pet products and dog chews and other accessories and equipment are faced with a situation that involves small van drivers. The company had initially allowed the small van drivers to take the vans to their homes and even start their duties directly from their homes. This practice has suited both the company and the van drivers. The company has however withheld this privilege after considering the possible insurance implications and security of the vans.
The company issued the notice to the drivers for a period of four weeks; drivers complained about the issue but later accepted the change. Three drivers however resisted the change and claimed that the company was depriving them of their job’ s privilege that they have been enjoying since they were employed in the company. After three weeks of the notice issue for the policy change, some drivers have stopped taking the vans home while others have not stopped.
With regard to the main statement of terms and conditions, of employment; it is not stated whether the drivers should take the vans home or not. The managing director is now worried about any legal implications possible if the company’ s drivers decided to take the action to the tribunal. Analysis of the caseThe United Kingdom law provides a number of privileges that employees should enjoy while working for a company. Such rights and privileges include payments, bonuses and other rewards stated before the start of a contract.
The benefits attributable to an employee are usually expressly indicated in the contract but sometimes these are benefits that employees do enjoy are implied with consent from the employer. The implied benefits mainly due to the customs and practices of the company do constitute an employment contract. Though the terms are not written down, the employer will be overruled from denying the legality of accepted practice.
Arup, C 2006, Labour law and labour market regulation: essays on the construction, constitution and regulation of labour markets and work relationship, Federation Press, London.PP. 242-253.
Berry, E & Hargreaves, S 2007, European Union Law, Oxford University Press, Oxford. PP. 234-256.
Davies, A, 2011, Workplace Law Handbook 2011 - Employment Law and Human Resources Handbook, Workplace Law Group, London. PP. 272-274.
Estreicher, A 2010, Global Labor Employment Law for Practicing Lawyer, Kluwer Law International, Manchester. PP. 452-533.
Gasda Cyf V Barret (2010) EDT 17.
Henry and others v London General Transport Services Ltd  IRLR 473 CA
Holland, J & Burnett, S 2007, Employment Law, Oxford University Press, Oxford. PP. 123-132.
Lee & ors v GEC Plessey Telecommunications  IRLR 383 CA
Moffat, J 2006, Employment Law, Oxford University Press, Oxford. PP. 344-356.
Parkinson v March Consulting Ltd (1997) IRLR 308 CA.