Following a dispute between colleagues over a used cup, an NHS worker has won a case of unfair dismissal.Mr Steve Mullen, an NHS supervisor at Glasgow Royal Infirmary, became irate after spilling liquid on himself after picking his cup to make himself a well-earned cuppa. He accused colleagues of using his cup and leaving liquid inside, but no one owned up to the act.Mr Hutchison, a technician, approached his supervisor, Mullen, and tried to calm him down by telling him he was mistaken and that the cup did not belong to him.Things escalated resulting in an altercation between Mullen and Hutchison in the department’s washroom. A complaint was filed against Mullen by Hutchison. An investigation and disciplinary hearing followed in which Mullen was informed that Hutchison accused him of swearing at him and threatening him. Mullen was further accused of trying to provoke Hutchison into a physical confrontation by stating that he knew where Hutchison’s car was parked and would get him outside later. Hutchison said he feared for his personal safety, believing the threat was genuine.During the investing, Mullen said he was provoked as Hutchison was not wearing the correct PPE when he approached him. Mullen offered to apologise to Hutchison. In October 2021, Mullen’s employment was terminated for reasons of gross misconduct. Mullen’s subsequent appeal was dismissed which led him to file for a claim for unfair dismissal against Glasgow Health Board.Tribunal findingsMullen won his case for unfair dismissal because the tribunal found the disciplinary process was too lengthy, lacked impartiality and may have been influenced by his prior behaviour. Glasgow Health Board was ordered to pay compensation of just under £9000.Employment Judge Rosie Sorrell said “I have carefully assessed all the evidence in the round. In doing so, I have found there were procedural defects in the process leading to the dismissal.I have therefore concluded that these procedural deficiencies had such impact that they rendered the whole process unfair, and that Glasgow Health Board did not act reasonably in dismissing him.” The award was later reduced to £2,312.50 due to the serious nature of the claims and the adverse impact on Hutchison’s mental health.Learning for employers<ul><li>Nip any unhealthy team dynamics ‘in the bud’ using conflict resolution and mediation where needed</li><li>Ensure any investigations and subsequent disciplinary hearings are carried out promptly, in a timely manner and in line with any guidelines laid out in company procedures</li><li>Ensure those leading the investigation are independent and impartial</li><li>Ensure any outcome or sanctions applied are in proportion to the breach of conduct</li><li>Ensure that the sanctions applied are relevant to the conduct in question and no previous incidents</li></ul>Please contact your SSG HR consultant if you need further advice or would like further information on upcoming training.Source: Nicola Harding

Following a dispute between colleagues over a used cup, an NHS worker has won a case of unfair dismissal.

‘Cup gate’ – Mullen v Glasgow Health Board

On 1 September 2025, organisations in the UK need to be ready to demonstrate that they are taking all reasonable steps to prevent fraud by their employees and all other “associated” people.This is because the government is taking action to address fraud by implementing the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 (ECCTA) driven in no small part by the fact that a staggering 41% of all crime in England and Wales is fraud, making it one of the most common crimes in the UK.The new corporate criminal offence is referred to as the “failure to prevent fraud” law and applies to larger organisations that meet at least two of the following criteria:<ul><li>More than 250 employees</li><li>More than £36m annual turnover</li><li>More than 18m in total assets</li></ul>The law will make an organisation criminally liable for fraud committed by an employee or “associated person” who intended to benefit the company. Organisations will be required to demonstrate that they had suitable fraud prevention measures in place at the time an offence occurs.<h3 id="b12b3f01-a7bb-4310-b1f7-ec845e3240dd" data-toc-id="b12b3f01-a7bb-4310-b1f7-ec845e3240dd">Impact on SMEs</h3>Although you may be a smaller employer, meaning the law will not directly apply, as we have seen with other legislation there will be a trickle-down impact.SMEs can expect that when tendering for work with a larger organisation or when completing an accreditation application to be asked what steps they are taking to prevent fraud and what is the evidence of their actions.<h3 id="4fbd1997-c34c-4702-b5cc-9d2c712536f8" data-toc-id="4fbd1997-c34c-4702-b5cc-9d2c712536f8">Reasonable fraud prevention procedures</h3>Under the new legislation organisations will be able to defend against prosecution if they can prove they have taken practical steps to prevent fraud.The government has set out the following six principles to guide employers on establishing fraud prevention procedures:<ol><li>Top-level commitment - Senior management foster a culture that rejects fraud and encourages employees to speak up about concerns.</li><li>Risk assessment - Identify specific fraud risks relevant to the organisation's operations and develop controls and procedures to address those risks.</li><li>Risk based prevention procedures – Develop a fraud prevention plan including implementing clear and comprehensive anti-fraud policies and procedures.</li><li>Due diligence – Establish and maintain strong internal controls (e.g. segregation of duties and access controls).</li><li>Communication (including training) - Providing regular fraud awareness training to employees and issuing relevant policies.</li><li>Monitoring and review - Regularly monitor and review the effectiveness of fraud prevention procedures.</li></ol>These six principles are intended to be flexible and adaptable so that organisations can take action to prevent fraud that is proportionate to the risks within their business.Relevant organisations that fail to actively prevent fraud can expect to face substantial fines.If you need further advice on this subject please contact your HR advisor.Source: Gavin Parrot

On 1 September 2025, organisations in the UK need to be ready to demonstrate that they are taking all reasonable steps to prevent fraud by their employees and all other “associated” people.

Forthcoming legislation – “the failure to prevent fraud” law

In the UK there are currently three main types of employment status. In this article we will consider the differences between each category and look ahead to the government’s vision for a two-tier approach to employment status.The three statuses in the UK today are employee, worker and self-employed.Each status has different rights and responsibilities. Employees receive the most protection and rights, self-employed receive the least and workers are in the middle.Correctly identifying an employment status is essential and getting it wrong can be expensive.Classifying an individual as self-employed when they are actually an employee can be very costly and trigger back payments in tax and employment liabilities (e.g. the cost of payments for unpaid holiday can be damaging to an employer).<h3 id="54494447-7f0f-4001-89ce-249989e9c097" data-toc-id="54494447-7f0f-4001-89ce-249989e9c097">Understanding the different statuses</h3>Here are the key differences between the three statuses:<ul><li>Employees are individuals who work under a contract of service. They are entitled to full employment law protections and they get all the rights that workers are entitled to receive.</li><li>Workers are individuals who, whilst not employees with employment rights, are not fully independent and therefore are entitled to only some protections. They are entitled to basic rights such as holiday pay, rest breaks and the national minimum wage. But they miss out on the higher level of protection that employees receive. The difference between a worker and employee can be hard to determine and is decided by individual situations.</li><li>Self-employed are individuals who work under a “contract for services.” They are their own bosses and are not entitled to employment law protections.</li></ul><h3 id="c9e93cc8-5f3b-4902-b59c-54efb960c311" data-toc-id="c9e93cc8-5f3b-4902-b59c-54efb960c311">Factors in determining status</h3>The nature of the relationship between the individual and the organisation determines which status will apply. This, along with the personal performance of the service, the obligations involved, and the amount of control exerted by the organisation are really the true tests.Here are the key considerations tribunals will consider when determining the status of an individual:<ul><li>Personal service – Is the individual required to perform the service themself or can they subcontract their work or appoint a substitute?</li></ul>“Personal service” is a condition of employee status. So, if an organisation does not require an individual to provide a personal service this is an indicator of self-employment.<ul><li>Mutuality of obligation – If an organisation is obliged to provide an individual with work and pay, and that individual is obliged to do that work personally it indicates an employment relationship.</li></ul>Whereas if the individual is a worker these obligations do not apply as the organisation is not obliged to provide work and the individual is not obliged to accept it.<ul><li>High levels of control – If an organisation exercises high levels of control over an individual’s workload and where, when and how that individual carries out their work it indicates an employee status.</li></ul>Whereas, if the individual has a level of freedom over where, when and how much they work it suggests a worker status. Workers still fall under the control of the organisation but they have more choice on where, when and how they work.<ul><li>Other factors to consider – Individuals who provide their own equipment, set their own hourly charge rates, have financial risk and work for other companies are likely to be self-employed.</li></ul>Whereas individuals given set or minimum hours, where pay rates are set by the organisation, who have low / minimal financial risk, who cannot work for others (without permission from the organisation) and those more deeply integrated in the organisation tend to be workers or employees.<h3 id="fa59052b-0c98-4d56-953d-10bb015d478c" data-toc-id="fa59052b-0c98-4d56-953d-10bb015d478c">Potential “two-tiered” status</h3>The government has set out proposals to explore a combined employee / worker status and a separate self-employed category.This plan is not part of the Employment Rights bill but remains a longer term objective following further consultation with employers.Should the proposed change become legislation, “workers” as we know them now, will be entitled to all basic employment rights from day one.Source: Gavin Parrot

In the UK there are currently three main types of employment status. In this article we will consider the differences between each category and look ahead to the government’s vision for a two-tier approach to employment status.

Ways to assess employment status

Did you know that IEMA is rebranding? IEMA will officially become The Institute of Sustainability and Environmental Professionals (ISEP) on 17 July 2025.As a trusted IEMA training partner, we are here to ensure that the transition to ISEP is smooth and seamless for all learners, businesses, and partners.Why the change?Although IEMA legally changed its name to ISEP in January 2025, the public launch of the new ISEP brand takes place on 17 July 2025. This transition reflects ISEP’s ongoing mission to better represent sustainability and environmental professionals across the globe.What does this mean for our delegates?While the course content remains unchanged, the course titles will be updated to reflect a broader sustainability focus. As we near the launch date, we are in the process of updating all course materials, course names and branding to align with the new ISEP brand.Course name updates:<ul><li>IEMA Foundation Certificate in Environmental Management (AIEMA) → ISEP Foundation Certificate in Sustainability &amp; Environmental Management (AISEP)</li><li>IEMA Certificate in Environmental Management (PIEMA) → ISEP Certificate in Sustainability &amp; Environmental Management (PISEP)</li></ul>New ISEP post-nominals will also apply to learners gaining professional recognition:<ul><li>AISEP (Associate)</li><li>PISEP (Practitioner)</li><li>MISEP (Full Member)</li></ul>These post-nominals should be used from 17 July onwards.CertificationLearners who completed courses on or after 8 January 2025 (the legal name change date) will automatically receive certificates under the new ISEP brand. Delegates who are wanting a paper certificate with the updated branding will be able to purchase one from ISEP’s website after 17 July.If you have any questions about the upcoming transition from IEMA to ISEP, or how it may affect your training or certification, please get in touch we’re happy to help guide you through the changes and ensure you are fully prepared for the launch on 17 July 2025.<a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" class="link" href="https://www.ssg.co.uk/courses?category=iema">Click here</a> to visit our website to explore our IEMA course offerings or call us on 01752 201616 to speak to a member of our team directly.

Did you know that IEMA is rebranding? IEMA will officially become The Institute of Sustainability and Environmental Professionals (ISEP) on 17 July 2025.